# Iranian Air Defense Systems



## twilight

The production line of the new system, Herz (Protector) 9, will be inaugurated in a special ceremony attended by the country's Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi tomorrow.

Last Tuesday, the Iranian defense ministry announced that Iran plans to unveil five new defensive achievements in coming days.

Also, a senior Iranian military commander announced last month that the country would unveil a home-made long-range air-defense missile system similar to the Russian S-300 in the* near future*.

"This system, dubbed as Bavar (belief) 373, is being developed in the country and will be officially unveiled soon," Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army's Self-Sufficiency Jihad Rear Admiral Farhad Amiri said.

He noted that Bavar-373 missile defense system has reached the production stage and its subsystems have been already tested.

Earlier this year, senior military officials announced that Iran was testing the subsystems of Bavar 373 missile defense system.

Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli said then that "laboratory tests are underway on subsystems of the long-range Bavar 373 air-defense system".

The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.

Defense analysts and military observers say that Iran's wargames and its advancements in weapons production have proved as a deterrent factor, specially at a time of heightened threats by the US.

Fars News Agency :: Iran to Start Mass-Production of New Air Defense System Tomorrow

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SOHEIL

Great news ... Bad news for Russians !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## mohsen

Soheil said:


> Great news ... Bad news for Russians !!!


actually bad news for both Russian and Americans.
also that *near future* most probably will be in 2014.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ResurgentIran

We should deliver our most advanced air defence systems to both Syria and Hezbollah.
That would really limit Israeli adventurism.

And to protect ourselves, just mass produce those systems and place it in every corner of the country, not to mention in Abu Musa and Tunb Islands. That would limit American adventurism.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 500

twilight said:


> home-made long-range air-defense missile system similar to the Russian S-300


I wonder what it will be:

1) Repainted S-200?
2) Repainted Hawk?
3) Oil Drums?
4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Feyen

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?



all those systems (s-200 and hawk) have been upgraded by iran...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oublious

this is a weird news. more likely a propaganda ahahah... read this part:

*The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.* 

what achievement ahahah...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

ResurgentIran said:


> We should deliver our most advanced air defence systems to both Syria and Hezbollah.
> That would really limit Israeli adventurism.
> 
> And to protect ourselves, just mass produce those systems and place it in every corner of the country, not to mention in Abu Musa and Tunb Islands. That would limit American adventurism.



If Russian systems didn&#8217;t limit Israel, Iranian will?


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?



You said the same thing about RAAD before test ...

Sadly you made that mistake another time ...

Because just an expert can see the differences not a biologist fan boy ...

This is going to be a sad news for you too ...

Because you can't troll this time ...

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## SOHEIL

Archdemon said:


> If Russian systems didn&#8217;t limit Israel, Iranian will?



Russians cant stop RQ-170 drone to entering their airspace but Iranians can down it in one piece ...

Just start another war against Hezbollah ...

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## 500

Soheil said:


> You said the same thing about RAAD before test ...


RAAD = Russian Buk missiles packed on airport fire truck.







*+*






*=*

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## kollang

Oublious said:


> this is a weird news. more likely a propaganda ahahah... read this part:
> 
> *The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.*
> 
> what achievement ahahah...


this again?why ahahahah instead of hahahaha?are you getting ****ed?



500 said:


> RAAD = Russian Buk missiles packed on airport fire truck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *+*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *=*


stop trolling.we have seen the vid of the test.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mohsen

kollang said:


> this again?why ahahahah instead of hahahaha?are you getting ****ed?
> 
> 
> stop trolling.we have seen the vid of the test.


he can't stop trolling, he feels humiliated with their big joke *Iron dump*, 5% hit chance

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> RAAD = Russian Buk missiles packed on airport fire truck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *+*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *=*



Did you ever compare Taaer-2 missiles with Buk M2 !?

I mean like experts not fanboys !!!

This is first ... But second :

If Israeli leaders & Comonders have the same Idea as you ...

That responses all of the questions about their failed wars in the region ...

At the end , nobody expecting bravo from an Israeli former MBT rider/biologist ...

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SOHEIL

kollang said:


> this again?why ahahahah instead of hahahaha?are you getting ****ed?
> 
> 
> stop trolling.we have seen the vid of the test.



We call such a kids multitask girls ...

They can **** & post at the same time ... Actually it doesn't have good effects on their posts !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sam1980

mohsen said:


> he can't stop trolling, he feels humiliated with their big joke *Iron dump*, 5% hit chance



It's a she!  I like nerdy girls!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MTN1917

It seems that The ninth Herz is mobile version of Ya zahra

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## ya hosein

ninth Herz use passive radar and its mobilized

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## BeyondHeretic

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?



Only one way to tell  , send some of your f-16 "flying sofa" s or your f-15 "high flying eagles" over iran so we can tell if they're effective or not

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Archdemon

Soheil said:


> Russians cant stop RQ-170 drone to entering their airspace but Iranians can down it in one piece ...
> 
> Just start another war against Hezbollah ...



Did RQ-170 flew over Russia? 
Lay down the catnap Persian kitten, it makes you go stupido

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

MTN1917 said:


> It seems that The ninth Herz is mobile version of Ya zahra


vahidi said this is the first short range *passive* AD system and is more effective against tracking disruption and jamming.

Herz9:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Archdemon

mohsen said:


> he can't stop trolling, he feels humiliated with their big joke *Iron dump*, 5% hit chance



Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Archdemon said:


> Did RQ-170 flew over Russia?
> Lay down the catnap Persian kitten, it makes you go stupido



So , you want personal attacks !?

You mean Yankees spying on Iran but don't give a sh!!!t about Russia !?

You mean Yankees made RQ-170 Sentinel only for Iranians ... & they aren't interested in Russia !?

Get a life little rat ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## BeyondHeretic

This is great news , but scary at the same time ! look at Syria they're testing Russian stuff there , so do you think they will test Russian stuff with iran next?! that's a good question to consider


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.



you should know most rockets of hamas are home made and are not strong. most of them are like katyusha that just can hurt people and hard can destroy a wall.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

Archdemon said:


> Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.



Based on Zionist sources 30% ...

Just imagine what will happen if they change Fajr-5 rockets with F-110 ballistic missiles ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Archdemon said:


> Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.


hey, 5% is wastern scientists opinion, just take it and be happy.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle...-iron-dome-grossly-over-hyped-scientists.html

If I want to refer to last incident, actually it would be 0%.
Eilat airport reopened after two rockets hit city; no casualties reported - Haaretz Daily Newspaper
*0 of 2 = 0*%

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

BeyondHeretic said:


> This is great news , but scary at the same time ! look at Syria they're testing Russian stuff there , so do you think they will test Russian stuff with iran next?! that's a good question to consider



What you mean !?


----------



## 500

Soheil said:


> Based on Zionist sources 30% ...
> 
> Just imagine what will happen if they change Fajr-5 rockets with F-110 ballistic missiles ...


86%. 
1500 rockets fired. 
0 killed in towns protected by Iron Dome.


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> 86%.
> 1500 rockets fired.
> 0 killed in towns protected by Iron Dome.



Are you expecting high performance from Arab made stuff !?

We can't export rockets & missiles to Gaza , only blue prints ...

Just examine Hezbollah another time , you will come & shouting "IRONY DUMB" !!!


----------



## 500

Soheil said:


> Are you expecting high performance from Arab made stuff !?
> 
> We can't export rockets & missiles to Gaza , only blue prints ...
> 
> Just examine Hezbollah another time , you will come & shouting "IRONY DUMB" !!!


Most rockets were Iranian made supplied from tunnels.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

500 said:


> Most rockets were Iranian made supplied from tunnels.



yeah sure.



Archdemon said:


> Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.



because like Saddam missiles non of the rockets reached population centers .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## stuka-j87

> Most rockets were Iranian made supplied from tunnels.



No , 90 % of them were homemade inaccurate sugar rocket made by pip line ! just less than 10 Iranian made Fajr rockets were fired.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

stuka-j87 said:


> No , 90 % of them were homemade inaccurate sugar rocket made by pip line ! just less than 10 Iranian made Fajr rockets were fired.



they were not even made in Iran according to officials Iran only told them how to made them so quality wise they are like rockets we made at the time of war with Iraq when we started to produce rockets .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 500

stuka-j87 said:


> No , 90 % of them were homemade inaccurate sugar rocket made by pip line ! just less than 10 Iranian made Fajr rockets were fired.


Most of the rockets were Iranian copy of Chinese WS-1.

Homemade rockets can only reach Sderot, not other towns.


----------



## BeyondHeretic

^^ 500 so got interested in iran these years , she's examined the rockets for herself


----------



## kollang

maybe our super expert (@500 ) can explain us more about this passive mobile AD system.LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BeyondHeretic

kollang said:


> maybe our super expert (@500 ) can explain us more about this passive mobile AD system.LOL



LOL , she can only explain how she's gonna kill the Russian crew

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> Most of the rockets were Iranian copy of Chinese WS-1.
> 
> Homemade rockets can only reach Sderot, not other towns.



I told you just blue prints ... 

WS-1 !?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Archdemon

mohsen said:


> hey, 5% is wastern scientists opinion, just take it and be happy.
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle...-iron-dome-grossly-over-hyped-scientists.html
> 
> If I want to refer to last incident, actually it would be 0%.
> Eilat airport reopened after two rockets hit city; no casualties reported - Haaretz Daily Newspaper
> *0 of 2 = 0*%



I still will take Rafael and IDF 87% success rate because they know **** unlike "scientist" who based their analysts on amateur videos and their gut feeling

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> you should know most rockets of hamas are home made and are not strong. most of them are like katyusha that just* can hurt people* and hard can destroy a wall.




Yeah, ill bet it cant hurt you if it hit you in the head, cause your skull is so fu&#1089;king thick.


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> Yeah, ill bet it cant hurt you if it hit you in the head, cause your skull is so fu&#1089;king thick.



with all due respect i had for you, i reported your post. Instead of talking like that, you could talk rationally

my mean of hurting people is those rockets only can hurt people who are in public area, in streets and not people who are in buildings.
even if you stay in your car, the rocket explosion cant hurt you unless it hit you directly. same as building. katyusha and it's family are useful against spot of infantries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Archdemon said:


> I still will take Rafael and IDF 87% success rate because they know **** unlike "scientist" who based their analysts on amateur videos and their gut feeling


and I stick to reality: 0%
Eilat airport reopened after two rockets hit city; no casualties reported - Haaretz Daily Newspaper

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abii

twilight said:


> The production line of the new system, Herz (Protector) 9, will be inaugurated in a special ceremony attended by the country's Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi tomorrow.
> 
> Last Tuesday, the Iranian defense ministry announced that Iran plans to unveil five new defensive achievements in coming days.
> 
> Also, a senior Iranian military commander announced last month that the country would unveil a home-made long-range air-defense missile system similar to the Russian S-300 in the* near future*.
> 
> "This system, dubbed as Bavar (belief) 373, is being developed in the country and will be officially unveiled soon," Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army's Self-Sufficiency Jihad Rear Admiral Farhad Amiri said.
> 
> He noted that Bavar-373 missile defense system has reached the production stage and its subsystems have been already tested.
> 
> Earlier this year, senior military officials announced that Iran was testing the subsystems of Bavar 373 missile defense system.
> 
> Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli said then that "laboratory tests are underway on subsystems of the long-range Bavar 373 air-defense system".
> 
> The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.
> 
> Defense analysts and military observers say that Iran's wargames and its advancements in weapons production have proved as a deterrent factor, specially at a time of heightened threats by the US.
> 
> Fars News Agency :: Iran to Start Mass-Production of New Air Defense System Tomorrow



akh joon

ye makete moghavaiye jadid! 

vaghte khodetoono ba in charandiat talaf nakonin baba. Age jang she ba in charandiat 10 deyeghaham vaght vase khodetoon nemikharin.



Soheil said:


> Great news ... *Bad news for Russians* !!!



lmfao

yeah I'm sure they're so scared of losing business to the shia taliban

And I just heard Lockheed Martin declared bankruptcy after the unveiling of this majestic beauty


----------



## SOHEIL

Archdemon said:


> Non? as in, you have little to *non *brain cells?
> 
> maybe you should research, tho i question your mental abilities.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Persian kitten, USA will fly its planes over Russian territory... You should stick to what you do best, eat catnip and play with string ball.



When somebody starts insulting , that means he don't have any thing to say ...

So Iranian brothers , just report him .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Abii said:


> akh joon
> 
> ye makete moghavaiye jadid!
> 
> vaghte khodetoono ba in charandiat talaf nakonin baba. Age jang she ba in charandiat 10 deyeghaham vaght vase khodetoon nemikharin.
> 
> 
> 
> lmfao
> 
> yeah I'm sure they're so scared of losing business to the shia taliban
> 
> And I just heard Lockheed Martin declared bankruptcy after the unveiling of this majestic beauty



I told you so many times don't drink too much !!!

& this is the result ... Enjoy BAN days ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## submitter

Israel will go apeshit with their jets if these things reach hezbollah

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The SiLent crY

twilight said:


> The production line of the new system, Herz (Protector) 9, will be inaugurated in a special ceremony attended by the country's Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi tomorrow.
> 
> Last Tuesday, the Iranian defense ministry announced that Iran plans to unveil five new defensive achievements in coming days.
> 
> Also, a senior Iranian military commander announced last month that the country would unveil a home-made long-range air-defense missile system similar to the Russian S-300 in the* near future*.
> 
> "This system, dubbed as Bavar (belief) 373, is being developed in the country and will be officially unveiled soon," Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army's Self-Sufficiency Jihad Rear Admiral Farhad Amiri said.
> 
> He noted that Bavar-373 missile defense system has reached the production stage and its subsystems have been already tested.
> 
> Earlier this year, senior military officials announced that Iran was testing the subsystems of Bavar 373 missile defense system.
> 
> Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli said then that "laboratory tests are underway on subsystems of the long-range Bavar 373 air-defense system".
> 
> The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.
> 
> Defense analysts and military observers say that Iran's wargames and its advancements in weapons production have proved as a deterrent factor, specially at a time of heightened threats by the US.
> 
> Fars News Agency :: Iran to Start Mass-Production of New Air Defense System Tomorrow



Good to see you back Mr historian .


----------



## The SiLent crY

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?



It will be a pain in your ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

S00R3NA said:


> It will be a pain in your ...



Don't mind : "@$$"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## twilight

S00R3NA said:


> Good to see you back Mr historian .



well .... I'm not historian .... 

if you want a historian go to this blog .... 

Ú©ÙÙØ§ÙØ¯Ø§ÙØªÙ


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> with all due respect i had for you, i reported your post. Instead of talking like that, you could talk rationally
> 
> my mean of hurting people is those rockets only can hurt people who are in public area, in streets *and not people who are in buildings.*
> even if you *stay in your car*, *the rocket explosion cant hurt you* unless it hit you directly. same as building. katyusha and it's family are useful against spot of infantries.




Oh really? 




































mohsen said:


> and I stick to reality: 0%
> Eilat airport reopened after two rockets hit city; no casualties reported - Haaretz Daily Newspaper



I fail to see where is the failure of Iron Dome, can you help me? there were no attempt to intersect, system did recognized threat because air alarm was activated, so where is the failure?


----------



## The SiLent crY

twilight said:


> well .... I'm not historian ....
> 
> if you want a historian go to this blog ....
> 
> Ú©Ù&#710;Ù&#8230;Ø§Ù&#8224;Ø¯Ø§Ù&#8224;ØªÙ&#8225;



well , you were the one called Jalaledin Kharazmshah a gay , Do you remember ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## I-LEK

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?



*no) rather, the nuclear chair for your a8s)))*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Uhuhu said:


> you should know most rockets of hamas are home made and are not strong. most of them are like katyusha that just can hurt people and hard can destroy a wall.



Small rockets like the ones used by Hamas are more difficult to intercept than fully fledged ballistic missiles. That is due to their smaller size, which affects radar return and requirement for precision, and unpredictable flight path.


----------



## BeyondHeretic

In the holy land everything is small , that's the very reason 500 is on this forum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

mohsen said:


> and I stick to reality: 0%
> Eilat airport reopened after two rockets hit city; no casualties reported - Haaretz Daily Newspaper



That's not how probability works. You need a bigger sample space for that.


----------



## twilight

S00R3NA said:


> well , you were the one called Jalaledin Kharazmshah a gay , Do you remember ?



He was ( or maybe he loved his slave for nothing ) ....

most of them were gay in that era ( that why mongul defeated all of those empire so easily .... ) ... and they make some useless Fatwa for covering it as well , just like Salfist and Their Jihad marriage Fatwa ....

and are you saying that I shouldn't say truth !?

well at least you knew about Soltan Mahmoud and Ayaz .... Soltan Mahmoud love to Ayaz is well known .... 

when you reading history you should be wise and find out something that historian didn't wrote clearly ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

twilight said:


> He was ( or maybe he loved his slave for nothing ) ....
> 
> most of them were gay in that era ( that why mongul defeated all of those empire so easily .... ) ... and they make some useless Fatwa for covering it as well , just like Salfist and Their Jihad marriage Fatwa ....
> 
> and are you saying that I shouldn't say truth !?
> 
> well at least you knew about Soltan Mahmoud and Ayaz .... Soltan Mahmoud love to Ayaz is well known ....
> 
> when you readi ng history you should be wise and find out something that historian didn't wrote clearly ...



Holy Sh!!!t !!!

Gay King ... 

Why they didn't use this ability in the war ... Kick @$$ machine


----------



## twilight

Soheil said:


> Holy Sh!!!t !!!
> 
> Gay King ...
> 
> Why they didn't use this ability in the war ... Kick @$$ machine



well , it was not common between normal people ,, it was common between the rich .... and they were busy to doing themselves ... so they have no time for war .... 

in 6th century most of Muslims nations were corrupted that why they defeated so badly .... this is something that our historian ( Islamist ) covers ... 

&#1575;&#1740;&#1606; &#1583;&#1585;&#1587;&#1578; &#1605;&#1579;&#1604; &#1607;&#1605;&#1608;&#1606; &#1583;&#1608;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606; &#1587;&#1575;&#1587;&#1575;&#1606;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1607;&#1587;&#1578; &#1705;&#1607; &#1588;&#1575;&#1586;&#1583;&#1607; &#1607;&#1575; &#1608; &#1575;&#1588;&#1585;&#1575;&#1601; &#1605;&#1588;&#1594;&#1608;&#1604; &#1575;&#1586;&#1583;&#1608;&#1575;&#1580; &#1576;&#1575; &#1582;&#1608;&#1575;&#1607;&#1585;&#1575;&#1588;&#1608;&#1606; &#1576;&#1608;&#1583;&#1606;&#1583; ...

&#1570;&#1605;&#1585;&#1740;&#1705;&#1575;&#1740;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1608; &#1594;&#1585;&#1576;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1607;&#1605; &#1583;&#1575;&#1585;&#1606;&#1583; &#1607;&#1605;&#1608;&#1606; &#1585;&#1575;&#1607; &#1585;&#1608; &#1591;&#1740; &#1605;&#1740; &#1705;&#1606;&#1606;&#1583; ... &#1608;&#1604;&#1740; &#1601;&#1585;&#1602;&#1588; &#1575;&#1740;&#1606;&#1607; &#1705;&#1607; &#1575;&#1740;&#1606;&#1576;&#1575;&#1585; &#1578;&#1705;&#1606;&#1608;&#1604;&#1608;&#1688;&#1740; &#1607;&#1605; &#1575;&#1608;&#1605;&#1583;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1591; ...


----------



## SOHEIL

twilight said:


> well , it was not common between normal people ,, it was common between the rich .... and they were busy to doing themselves ... so they have no time for war ....
> 
> in 6th century most of Muslims nations were corrupted that why they defeated so badly .... this is something that our historian ( Islamist ) covers ...
> 
> &#1575;&#1740;&#1606; &#1583;&#1585;&#1587;&#1578; &#1605;&#1579;&#1604; &#1607;&#1605;&#1608;&#1606; &#1583;&#1608;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606; &#1587;&#1575;&#1587;&#1575;&#1606;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1607;&#1587;&#1578; &#1705;&#1607; &#1588;&#1575;&#1586;&#1583;&#1607; &#1607;&#1575; &#1608; &#1575;&#1588;&#1585;&#1575;&#1601; &#1605;&#1588;&#1594;&#1608;&#1604; &#1575;&#1586;&#1583;&#1608;&#1575;&#1580; &#1576;&#1575; &#1582;&#1608;&#1575;&#1607;&#1585;&#1575;&#1588;&#1608;&#1606; &#1576;&#1608;&#1583;&#1606;&#1583; ...
> 
> &#1570;&#1605;&#1585;&#1740;&#1705;&#1575;&#1740;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1608; &#1594;&#1585;&#1576;&#1740; &#1607;&#1575; &#1607;&#1605; &#1583;&#1575;&#1585;&#1606;&#1583; &#1607;&#1605;&#1608;&#1606; &#1585;&#1575;&#1607; &#1585;&#1608; &#1591;&#1740; &#1605;&#1740; &#1705;&#1606;&#1606;&#1583; ... &#1608;&#1604;&#1740; &#1601;&#1585;&#1602;&#1588; &#1575;&#1740;&#1606;&#1607; &#1705;&#1607; &#1575;&#1740;&#1606;&#1576;&#1575;&#1585; &#1578;&#1705;&#1606;&#1608;&#1604;&#1608;&#1688;&#1740; &#1607;&#1605; &#1575;&#1608;&#1605;&#1583;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1591; ...



Amrikaiia ke har roz ye ravesh jadid *** kashf mikonan !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SiLent crY

twilight said:


> He was ( or maybe he loved his slave for nothing ) ....
> 
> most of them were gay in that era ( that why mongul defeated all of those empire so easily .... ) ... and they make some useless Fatwa for covering it as well , just like Salfist and Their Jihad marriage Fatwa ....
> 
> and are you saying that I shouldn't say truth !?
> 
> well at least you knew about Soltan Mahmoud and Ayaz .... Soltan Mahmoud love to Ayaz is well known ....
> 
> when you reading history you should be wise and find out something that historian didn't wrote clearly ...



source please , cos I can't believe a man who sacrificed his family and children and fought against mongols is a gay .


----------



## SOHEIL

S00R3NA said:


> source please , cos I can't believe a man who sacrificed his family and children and fought against mongols is a gay .



zarbol masal : giram pedare to bood jakesh ! az $ex pedar to ra che hasel !!!


----------



## twilight

S00R3NA said:


> source please , cos I can't believe a man who sacrificed his family and children and fought against mongols is a gay .



well , Even though Persian Wikipedia isn't reliable source but :



> &#1576;&#1607; &#1593;&#1602;&#1740;&#1583;&#1607; &#1605;&#1608;&#1585;&#1582;&#1740;&#1606; &#1590;&#1593;&#1601; &#1583;&#1585;&#1608;&#1606;&#1740; &#1587;&#1662;&#1575;&#1607;&#1740;&#1575;&#1606;&#1548; &#1570;&#1588;&#1601;&#1578;&#1711;&#1740; &#1587;&#1740;&#1575;&#1587;&#1740; &#1575;&#1740;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606; &#1608; &#1581;&#1587;&#1575;&#1583;&#1578; &#1576;&#1585;&#1575;&#1583;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606; &#1608; &#1575;&#1591;&#1585;&#1575;&#1601;&#1740;&#1575;&#1606; &#1580;&#1604;&#1575;&#1604; &#1575;&#1604;&#1583;&#1740;&#1606; &#1608; &#1593;&#1740;&#1575;&#1588;&#1740; &#1608;&#1740; &#1575;&#1586; &#1583;&#1604;&#1575;&#1740;&#1604; &#1575;&#1589;&#1604;&#1740; &#1588;&#1705;&#1587;&#1578; &#1575;&#1608; &#1576;&#1608;&#1583;.
> 
> &#1575;&#1608; &#1583;&#1585; &#1580;&#1606;&#1711; &#1576;&#1575; &#1605;&#1594;&#1608;&#1604;&#1575;&#1606; &#1601;&#1575;&#1602;&#1583; &#1587;&#1740;&#1575;&#1587;&#1578; &#1582;&#1575;&#1589;&#1740; &#1576;&#1608;&#1583; &#1608; &#1593;&#1604;&#1740;*&#1585;&#1594;&#1605; &#1588;&#1580;&#1575;&#1593;&#1578;&#1548; &#1575;&#1594;&#1604;&#1576; &#1575;&#1608;&#1602;&#1575;&#1578; &#1585;&#1575; &#1662;&#1587; &#1575;&#1586; &#1580;&#1606;&#1711; &#1576;&#1607; &#1593;&#1740;&#1575;&#1588;&#1740; &#1605;&#1740;*&#1711;&#1584;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606;&#1583;.&#1662;&#1587; &#1575;&#1586; &#1601;&#1578;&#1581; &#1607;&#1585; &#1588;&#1607;&#1585; &#1585;&#1601;&#1578;&#1575;&#1585;&#1588; &#1576;&#1575; &#1576;&#1586;&#1585;&#1711;&#1575;&#1606; &#1608; &#1605;&#1585;&#1583;&#1605; &#1576;&#1587;&#1740;&#1575;&#1585; &#1605;&#1578;&#1705;&#1576;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606;&#1607; &#1576;&#1608;&#1583; &#1578;&#1575; &#1580;&#1575;&#1740;&#1740;&#1705;&#1607; &#1607;&#1740;&#1670; &#1705;&#1587; &#1605;&#1575;&#1740;&#1604; &#1576;&#1607; &#1607;&#1605;&#1585;&#1575;&#1607;&#1740; &#1576;&#1575; &#1608;&#1740; &#1606;&#1605;&#1740;*&#1588;&#1583;. &#1607;&#1605;&#1670;&#1606;&#1740;&#1606; &#1580;&#1606;&#1711;*&#1607;&#1575;&#1740; &#1601;&#1575;&#1602;&#1583; &#1606;&#1602;&#1588;&#1607; &#1608;&#1740; &#1578;&#1606;&#1607;&#1575; &#1605;&#1594;&#1608;&#1604;&#1575;&#1606; &#1585;&#1575; &#1576;&#1607; &#1587;&#1585;&#1575;&#1587;&#1585; &#1587;&#1585;&#1586;&#1605;&#1740;&#1606; &#1575;&#1740;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606; &#1705;&#1588;&#1575;&#1606;&#1583; &#1608; &#1608;&#1740;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606;&#1740;&#1607;&#1575; &#1585;&#1575; &#1588;&#1583;&#1578; &#1576;&#1582;&#1588;&#1740;&#1583;.]



Ø¬Ù&#8222;Ø§Ù&#8222;*Ø§Ù&#8222;Ø¯Û&#338;Ù&#8224; Ø®Ù&#710;Ø§Ø±Ø²Ù&#8230;Ø´Ø§Ù&#8225; - Ù&#710;Û&#338;Ú©Û&#338;*Ù¾Ø¯Û&#338;Ø§

don't fall in historian traps ... they only wanted to create a hero ... Jalal al Din only was a great warrior ... He even wasn't a great man .... and he only wanted to protect his kingdom ( well , it is better to say he only wanted to has a kingdom ) .... and you should know nationalism hadn't any value in 6th century ....

Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

another thing is that I didn't mean he actually was a gay , but the chance is high .... and I read it in a book .... old one ... 

another thing , history is sad book for us ... just a though ...


----------



## The SiLent crY

twilight said:


> another thing , history is sad book for us ... just a though ...



lts cool to see you interested in history and thanks for the info however I don't agree with you in blaming our history like some of the religious people in our country .


----------



## twilight

S00R3NA said:


> lts cool to see you interested in history and thanks for the info however I don't agree with you in blaming our history like some of the religious people in our country .




I don't blame history .... the only part of history that interest me is Cyrus the great era .... nothing more nothing less .... and most painful part of Iran history is after Agha Mohammad Khan death till 50 years ago .... there is no point of blaming history .... 

and you are biased toward religious Iranian .... 

and one of most painful part of history for me is that we only have our enemy view about our history .... !!!

just look at Hackhamaneshi era ... we only have Heroudet and Younani version !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> Oh really?



you confirmed my word, as we can see it just made a hole in The roof top and it even couldn't blow up That room. If it was a missile or big rocket, whole the apartment with neighbors were on the Air and all windows in the street and two alleys behind it were exploded.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> you confirmed my word, as we can see it just made a hole in The roof top and it even couldn't blow up That room. *If it was a missile or big rocket*, whole the apartment with neighbors were on the Air and all windows in the street and two alleys behind it were exploded.





There is a *rocket *and there is a *rocket *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> There is a *rocket *and there is a *rocket *



Thank you for confirming my words again. that's exactly what i said. so since now dont try to count hamas home-made rockets as a heavy bloody weapon.


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> you confirmed my word, as we can see it just made a hole in The roof top and it even couldn't blow up That room. If it was a missile or big rocket, whole the apartment with neighbors were on the Air and all windows in the street and two alleys behind it were exploded.



Only by destroying whole building it can hurt human? 

The shrapnels will bounce off human flesh? 














Qassam perforate with shrapnels concrete wall but it will not hurt a flesh?  

And Qassams are by far not the only thing being launch at Israel from Gaza, there are Grads, zilzals, mortars etc...


----------



## Hack-Hook

Archdemon said:


> Only by destroying whole building it can hurt human?
> 
> The shrapnels will bounce off human flesh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Qassam perforate with shrapnels concrete wall but it will not hurt a flesh?
> 
> And Qassams are by far not the only thing being launch at Israel from Gaza, there are Grads, zilzals, mortars etc...



do you knew what is a zelzal ?
for the information it will level a house with several house around it. don't compare it with Qassam and also its range is above 200km and carry up to to 600kg of explosives 
if you saw such thing in Hamas arsenal then call me 






also Qassam , Grad and mortars are doing the same amount of damage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> Only by destroying whole building it can hurt human?
> 
> The shrapnels will bounce off human flesh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Qassam perforate with shrapnels concrete wall but it will not hurt a flesh?
> 
> And Qassams are by far not the only thing being launch at Israel from Gaza, there are Grads, zilzals, mortars etc...



did i say they will not hurt anybody!?!? I'm comparing them with missiles and heavy rockets.
it means if you take cover behind a wall or another room, you dont get damage.(it's clear in your pics)
but when a missile hit the apartment, doesn't matter where you are in the house , whole the apartment is on the air and...( read again my old posts instead of being delusional or making story)

I've never heard hamas is using zelzal.
about grad and it's family, they even cant completely destroy a wall . They are very useful against infantry spots in fronts. It's because of what they are made and it's purpose.


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> *did i say they will not hurt anybody!?!?* I'm comparing them with missiles and heavy rockets.
> it means if you take cover behind a wall or another room, you dont get damage.(it's clear in your pics)
> but when a missile hit the apartment, doesn't matter where you are in the house , whole the apartment is on the air and...( read again my old posts instead of being delusional or making story)
> 
> I've never heard hamas is using zelzal.
> about grad and it's family, they even cant completely destroy a wall . They are very useful against infantry spots in fronts. It's because of what they are made and it's purpose.



Yes you did*! *

http://www.defence.pk/forums/irania...ystem-last-news-about-b373-3.html#post4311547



Uhuhu said:


> you should know most rockets of hamas are home made and are not strong. most of them are like katyusha that just can hurt people and hard can destroy a wall.


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> Yes you did*! *
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/irania...ystem-last-news-about-b373-3.html#post4311547



seriously? do you use drug?



> ]you should know most rockets of hamas are home made and are not strong. most of them are like katyusha that* just can hurt people and hard can destroy a wall*.



It means:
1-It hurts people
2-It cant completely destroy a wall or a apartment like other heavy rockets or missile can do.

hence less people die and many can be survive by taking cover in Hamas rocket Attack.

Dude, i dont know hebrew.. believe me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?


really?ur that arrogant,ur county is a little ***** hiding behind usa's skirts,we'll see the truth when these toys r used against u  btw i dont care if im banned because im sayin the right thing ,also i would like to ask the admin that why r israelis allowed here being that this is a pakistani defense fourm,this way ur only tolerating these people


----------



## Archdemon

JEskandari said:


> do you knew what is a zelzal ?
> for the information it will level a house with several house around it. don't compare it with Qassam and also its range is above 200km and carry up to to 600kg of explosives
> if you saw such thing in Hamas arsenal then call me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also Qassam , Grad and mortars are doing the same amount of damage.



Ok my mistake, meant Fajr-5


----------



## mohsen

Uhuhu said:


> seriously? do you use drug?
> 
> 
> 
> It means:
> 1-It hurts people
> 2-It cant completely destroy a wall or a apartment like other heavy rockets or missile can do.
> 
> hence less people die and many can be survive by taking cover in Hamas rocket Attack.
> 
> Dude, i dont know hebrew.. believe me.


probably he expects harmless rockets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Archdemon

Uhuhu said:


> seriously? do you use drug?
> 
> 
> 
> It means:
> 1-It hurts people
> 2-It cant completely destroy a wall or a apartment like other heavy rockets or missile can do.
> 
> hence less people die and many can be survive by taking cover in Hamas rocket Attack.
> 
> Dude, i dont know hebrew.. believe me.



My apologies, i red can as cant, maybe because of *can hurt* im dyslectic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Uhuhu

Archdemon said:


> ...



your welcome


----------



## Sam1980

Archdemon said:


> Ok my mistake, meant Fajr-5



Zelzal Warhead: 600kg 
Fajr-5 Warhead: 90kg
Qassam Warhead: 5-20kg 

You do the math.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## twilight

Sam1980 said:


> Zelzal Warhead: 600kg
> Fajr-5 Warhead: 90kg
> Qassam Warhead: 5-20kg
> 
> You do the math.



and you forget that Hamas can't produce strong warhead as well ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sam1980

twilight said:


> and you forget that Hamas can't produce strong warhead as well ...



I actually would like to show you something, the video I post here contains a footage from explosion of 1kg of TNT, trotyl chemical chemical compound to be more exact, and you could see its destructive power relative to its size, yet some of our Israeli members here claim that, this building was targeted by Fajr-5 which contains 90kg military grade high explosive content, I'm not a bomb specialist, but I believe 90kg HE warhead ought to do more damage than this. If they would be kind enough to provide us with more pictures, maybe we could discuss about this.

There are far more better chemical compounds like cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine that could make the unstable TNT look pale in comparison, but I highly doubt if Hamas could get their paws on that easily!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUSff_JGyqw

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Oublious said:


> this is a weird news. more likely a propaganda ahahah... read this part:
> 
> *The Iranian Armed Forces have recently test-fired different types of newly-developed missiles and torpedoes and tested a large number of its home-made weapons, tools and equipments, including submarines, military ships, artillery, choppers, aircraft, UAVs and air defense and electronic systems, during massive military drills.*
> 
> what achievement ahahah...



What do you expect, some red light achievements?


----------



## The SC

SOHEIL said:


> Did you ever compare Taaer-2 missiles with Buk M2 !?
> 
> I mean like experts not fanboys !!!
> 
> This is first ... But second :
> 
> If Israeli leaders & Comonders have the same Idea as you ...
> 
> That responses all of the questions about their failed wars in the region ...
> 
> At the end , nobody expecting bravo from an Israeli former MBT rider/biologist ...



And most probably a pleasure girl to the Israeli officers, ask her if she was thinking the same when they received some missiles on their heads in 2006, and hundred of thousands of them were displaced, and hid like rats. Not to mention their failed Merkava tanks that was (falsely; in order to sell the peace of junk) supposed to be the best of the world, but failed miserably against Hezbollah's antitank missiles, or their supposedly best of the best warship being hit and disabled for more than a year by one single missile.
So you can see that their posts are all expressions of their inner dissatisfaction with themselves, projected outright in their writings. They can do nothing about it, it the power of the mind against their fake will.


----------



## The SC

Archdemon said:


> Yeah 5%.... 1500 rockets and so little of damage, i wonder why.



Unlike you, the Muslims do not mass target civilians, Palestinians have home made artisanal rockets to send you a message, and they have proven once again your false weapons technologies achievements.
In 2006, Hezbollah had precision missiles, and could have easily targeted your biggest chemical factory in Haifa and Israel, and kill or mime for life about 200 000 Israelis in Haifa alone, but they showed restraint, and targeted your military bases and compounds, go ask how many direct hits on your military bases, airfields and command posts.


----------



## 500

The SC said:


> Unlike you, the Muslims do not mass target civilians, Palestinians have home made artisanal rockets to send you a message, and they have proven once again your false weapons technologies achievements.
> In 2006, Hezbollah had precision missiles, and could have easily targeted your biggest chemical factory in Haifa and Israel, and kill or mime for life about 200 000 Israelis in Haifa alone, but they showed restraint, and targeted your military bases and compounds, go ask how many direct hits on your military bases, airfields and command posts.


Hezbollah deliberately targeted civilians. They indiscriminately fired thousands of shrapnel rockets at civilian neighborhoods. They fired all their rockets during day and especially increased rocket fire during rush hours.

They targeted chemical plants in Haifa as well, but failed due to miserable accuracy. Damage to military sites was accidental and very very minor.

Israel on the other hand carred 11,000 combat sorties during the war. Each plane can carry some 5 tons of munitions easily, thats 55,000 tons of bombs. That would be enough to vaporize the entire Shia population of Lebanon. But we showed great restraint and attacked only terrorist sites.


----------



## Archdemon

The SC said:


> Unlike you, the Muslims do not mass target civilians, Palestinians have home made artisanal rockets to send you a message, and they have proven once again your false weapons technologies achievements.
> In 2006, Hezbollah had precision missiles, and could have easily targeted your biggest chemical factory in Haifa and Israel, and kill or mime for life about 200 000 Israelis in Haifa alone, but they showed restraint, and targeted your military bases and compounds, *go ask how many direct hits on your military bases, airfields and command posts*.




Ok, im asking.


----------



## Serpentine

500 said:


> Hezbollah deliberately targeted civilians. They indiscriminately fired thousands of shrapnel rockets at civilian neighborhoods. They fired all their rockets during day and especially increased rocket fire during rush hours.
> 
> They targeted chemical plants in Haifa as well, but failed due to miserable accuracy. Damage to military sites was accidental and very very minor.
> 
> Israel on the other hand carred 11,000 combat sorties during the war. Each plane can carry some 5 tons of munitions easily, thats 55,000 tons of bombs. That would be enough to vaporize the entire Shia population of Lebanon. But we showed great restraint and attacked only terrorist sites.



According to your own words:

Hezbollah didn't show any restraint and only targeted civilians and in the end, it killed only *44 Israeli citizens*, 3 times less than the number of IDF soldiers it killed which is *121*.

IDF showed the most restraint, had the most accurate weapons and yet, it killed *1191 Lebanese civilians*, roughly two times more than the Hezbollah fighters it killed. IDF also deliberately targeted civilians infrastructures, Beirut residential areas and airports, apartments, bridges and many other areas.

It tells us many things about the nature of both sides.
Israel kills civilians to force its enemy to surrender more quickly.
Hezbollah killed IDF soldiers 3 times more than citizens it killed, that was a disaster compared to previous Israeli wars.

The propaganda of the maniac Israeli leaders, Nutjobyahu, Barak and Peres may not work on many people who don't live in Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

500 said:


> Hezbollah deliberately targeted civilians. They indiscriminately fired thousands of shrapnel rockets at civilian neighborhoods. They fired all their rockets during day and especially increased rocket fire during rush hours.
> 
> They targeted chemical plants in Haifa as well, but failed due to miserable accuracy. Damage to military sites was accidental and very very minor.
> 
> Israel on the other hand carred 11,000 combat sorties during the war. Each plane can carry some 5 tons of munitions easily, thats 55,000 tons of bombs. That would be enough to vaporize the entire Shia population of Lebanon. But we showed great restraint and attacked only terrorist sites.


I feel sorry for you and your fake nation, probably you think by writing here you can change the history.
the reality is 180' opposite to what you wrote. you bombarded Lebanon cities and infrastructures to force people abandon the Hezbollah while Hezbollah troops mostly were fighting with you outside the cities, remember your ruined legacy Mercava, remember their grave yard.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 500

Serpentine said:


> According to your own words:
> 
> Hezbollah didn't show any restraint and only targeted civilians and in the end, it killed only *44 Israeli citizens*, 3 times less than the number of IDF soldiers it killed which is *121*.
> 
> IDF showed the most restraint, had the most accurate weapons and yet, it killed *1191 Lebanese civilians*, roughly two times more than the Hezbollah fighters it killed.


First of all 1191 - is *total* number of Lebanese citizens killed, including Hezbollah.

Secondly this statistics is quite meaningless. in WW2 US killed hundreds of thousands German civilians, Germany killed almost no any US civilian. So what? Nazis were much nicer than Americans according to that logic?

IDF tactics is that soldiers go in front into enemy territory, protecting civilians with their bodies. In addition Israel invests BILLIONS to protect their civilians with shelters and so on.

Hezbollah tactics is the opposite: they hide behind their civilians. They invest zero in shelters and stuff.



> IDF also deliberately targeted civilians infrastructures, Beirut residential areas and airports, apartments, bridges and many other areas.


Israel attacked infrastructures which were used by Hezbollah.



> Israel kills civilians to force its enemy to surrender more quickly.
> Hezbollah killed IDF soldiers 3 times more than citizens it killed, that was a disaster compared to previous Israeli wars.


It tells the opposite: IDF soldiers go to into enemy territory to protect civilians, Hezbollah hide behind their civilians.

IDF could kill hundreds of thousands Lebanese civilians with ease, without endangering any of its soldiers.
Hezbollah wanted to kill as much civilians as possible, but they could kill much not because of the IDF protection.


----------



## Archdemon

mohsen said:


> *I feel sorry for you and your fake nation*, probably you think by writing here you can change the history.
> the reality is 180' opposite to what you wrote. you bombarded Lebanon cities and infrastructures to force people abandon the Hezbollah while Hezbollah troops mostly were fighting with you outside the cities, remember your ruined legacy Mercava, remember their grave yard.



Talking about fake, your avatar


----------



## turkish

Dont know about Missiles but love Iranian movie!


----------



## Shahnameh

Bavar-373 will probably be ready in early 2014.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Archdemon said:


> Ok, im asking.



Ask your commanders at that time or look for the documentary called: if Hezbollah was defeated and you will have your answer with details, and real time footage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

500 said:


> Hezbollah deliberately targeted civilians. They indiscriminately fired thousands of shrapnel rockets at civilian neighborhoods. They fired all their rockets during day and especially increased rocket fire during rush hours.
> 
> They targeted chemical plants in Haifa as well, but failed due to miserable accuracy. Damage to military sites was accidental and very very minor.
> 
> Israel on the other hand carred 11,000 combat sorties during the war. Each plane can carry some 5 tons of munitions easily, thats 55,000 tons of bombs. That would be enough to vaporize the entire Shia population of Lebanon. But we showed great restraint and attacked only terrorist sites.



What about your supposedly highly advanced warship, they missed it too? talk about precision your navy never saw it coming!!!
I know that you can do nothing but lie to people, there are documentaries with actual footages that contradicts everything you say.
Usually I skip reading your posts because of what I have just said, so please try to avoid mine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

The SC said:


> Ask your commanders at that time or look for the documentary called: if Hezbollah was defeated and you will have your answer with details, and real time footage.



No, im asking you, provide for only one example of missile targeting base or militarily compound, date and location.


----------



## The SC

Archdemon said:


> No, im asking you, provide for only one example of missile targeting base or militarily compound, date and location.


 you'll find all what you are asking for and more in that documentary.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Back to topic:

No Iran-Russia deal on replacing S-300: Russian official



The head of Russia&#8217;s state arms export company Rosoboronexport says there is no deal between Tehran and Moscow over a replacement for the S-300 missile defense systems, which Russia is mandated to deliver to Iran under a contract.


Responding to a question about the potential offer to Iran for a replacement by Russia, Anatoly Isaikin said, &#8220;I will only be able to speak about that if there were any deals or when there would be deals, but there are none,&#8221; RIA Novosti reported Tuesday.

Under a contract signed in 2007, Russia undertook to provide Iran with at least five S-300 missile defense systems.

However, Moscow refused to deliver the systems to Iran under the pretext that they were covered by the fourth round of the UN Security Council resolutions against Iran.

In September 2010, then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree banning the delivery of the S-300 systems to the Islamic Republic.

Following Russia&#8217;s failure to deliver the systems under the contract, Iran filed a complaint against Rosoboronexport with the International Court of Arbitration in Geneva.

On May 30, Russian Technologies (Rostech) CEO Sergei Chemezov said that Moscow sought to reach a settlement with Tehran to have Iran withdraw its lawsuit against Rosoboronexport over the deal on S-300 as Russia&#8217;s chances to win the case &#8220;are very slim.&#8221;


Chemezov said that the US had applied heavy pressure on Moscow to stop the agreement under the pretext that the deal was against the UNSC sanctions. The Russian official added, however, that Washington later changed its rhetoric, saying the UN resolution did not specifically mention the S-300 system and claiming that Russia had acted on its own.

On July 31, Iran&#8217;s Ambassador to Russia Seyyed Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi said there were no negotiations between Tehran and Moscow over a replacement for the S-300 systems.

No Iran-Russia deal on replacing S-300: Russian official - JamNews


----------



## Shahnameh

Only s-400 will be a good compensation.


----------



## Archdemon

Dogging the question, typical, you just cant name, because there were ZERO hits on Israeli bases/compounds


----------



## The SC

Archdemon said:


> Dogging the question, typical, you just cant name, because there were ZERO hits on Israeli bases/compounds



Watch the video.


----------



## Archdemon

The SC said:


> Watch the video.



You just cant, even if there were mention in the video they can not be verified, oh and i will not waste my time of hez propaganda.


----------



## The SC

Even the truth with real footage is propaganda for you, oh, I forgot, your religion forbids you from saying the truth or recognizing it.


----------



## Archdemon

The SC said:


> Even the truth with real footage is propaganda for you, oh, I forgot, your religion forbids you from saying the truth or recognizing it.



One only one, name one military base/installation/compound which was hit by hez missile/s, *ONE**!*


----------



## MTN1917

Today production line of Sayyad-2 AD missile was inaugurated in presence of Dehghan defence minister of Iran.

Today also it was announced development of "Talash" AD system was finished.

Sayyad-2 is a *Solid* propellant, medium range, high altitude surface to air missile with combinatorial guidance system that can target all types of aerial targets like helicopters, low rcs targets, high speed and high maneuverable targets.

Talash is a medium range high altitude AD system used against fighters and bombers. It also can target helicopters and UAVs too. 
Talash AD system is used for detection and tracking targets for Sayyad-2 AD missile.

افتتاح خط توليد موشك پدافند هوايي "صياد 2" و خاتمه تحقيقات سامانه پدافند هوايي "تلاش" | وزارت دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح - IR.IRAN Ministry of Defence
pics:

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## mohsen

page is too heavy, convert some of the pics to link please.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

It looks totally different from Sayyad-2, the tubes are similar to Patriot pac 2.


----------



## Arman-Shahr



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

No wonder Iran was not so eager to take the offer from Russians for the S300 deal ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SiLent crY

SOHEIL said:


> No wonder Iran was not so eager to take the offer from Russians for the S300 deal ...



bavar karesh be koja resideh ?

dar zemn , khodeto chos nakon . bashe ?


----------



## Surenas

SOHEIL said:


> No wonder Iran was not so eager to take the offer from Russians for the S300 deal ...



No wonder? They have start a bloody arbitrary case for God's sake, and are till this day negotiating with the Russians to still get those systems. The only reason why they aren't in Iran is because of Russia.


----------



## SOHEIL

S00R3NA said:


> bavar karesh be koja resideh ?
> 
> dar zemn , khodeto chos nakon . bashe ?



BAVAR-373 is a real monster (cold launch missiles) ... passing last tests !

PS : no chos ... just no time for idiots !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SiLent crY

SOHEIL said:


> BAVAR-373 is a real monster (cold launch missiles) ... passing last tests !
> 
> PS : no chos ... just no time for idiots !



 , I see

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cabatli_53

S-2 looks so delicious. If It reaches the succesfull kill rates, Then It means Iran achieved a big goal in SAM field. 

BTW, I admired new features of PDF.


----------



## SOHEIL

Surenas said:


> No wonder? They have start a bloody arbitrary case for God's sake, and are till this day negotiating with the Russians to still get those systems. The only reason why they aren't in Iran is because of Russia.



100% wrong ... almost nothing we got from Russians !

they just backstabed us !

Russia !!! he he ... did you forget Mig-29 story !?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## cabatli_53

If Aft fins of missile is not folding type, There will be a new big propaganda wave news to be occured the agenda again. 

Pay attention to body fins integrated along with missile body and launcher size.






If We consider the aft fins (If It is not folding type) as way bigger than body fins , Then, It can easily be thought that S-2 missile is not fitted into those launchers looking like Patriot...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Surenas

SOHEIL said:


> 100% wrong ... almost nothing we got from Russians !
> 
> they just backstabed us !
> 
> Russia !!! he he ... did you forget Mig-29 story !?


----------



## SOHEIL

cabatli_53 said:


> If Aft fins of missile is not folding type, There will be a new big propaganda wave news to be occured the agenda again.
> 
> Pay attention to body fins integrated along with missile body and launcher size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If We consider the aft fins (If It is not folding type) as way bigger than body fins , Then, It can easily be thought that S-2 missile is not fitted into those launchers looking like Patriot...



You really disappointed me !!!

Look at the f@king fins again !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Surenas

Another pic:


----------



## cabatli_53

SOHEIL said:


> You really disappointed me !!!
> 
> Look at the f@king fins again !!!




Can you translate what's written on the center of aft fins ?


----------



## Arman-Shahr

higher quality video:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Surenas

cabatli_53 said:


> Can you translate what's written on the center of aft fins ?



Can't see it clearly, but it seems as if it is referring to the number of the missile

(Tank shomareh chehel?)












You are on MP.Net. Can't you open a topic about these missiles over there? I am curious about what those guys have to say.


----------



## The SiLent crY

SOHEIL said:


> You really disappointed me !!!
> 
> Look at the f@king fins again !!!



soheil , mage ghablan ye sayyade 2 nasakhte budan ?

History of Iranian Missiles and Rockets | Page 2

pas chera dobare hamun esmo vasash gozashtan ?


----------



## SOHEIL

S00R3NA said:


> soheil , mage ghablan ye sayyade 2 nasakhte budan ?
> 
> History of Iranian Missiles and Rockets | Page 2
> 
> pas chera dobare hamun esmo vasash gozashtan ?



No ... this is sayyad-1 !!!


----------



## 500

Looks like Buk missile in Patriots canister:


----------



## kaykay

wow congrats Iran. Anyway what is the range?? @SOHEIL

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The SiLent crY

SOHEIL said:


> No ... this is sayyad-1 !!!



are you sure ?


----------



## BeyondHeretic

500 said:


> Looks like Buk missile in Patriots canister:


enough to fool the American eye

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Surenas

500 said:


> Looks like Buk missile in Patriots canister:



The wings of Buk missiles are much shorter.


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> Looks like Buk missile in Patriots canister:



He He ... biologist ... you are out of this playground !!!

Wait for B-373 monster with *cold launch system* ! 


S00R3NA said:


> are you sure ?



100% ba chesh e khodam didam ! 


Surenas said:


> The wings of Buk missiles are much shorter.



Just wings !?

He just don't have anything to say !

Buk missiles !!!!!!!!!!  


kaykay said:


> wow congrats Iran. Anyway what is the range?? @SOHEIL



Classified data ... but seems +250 km to me ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

SOHEIL said:


> Classified data ... but seems +250 km to me ...


if it was 250km then they would call it long range system not mid-range. I think it's about 70~80 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

mohsen said:


> if it was 250km then they would call it long range system not mid-range. I think it's about 70~80 km.



70~80 km !!! 

my knowledge about rockets says : this is a long range system (200-250 km)


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## 500

SOHEIL said:


> He He ... biologist ... you are out of this playground !!!
> 
> Wait for B-373 monster with *cold launch system* !


Sweetheart, why do you need *cold launch system*? Do you plan to launch missiles from Siberia forests? Because otherwise it only makes system only more complicated and expensive.


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## BeyondHeretic

500 said:


> Sweetheart, why do you need *cold launch system*? Do you plan to launch missiles from Siberia forests? Because otherwise it only makes system only more complicated and expensive.


He means solid fuel


----------



## SOHEIL

500 said:


> Sweetheart, why do you need *cold launch system*? Do you plan to launch missiles from Siberia forests? Because otherwise it only makes system only more complicated and expensive.



Sweetheart !!!

we don't have cold places in IRAN !?

& temperature is the only reason !?


----------



## BeyondHeretic

We have cold places in iran , but we don't plan to fight the Zionists from there


----------



## SOHEIL

BeyondHeretic said:


> He means solid fuel



Yeeeeeeaaah ... missiles are solid fuel !

but we are talking about launching platform, my dear !


----------



## BeyondHeretic

SOHEIL said:


> Yeeeeeeaaah ... missiles are solid fuel !
> 
> but we are talking about launching platform, my dear !



a platform with that much of maintenance belongs nowhere


----------



## SOHEIL

BeyondHeretic said:


> We have cold places in iran , but we don't plan to fight the Zionists from there



fight what !?

If you say BMs & Fighter Jets , it will be correct !

this things are AD systems !!! not ballistic missiles !!!


----------



## BeyondHeretic

SOHEIL said:


> fight what !?
> 
> If you say BMs & Fighter Jets , it will be correct !
> 
> this things are AD systems !!! not ballistic missiles !!!


you mean AA ?>


----------



## SOHEIL

BeyondHeretic said:


> a platform with that much of maintenance belongs nowhere



 


BeyondHeretic said:


> you mean AA ?>



AD = Air Defense !


----------



## BeyondHeretic

SOHEIL said:


> AD = Air Defense !



Anyway I hope you get pictures of missiles with COLD LAUNCH SYSTEMS when they are out, to post on this forum


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## BeyondHeretic

Was that a cold launch system ? cause the link is broken here , I think it's soheil's gaming PC that uses a cold launching system.


----------



## SOHEIL

BeyondHeretic said:


> Was that a cold launch system ? cause the link is broken here , I think it's soheil's gaming PC that uses a cold launching system.



You are trolling bro !?

you can't see the pictures !?


----------



## BeyondHeretic

No , i'm using satellite internet and I can't see the pictures you posted.


----------



## SOHEIL

............................................................

Yes ... you can't !!! 

wait !


----------



## Surenas

Nobody can't see the pics you posted on the last two pages.


----------



## BeyondHeretic

Sounds like some one's hacking


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BeyondHeretic

impressive


----------



## SOHEIL

cabatli_53 said:


> If Aft fins of missile is not folding type, There will be a new big propaganda wave news to be occured the agenda again.
> 
> Pay attention to body fins integrated along with missile body and launcher size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If We consider the aft fins (If It is not folding type) as way bigger than body fins , Then, It can easily be thought that S-2 missile is not fitted into those launchers looking like Patriot...



@cabatli_53

fins of missile is not folding type !?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

رونمایی و شلیک موشک صیاد 2 (پدافند تلاش)


----------



## mohsen

SOHEIL said:


> 70~80 km !!!
> 
> my knowledge about rockets says : this is a long range system (200-250 km)


soheil, I'm tired, don't f@ck with me. they unveiled it as a mid-range AD system.
you wanna see the size of a 200km missile?




the 2 tube launchers are Giant missiles with the range of 200km. yet even gladiator missiles (4 tube) are about 2 times bigger than the Sayyad-2 missiles.


----------



## BLACKEAGLE

The missiles look almost exactly like the US-made RIM-66 Standard which is used on Iranian frigates and missiles boats:





It was first produced in 1967 and it's operational range is 40-170, flight ceiling 24,400 m, speed mach 3.5.
Very good achievement nonetheless although we haven't seen it being tested yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

mohsen said:


> soheil, I'm tired, don't f@ck with me. they unveiled it as a mid-range AD system.
> you wanna see the size of a 200km missile?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the 2 tube launchers are Giant missiles with the range of 200km. yet even gladiator missiles (4 tube) are about 2 times bigger than the Sayyad-2 missiles.



I should calculate again !  


BLACKEAGLE said:


> Very good achievement nonetheless although we haven't seen it being tested yet.



رونمایی و شلیک موشک صیاد 2 (پدافند تلاش)


----------



## SOHEIL

Ok ... +150 km is correct !


----------



## mohsen

SOHEIL said:


> Ok ... +150 km is correct !


so you mean you wanna do it tonight?


----------



## SOHEIL

mohsen said:


> so you mean you wanna do it tonight?


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BeyondHeretic

wow


----------



## cabatli_53

SOHEIL said:


> Ok ... +150 km is correct !




I think By judging its size and classification along with derivatives specifications Iran has, This missile has a range around 40-50km as medium altitude SAM.


----------



## SOHEIL

cabatli_53 said:


> I think By judging its size and classification along with derivatives specifications Iran has, This missile has a range around 40-50km as medium altitude SAM.



WRONG ... base on official video, The system has a range around 120 km ...


----------



## BeyondHeretic

I think soheil is right , can't you see how the missiles head is stuck out of its canister , it simply has more range than that.


----------



## cabatli_53

SOHEIL said:


> WRONG ... base on official video, The system has a range around 120 km ...



Consider 9M317 Buk-M2 as an example. The sizes of them are more or less similar and 9M317 is one of the latest generation system in its class Russian industry developed. Fuel and Rocket motor on similar size and technology missiles doesn't make much differences among eachothers If you didn't develop an unknown type of new fuel or rocket motor technology that is able to burn much longer than Russian latest variant equivalents. 9M317 has a max range of 50km.


----------



## cabatli_53

Chinese HQ-16 missile has a range of 40km.


----------



## 500

SOHEIL said:


> Ok ... +150 km is correct !


Depending on guidance method. If its simple SAHR then about 40 km, if it is command +SAHR then it can be up to 70 km.


----------



## farag

There is a difference between nominal altitude and practical altitude. Practical altitude should have 95% degree of confidence. 40 km and 120 km are both right answers.
I would like to bring up the u2 incident story. Soviet union hit it with an AD with a range of 40 km but u2 was in 65 km. The story was later revealed by son of Khrushchev.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mitth

PressTV - Iran inaugurates production line of Sayyad-2 missile


----------



## SOHEIL

cabatli_53 said:


> Chinese HQ-16 missile has a range of 40km.



Let's talk about launchers !


----------



## UKBengali

The best thing about the SAM systems that Iran is developing is that the US and other hostile nations will have no idea how they work.

The Bavar-373 maybe even more of a headache than if Iran had gotten the S-300 from Russia.

Best of luck to Iran in developing a fully comprehensive air-defence system to keep aggressors at bay.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ResurgentIran

Nice.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cabatli_53

SOHEIL said:


> Let's talk about launchers !




S-2 is almost same size as them introduced above but Let's talk If it gives you some clue about size of them.. Iranian one has a launcher like Patriot but Chinese version is introduced without launchers. Both uses similar 6x6 truck. The aft point of missile began from back tires and Fore sections of both missiles reach up to driver compartment.


----------



## TOPGUN

Good luck to our Iranian brothers , mashallah

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

farag said:


> There is a difference between nominal altitude and practical altitude. Practical altitude should have 95% degree of confidence. 40 km and 120 km are both right answers.
> I would like to bring up the u2 incident story. Soviet union hit it with an AD with a range of 40 km but u2 was in 65 km. The story was later revealed by son of Khrushchev.




Altitude is a different story to talk. Those are effective ranges of related missiles.

For exm. If We consider Russian 9M317 Buk-M2 missile:

(Source: Wiki)
Engagement Range: Up to 50km
Engagement Altitude: Up to 25km


----------



## SOHEIL

cabatli_53 said:


> S-2 is almost same size as them introduced above but Let's talk If it gives you some clue about size of them.. Iranian one has a launcher like Patriot but Chinese version is introduced without launchers. Both uses similar 6x6 truck. The aft point of missile began from back tires and Fore sections of both missiles reach up to driver compartment.



Outstanding analysis !


----------



## Oldman1

UKBengali said:


> The best thing about the SAM systems that Iran is developing is that the US and other hostile nations will have no idea how they work.
> 
> The Bavar-373 maybe even more of a headache than if Iran had gotten the S-300 from Russia.
> 
> Best of luck to Iran in developing a fully comprehensive air-defence system to keep aggressors at bay.



We have an idea how it works.


----------



## iranigirl2



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

*See differences, compare it with Sayyad-2:*

*LY-80:*







.
.
.

*SD2M:*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## applesauce

cabatli_53 said:


> S-2 is almost same size as them introduced above but Let's talk If it gives you some clue about size of them.. Iranian one has a launcher like Patriot but Chinese version is introduced without launchers. Both uses similar 6x6 truck. The aft point of missile began from back tires and Fore sections of both missiles reach up to driver compartment.



the LY-80 actually has a box launcher version.


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ALPfollowerOF373

good work brother iranians, keep going and kick the enemy of humankind, israel, usa and saudiking.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The_magnificent

Missile looks nice to me. Congratulations Irani members

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## [Bregs]

Iran is showing immense indigenous potential in making various types of arms

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

[Bregs] said:


> Iran is showing immense indigenous potential in making various types of arms



Wait for B-373

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ALPfollowerOF373

Yes we waiting the ticket to hell for usrael

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## ResurgentIran

Is this air defence system better than Raad, that Iran unveiled last year?


----------



## Uhuhu

S-2 has larger diameter in compare with standard(RIM 66).











Talash(S-2) is a medium range and High attitude system. it finds it's place between bavar-273 ( S-300 ) and Raad Air defence systems.
They used some of S-200 features and also radar in talash Air defence system( S-2).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Prince of Persia

A beautiful system!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Prince of Persia




----------



## Prince of Persia

Some insight regarding engine and simulator!


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> Wait for B-373


 you doing good job here in this forum


----------



## Prince of Persia

Iran is also developing Sayyad-3. 

امیر اسماعیلی خبر داد طراحی موشک صیاد ۳ برای سامانه S200/ نصب موشک جدید بر روی مرصاد/ توصیه رهبر انقلاب به فرمانده پدافند هوایی


----------



## Prince of Persia

Lets off by showing the most advanced of the ra'ad family. The one called, third of Khordad. According to the commander, Hajizadeh says 3rd of Khordad uses phased array radar with 1700 elements, and has electronically scan capability, it can simultaneously destroy 4 targets with 8 missiles (fires 2 missile per target for maximum kill probability), 3 missiles on TEL with radar, and two other TELs without radar (thus 9 missiles all together).
Range of "3rd of Khordad" will reach to 100 km in future with new missiles.

مشروح/ سردار حاجی‌زاده در گفتگوی ویژه خبری: فروندهای دوم و سوم RQ170 در حال ساخت است/ موشک «هرمز1» ضد رادار و «هرمز2» ضد ناو است

The missile of ra'ad defence system are called taer-2B have a range of 50 km and can reach altitudes of 25 km.
And here it is:



















The taer 2 missile (in the middle) compared to the Russian buk missiles:





The less advance member of ra'ad family is called Tabas, it uses the Taer2A missiles, the radar it uses is less advanced than that of 3rd of khordad.
And here it is:



















There is also a version of the ra'ad which utilised electro optic:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Prince of Persia

And we have the ra'ad missile carrier without any radars:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nomi007

Prince of Persia said:


> Troll, it seems the Russians are also using "fire brigade vehicles":
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Serpentine
> Sorry if you're busy.
> Please delete the trolls post. Thank you.


i will share images later


----------



## Prince of Persia

Some seekers, they could belong to ra'ad missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## -------

Great developments by Iran, even though it's not state of the art, it will certainly make hostile countries doublethink.


----------



## Prince of Persia

Combat-Master said:


> Great developments by Iran, even though it's not state of the art, it will certainly make hostile countries doublethink.



Thanks brother.

I am not sure what you mean by state of the art. It's certainly not as powerful as s-300/400. It's one of the most advanced medium ranged air defence made and in Iran's arsenal. Sayyad-2 is arguably more advanced. Iran's bavar-373 long range air defence systems will be the major advancement, it should be ready by 2016. Also,as I said in the beginning, a 100km and 200km ranged missiles are in development for next generation ra'ad systems.


----------



## RAMPAGE

Looks awesome !!!

Finally something good from Iranian Defense Industry.


----------



## Prince of Persia

RAMPAGE said:


> Looks awesome !!!
> 
> Finally something good from Iranian Defense Industry.



Thanks brother, but this is by no means the first good products made by Iran.
There are many more.

It would be great to see this system protecting your country's sky from drone using savages.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Informant

Prince of Persia said:


> Thanks brother, but this is by no means the first good products made by Iran.
> There are many more.
> 
> It would be great to see this system protecting your country's sky from drone using savages.



You guys need to concentrate on your airforce. Which is severely lacking. Your air defence systems are top notch in the region but not airforce. And in todays world it's only about airforce. Power projection.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Prince of Persia

Informant said:


> You guys need to concentrate on your airforce. Which is severely lacking. Your air defence systems are top notch in the region but not airforce. And in todays world it's only about airforce. Power projection.



Biggest problem Iran faces is jet engines. Iran has no problem with any other parts.
Hopefully once a jet engine is ready, you'll see some 4+ gen fighter jet. 
In my own opinion, Iran should concentrate more on UAV's, which is what we're doing. They are much cheaper and as they advance, they can replace manned planes. Manned planes are too expensive to develop. Remember, we have to develop them, we cant buy them.


----------



## Informant

Prince of Persia said:


> Biggest problem Iran faces is jet engines. Iran has no problem with any other parts.
> Hopefully once a jet engine is ready, you'll see some 4+ gen fighter jet.
> In my own opinion, Iran should concentrate more on UAV's, which is what we're doing. They are much cheaper and as they advance, they can replace manned planes. Manned planes are too expensive to develop. Remember, we have to develop them, we cant buy them.



UAV can not force project. Nor can it counter real planes in the sky. Monitoring sure, other than that it is handicapped to do anything. Engine is an issue for you guys.

What's Iran's military budget?


----------



## RAMPAGE

Prince of Persia said:


> Thanks brother, but this is by no means the first good products made by Iran.
> There are many more.
> 
> It would be great to see this system protecting your country's sky from drone using savages.


Pakistan uses SPADA 2000 as its Medium range air defence missile. 

But it would be great to work with Iran. I'm interested in the missile motor technology. 

Can you give me Sayyad 2's specs ???


----------



## Brutas

Iran's concentration should be
- Build an excellent navy to deter any aggression and project power beyond the region. Only navy can project power & deter attack far away from the home base. Even air power can't do much unless there are ships to carry them or bases in defferent regions to support them.
- Have a good air defense to deter any pre-emptive strike by any regional or outside forces
- Have a decent air force to counter attack in case anyone decides to strike.

Age of ground war is over. Spending on ground forces with limited resources could be a waste.


----------



## Prince of Persia

Informant said:


> UAV can not force project. Nor can it counter real planes in the sky. Monitoring sure, other than that it is handicapped to do anything. Engine is an issue for you guys.
> 
> What's Iran's military budget?



Iran's military is actually the lowest in the region I believe. @yavar Could give a better answer to that.

Also, I understand currently manned planes have more capability, but how long do you think that will last.
In the future UAV's will become more and become capable to a point where they will dwarf a manned planed.
In a manned plane you pull a certain amount of G's, you will kill the pilot. In UAV's you have no such issue. Do not judge UAV's prematurely. They are the future.



RAMPAGE said:


> Pakistan uses SPADA 2000 as its Medium range air defence missile.
> 
> But it would be great to work with Iran. I'm interested in the missile motor technology.
> 
> Can you give me Sayyad 2's specs ???



Sayyad-2 is a high altitude missile, its range was not declared but it's probably between 50-80 km (some day even more due it's size). 
Unlike ra'ad, it has 4 missile per carrier than 3.


----------



## mohsen

@Prince of Persia, third of Khordad is the name of that TELAR, it isn't part of Ra'ad. Ra'ad is just the name of the vehicle (TEL) which has no Radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Informant

Prince of Persia said:


> Iran's military is actually the lowest in the region I believe. @yavar Could give a better answer to that.
> 
> Also, I understand currently manned planes have more capability, but how long do you think that will last.
> In the future UAV's will become more and become capable to a point where they will dwarf a manned planed.
> In a manned plane you pull a certain amount of G's, you will kill the pilot. In UAV's you have no such issue. Do not judge UAV's prematurely. They are the future.
> 
> 
> 
> Sayyad-2 is a high altitude missile, its range was not declared but it's probably between 50-80 km (some day even more due it's size).
> Unlike ra'ad, it has 4 missile per carrier than 3.



UAV will cost just as much as a normal jet, maybe even more. That is the thing, it will have all the capabilities of a fighter plane, but not the size of a drone. The only cost saving would be the pilot. And this is not gonna happen than soon.


----------



## Prince of Persia

mohsen said:


> @Prince of Persia, third of Khordad is the name of that TELAR, it isn't part of Ra'ad. Ra'ad is just the name of the vehicle (TEL) which has no Radar.



I called them the "ra'ad " family because they are all still based on ra'ad.



Brutas said:


> Iran's concentration should be
> - Build an excellent navy to deter any aggression and project power beyond the region. Only navy can project power & deter attack far away from the home base. Even air power can't do much unless there are ships to carry them or bases in defferent regions to support them.
> - Have a good air defense to deter any pre-emptive strike by any regional or outside forces
> - Have a decent air force to counter attack in case anyone decides to strike.
> 
> Age of ground war is over. Spending on ground forces with limited resources could be a waste.



Iran's navy actually has so much ambition projects. I will not go into them here but you will see how the navy will put the airforce to shame with it's pace of development. Out air defence speaks for itself, it's growing at a very fast pace too. In 1-2 years, bavar-373 will be coming online. Out our force is not doing so well though. We are working on the jet engines, once that is done, things would be much easier.


----------



## RAMPAGE

Prince of Persia said:


> Sayyad-2 is a high altitude missile, its range was not declared but it's probably between 50-80 km (some day even more due it's size).
> Unlike ra'ad, it has 4 missile per carrier than 3.


speed ???


----------



## Brutas

Prince of Persia said:


> Our Air force is not doing so well though. We are working on the jet engines, once that is done, things would be much easier.



No need for a great air force. Just a decent one should be enough. It's only required for a counter attack. As long as you have a superb navy, counter strike can be carried out by navy as well.

Watch all 4 episode below;
















The Golden Ocean -Empire of the Seas- How England achieve global supremacy? - YouTube

Russia, China, Japan all are building navies. That is the future. Future wars will be fought long distance. Enemies won't see each other. Bedouins living south of Iran have no notion of a navy. Probably to them desert is the ocean. Camels are sufficient, so spending much on ground forces to encounter them will be waste for Iran.


----------



## The SC

Prince of Persia said:


> I called them the "ra'ad " family because they are all still based on ra'ad.
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's navy actually has so much ambition projects. I will not go into them here but you will see how the navy will put the airforce to shame with it's pace of development. Out air defence speaks for itself, it's growing at a very fast pace too. In 1-2 years, bavar-373 will be coming online. Out our force is not doing so well though. We are working on the jet engines, once that is done, things would be much easier.



According to the Iranian general presenting the RQ-170 Iranian copy, Iran has advanced 35 years ahead in drone engine technology, thanks to the reverse engineering of the RQ-170.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Prince of Persia

RAMPAGE said:


> speed ???



Mach 3.5 I believe.



The SC said:


> According to the Iranian general presenting the RQ-170 Iranian copy, Iran has advanced 35 years ahead in drone engine technology, thanks to the reverse engineering of the RQ-170.



Indeed. The RQ-170 mst have used a very very advance engine due to it's requirements. It's technology for certainly help Iran develop a larger engine.


----------



## yavar

Prince of Persia said:


> Biggest problem Iran faces is jet engines. .


are you sure ??













Prince of Persia said:


> I
> Sayyad-2 is a high altitude missile, its range was not declared but it's probably between 50-80 km (some day even more due it's size).Unlike ra'ad, it has 4 missile per carrier than 3.


Sayyad 2 is about 50 to 80 KM .. how do you come to such conclusion ??




as you can see on first version of Sayyad 2 it was shown about 120KM . so i do ont understand where you got 50 to 80 KM from 





and this is latest version of Sayyad 2 . as you can see it totally different system compare to it first version.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Prince of Persia

yavar said:


> are you sure ??



Yavar jan

Those are refurbished engines. They are not new, despite their very shiny appearance.
Believe me, If Iran made a jet engine, you would have seen it unveiled in a proper ceremony.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## -SINAN-

yavar said:


> are you sure ??



@Prince of Persia

Not gonna comment on this post.

Is there any road map regarding Iran's plan of developing jet engines ? ( This is an honest question, don't bring Turkey on the table. )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Prince of Persia

yavar said:


> are you sure ?
> 
> 
> Sayyad 2 is about 50 to 80 KM .. how do you come to such conclusion ??
> 
> as you can see on first version of Sayyad 2 it was shown about 120KM . so i do ont understand where you got 50 to 80 KM from



120km is the range of the radar NOT the missile. They said it's a medium ranged missile, that's where I got my 50-80 km range from.



Sinan said:


> @Prince of Persia
> 
> Not gonna comment on this post.
> 
> Is there any road map regarding Iran's plan of developing jet engines ? ( This is an honest question, don't bring Turkey on the table. )


Why would I bring Turkey into it bro?
Honest answer would be that I don't know how they are going about it.
Considering Iran's MAPNA company, I have no doubt Iran is not that far from making a jet engine. We already have the capability to make single crystal turbine blades and that is very important for making jet engines.

It should not be long before we see the first Iranian jet engine. And when we do make one, you'll see it posted here for certain.
Sorry if I did not answer you points properly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Irajgholi

Sinan said:


> @Prince of Persia
> 
> Not gonna comment on this post.
> 
> Is there any road map regarding Iran's plan of developing jet engines ? ( This is an honest question, don't bring Turkey on the table. )



i know that u didnt ask me the question. but i will answer it anyway, as far as i know iran could build j-85 but not at large scale.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Prince of Persia

yavar said:


> who said is 50-80 KM ?? when did ever any Iranian official announce such thing . what they said exactly was this medium long range air defense missile system .



What is a medium long range air defence? What they said was it's a high altitude, medium ranged missile. Just like ra'ad. 120km range which you showed was the radar, not the missile range.

That's not an issue. wait a while and you'll see the Iranian 100-200km ranged missiles.


----------



## yavar

Prince of Persia said:


> 120km is the range of the radar NOT the missile. They said it's a medium ranged missile, that's where I got my 50-80 km range from..


who said is 50-80 KM ?? when did ever any Iranian official announce such thing . what they said exactly was this medium long range air defense missile system .
listen to this video and you will see they said it is medium long rage missile system




this is fist version of Sayyad 2 air defense missile system. the picture below .




if people you look at this the picture below and download it and zoom in it you will see the head of Sayyad-2 AD missile is not out of the missile canister. . the Sayyad-2 AD missile from top to bottom is fully inside the canister and there is no part of the missile outside canister so you can not see the any part of Sayyad-2 missile when it is in the canister.









like this




and this is latest Sayyad 2 system .( the picture below ) look at first version and look at latest one and look at the differences . look at fuel on first version and look at fuel used on latest one .and the first one which one do you think is going to produce thrust ??






Prince of Persia said:


> That's not an issue. wait a while and you'll see the Iranian 100-200km ranged missiles.



طراحی موشک صیاد ۳ برای سامانه S200/ نصب موشک جدید بر روی مرصاد/ توصیه رهبر انقلاب به فرمانده پدافند هوایی 
اhttp://farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13930129000043



وی خطاب به خبرنگاران گفت: هدیه‌ای برای شما همرزمان جنگ نرم و ملت صبور و غیور ایران اسلامی دارم، امروز الحمدالله افزون بر سامانه موشکی سیستم سلاح صیاد 2، که آن را برای S200 در نظر گرفته بودیم و تست کردیم، موشک صیاد 3 را برای S200 با برد بالاتر، سرعت بالاتر و جنگ‌آوری بالاتر طراحی کردیم.

فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء (ص) با اشاره به دستاوردهای این قرارگاه تاکید کرد: با این دستاوردها و سلاح‌ها دشمن غافلگیر خواهد شد و حدسش را هم نمی‌زد. البته این دستاوردها مدیون ملت صبور و جوانان پدافند هوایی است

دست یابی به سامانه کاوش جو بالا/ طراحی موشک صیاد۳برای s ۲۰۰
if you talking about Sayyad 3 . the Sayyad 3 is much longer range then 120KM


Prince of Persia said:


> What is a medium long range air defence? What they said was it's a high altitude, medium ranged missile. Just like ra'ad. 120km range which you showed was the radar, not the missile range..


so what does high altitude means ?? it means it goes high then normal medium range missile .for example Raad 1 missile it goes up 27 km .but the Sayyad 2 it goes much higher .
so let say we want to target cruise missile with Sayyad 2 missile . so the Sayyad 2 missile does not need to go in such high altitude so it will allow the missile to flying much longer range to get to the target .


----------



## Prince of Persia

@yavar 

Do you have the video for that turbine manufacturing in Iran? You posted the picture from the video, but , do you have the video?


----------



## shuntmaster

This is confusing, even Pakistan has missile named Ra'ad.. what does Ra'ad mean? Is same in urdu and persian?


----------



## yavar

Prince of Persia said:


> What is a medium long range air defence? What they said was it's a





Prince of Persia said:


> @yavar
> 
> Do you have the video for that turbine manufacturing in Iran? You posted the picture from the video, but , do you have the video?


I think if you go look in Iran forum you may find it . or may find it here
آپارات - ویدیو ها صفحه 1

sorry brother .


----------



## Luftwaffe

shuntmaster said:


> This is confusing, even Pakistan has missile named Ra'ad.. what does Ra'ad mean? Is same in urdu and persian?



In arabic Ar-r'ad means "The Thunder"...no idea what raad means in persian but most likely same Thunder.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

Luftwaffe said:


> In arabic Ar-r'ad means "The Thunder"...no idea what raad means in persian but most likely same Thunder.


Tondar in persian (indo-european word>> thunder in english, donder in dutch)


----------



## Luftwaffe

Shapur Zol Aktaf said:


> Tondar in persian (indo-european word>> thunder in english, donder in dutch)



Than what is ra'ad in persian?


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

Luftwaffe said:


> Than what is ra'ad in persian?


Same (ra'ad o bargh). For the arabic words in our language we have the Iranian substitutes.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shapur Zol Aktaf said:


> Same (ra'ad o bargh). For the arabic words in our language we have the Iranian substitutes.


Raad is the sound you hear Bargh is the light you see.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Penguin

Just for comparison.

Sayyad 2






RIM-66 Standard Missile SM-1MR





3S90E Shtil-1

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DizuJ

JPOST

Iran claims domestic alternative employs advanced technology that "even Americans do not have."

The deputy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), Brig.-Gen. Hossein Salami announced on Saturday that his country has built a top secret air-defense system, which is more advanced than the Russian s-300.

"An air defense system more advanced than what they didn’t supply to us due to their strategic interests went on display in the IRGC's recent exhibition," Salami said in Tehran according to a report by Iran’s Fars news agency.

He said that the air-defense system would not be publicly displayed, but would "remain confidential" for now.

Media reports indicate that Iran has long sought to purchase the S-300 from Russia but has faced pressure from the US and Israel against the sale. 

In the end, Russia scrapped the sale in 2010, and in what may have been a quid pro quo, Israel agreed to sell Russia surveillance drones that would narrow its technological military gap with Georgia.

Salami added, according to the report, that its ballistic missiles now enjoy "pinpoint precision capability when fired at mobile targets; this might be impossible in terms of science, but it is true and, in addition to us, only the Russians might possess this technology and even the Americans do not have it."

"As regards the ground force power, the IRGC stands atop the world, given its hundreds of martyrdom-seeking battalions and hundreds of highly trained combat battalions," he said.

06/01/2014

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

In a ceremony attended by IRIADF commander Brigadier Farzad Ismaeli, Iran unveiled a new 3D phased array radar named ''Ghadir'' with a detection range of 1100km and altitude of 300km, development of Ghadir was finished 2 years ago, the radar became operational after several months of testing.

This radar was designed by IRGC AF and according to IRIADF commander IRIADF have radars with similar capabilities named ''Shahab'' and ''Thamen''

This Ghadir installation which is based in Garmsar is named ''Shohadaye besat'' installation.





Video:




از کشف هواپیماهای استیلز تا ماهواره و موشک رادار ۱۱۰۰ کیلومتری «قدیر» سپاه رونمایی شد+ویژگی‌ها
اسماعیلی در جمع خبرنگاران: کشف اهداف متخاصم در عمق توسط رادار «قدیر»/ از کشورهای صاحب تکنولوژی عقب نیستیم
خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - سامانه راداری برد بلند "قدیر" سپاه پاسداران رونمایی شد +جزئیات

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## SOHEIL

old but new for public ...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## farhan_9909

Good development but they should make it slightly more mobile for better transportation.

It also confirms that Iran does has the domestics labs for the designing and manufacturing of T/R modules for long range radar

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

farhan_9909 said:


> Good development but they should make it slightly more mobile for better transportation.
> 
> It also confirms that Iran does has the domestics labs for the designing and manufacturing of T/R modules for long range radar



are you kidding me ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pangu

Looking good Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MTN1917

SOHEIL said:


> old but new for public ...


Yes, they have already tested it in a previous wargame


farhan_9909 said:


> Good development but they should make it slightly more mobile for better transportation.
> 
> It also confirms that Iran does has the domestics labs for the designing and manufacturing of T/R modules for long range radar


This is a very large radar with a long range, so it can't be made mobile

More pics:






























More pics:
رونمایی از سامانه راداری قدیر

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## farhan_9909

SOHEIL said:


> are you kidding me ?



I am not getting you,What do you mean?


----------



## SOHEIL

farhan_9909 said:


> I am not getting you,What do you mean?



this is a huge system ... we can't make it mobile !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## farhan_9909

SOHEIL said:


> this is a huge system ... we can't make it mobile !!!



You can though will take time.tag any indian member to post the info about the latest development of 1500km range variant of sowrdfish radar.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## The SiLent crY

MTN1917 said:


> In a ceremony attended by IRIADF commander Brigadier Farzad Ismaeli, Iran unveiled a new 3D phased array radar named ''Ghadir'' with a detection range of 1100km and altitude of 300km, development of Ghadir was finished 2 years ago, the radar became operational after several months of testing.
> 
> This radar was designed by IRGC AF and according to IRIADF commander IRIADF have radars with similar capabilities named ''Shahab'' and ''Thamen''
> 
> This Ghadir installation which is based in Garmsar is named ''Shohadaye besat'' installation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Video:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> از کشف هواپیماهای استیلز تا ماهواره و موشک رادار ۱۱۰۰ کیلومتری «قدیر» سپاه رونمایی شد+ویژگی‌ها
> اسماعیلی در جمع خبرنگاران: کشف اهداف متخاصم در عمق توسط رادار «قدیر»/ از کشورهای صاحب تکنولوژی عقب نیستیم
> خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - سامانه راداری برد بلند "قدیر" سپاه پاسداران رونمایی شد +جزئیات



Always short and useful posts .

Thanks .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## daring dude

is this consist of 5 Units....why that big apparatus is required?
today its time for small and Compressed technology.. do you think it is safe to keep this kind of Radars for long time


----------



## mohsen

another video:
Video: Qadir long range radar

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

farhan_9909 said:


> You can though will take time.tag any indian member to post the info about the latest development of 1500km range variant of sowrdfish radar.



They made this to scan far hence why its big. They have to be huge. I mean you can make a huge mobile radar. But its complex. Think of a flashlight compared to a spotlight. Thats how we test to shoot down ballistic missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## King Of Persians

@Oldman1

Indeed you are correct. This new Iranian radar reaches altitude of 300km! Good luck trying to make such a radar very mobile. Another radar will be made soon with range 2500-3000 km and can scan much higher altitude than this radar. Its name is sepehr.

Iran already has many mobile radars. Not all radars need to be mobile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

King Of Persians said:


> @Oldman1
> 
> Indeed you are correct. This new Iranian radar reaches altitude of 300km! Good luck trying to make such a radar very mobile. Another radar will be made soon with range 2500-3000 km and can scan much higher altitude than this radar. Its name is sepehr.
> 
> Iran already has many mobile radars. Not all radars need to be mobile.


Well its not impossible to make such size mobile. Like I've said before, its complex.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rahi2357

@Oldman1 
in this size no one can make a ground mobile radar and we don't need it in sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kiarash



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 1000

Thought radar signals will be blocked by all those mountains in Iran, fighters hide between mountains to avoid radar signals


----------



## Falcon29

Fake.


----------



## King Of Persians

Hazzy997 said:


> Try noticing the sarcasm.



Yes, because it was so clear you were being sarcastic?
I removed the comment.


----------



## Falcon29

King Of Persians said:


> Yes, because it was so clear you were being sarcastic?
> I removed the comment.



You're not familiar with me, most Iranians here are. So they would know that I, being sarcastic.


----------



## King Of Persians

Hazzy997 said:


> You're not familiar with me, most Iranians here are. So they would know that I, being sarcastic.



Okay, I apologise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SajeevJino

..

from Now The Iran Going to track everything within the Range of 1100KM at an Alt of 300KM ..but can someone Tell me which size of the targets can be detected By this Super Radar 


.Remembering good Old Days


----------



## Oldman1

rahi2357 said:


> @Oldman1
> in this size no one can make a ground mobile radar and we don't need it in sea.



Have to think outside the box my friend. Just pointing out its possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kaku1

Wow, Iran is really progressing well and even fast in militaristic sector.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

better quality video from farsnews with a nice music!
visit this page for web player verion.
direct link to video

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kiarash

How many countries beside Iran, can manufacture such an advanced system ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Archdemon

Kiarash said:


> How many countries beside Iran, can manufacture* such an advanced* system ?


How do you know how advanced this system is?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ALPfollowerOF373

Archdemon said:


> How do you know how advanced this system is?


How can you know it is not ?



mohsen said:


> better quality video from farsnews with a nice music!
> visit this page for web player verion.
> direct link to video


Thank you brother.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Archdemon

ALPfollowerOF373 said:


> How can you know it is not ?


Exactly, there is nothing to compare.


----------



## TimeOwner



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

Archdemon said:


> Exactly, there is nothing to compare.




Well---then by default---it is advanced----


----------



## mohsen

just for Iranian.
the article which mashreghnews referred to it is this one:
Israel Defense | חשיפה: מכ"ם מתקדם לאיראנים | עוד כותרות
they thought this is the Qadir radar:





من نمیدونم کی این مقاله ها رو مینویسه، ولی نکته جالبش اینکه حتی بعد از رونمایی از رادار قدیر هنوز دوزاریشون نیفتاده کی به کی بوده

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Archdemon

MastanKhan said:


> Well---then by default---it is advanced----


Advanced is relative concept like right-left cold-hot big-small etc...
Most likely it is advanced compared to previous Iranian made radars. You would be surprised but one of the crucial components in radars is the software, especially in these kind of real time monitoring radars, the algorithms are fairly complex to fully utilize the potential, filters, modes, real time comuting etc.


----------



## That Guy

farhan_9909 said:


> Good development but they should make it slightly more mobile for better transportation.
> 
> It also confirms that Iran does has the domestics labs for the designing and manufacturing of T/R modules for long range radar


or it could be more bull, who knows?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Archdemon said:


> How do you know how advanced this system is?


well if it make you happy , how many country can build such rudimentary system ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bratva

Pardon my ignorance, I thought phased array radar looked like these


















But the iranian radar looks like lot of antennas combined together instead of T/R module? sort of huge TV antenna


----------



## Abii

^^
The pic below is a phased array from WW2 (built by the Germans at the end of the war). It looks similar to the Iranian one. I'm guessing that this is a rudimentary basic design, but a phased array radar nonetheless.


----------



## mohsen

mafiya said:


> Pardon my ignorance, I thought phased array radar looked like these
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the iranian radar looks like lot of antennas combined together instead of T/R module? sort of huge TV antenna


Nebo, one of the Russian's most advanced radars, specially counter stealth, and it's an AESA radar.









NNIIRT Nebo SVU / RLM-M Nebo M / Assessing Russia's FirstMobile VHF AESAs

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## -------

Is it a Passive radar?


----------



## SOHEIL

SajeevJino said:


> ..
> 
> from Now The Iran Going to track everything within the Range of 1100KM at an Alt of 300KM ..but can someone Tell me which
> size of the targets can be detected By this Super Radar
> 
> 
> .Remembering good Old Days





SajeevJino said:


> ..
> 
> from Now The Iran Going to track everything within the Range of 1100KM at an Alt of 300KM ..but can someone Tell me which size of the targets can be detected By this Super Radar
> 
> 
> .Remembering good Old Days





SajeevJino said:


> ..
> 
> from Now The Iran Going to track everything within the Range of 1100KM at an Alt of 300KM ..but can someone Tell me which size of the targets can be detected By this Super Radar
> 
> 
> .Remembering good Old Days



size ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## King Of Persians

That Guy said:


> or it could be more bull, who knows?



We all know how but hurt you are. You go in every Iranian thread and act like a pathetic little kid whom is dying of jealousy.
One thing is for sure, Iranian radar are actually tested, the so called stealth Rq-170 which was downed is a an example of that.
This capability is light years ahead of what some failed states around Iran have

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ALPfollowerOF373

Did you catch it, there is a hoisting system on top of radar, is it under construction yet? Or is it essiential to plug in new some ones to radar system?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## King Of Persians

ALPfollowerOF373 said:


> Did you catch it, there is a hoisting system on top of radar, is it under construction yet? Or is it essiential to plug in new some ones to radar system?



This radar has been ready for a while now. They tested it as well.
The crone probably there in case the radars in that tall structure needs repairing/removal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

this is not the most advanced we got ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## That Guy

King Of Persians said:


> We all know how but hurt you are. You go in every Iranian thread and act like a pathetic little kid whom is dying of jealousy.
> One thing is for sure, Iranian radar are actually tested, the so called stealth Rq-160 which was downed is a an example of that.
> This capability is light years ahead of what some failed states around Iran have


RQ-170, you can't even get your facts right.

I actually stay away from Iranian threads, I still don't understand why I thought it would be a good idea to visit one randomly.


----------



## King Of Persians

That Guy said:


> RQ-170, you can't even get your facts right.
> 
> I actually stay away from Iranian threads, I still don't understand why I thought it would be a good idea to visit one randomly.



Excellent comeback! When you can't argue back against someone, try to find a little error 

Why do you keep saying "I actually stay away from Iranian threads", and yet coming back to our section? Either come here and get embarrassed or stay away.
You're no friend to Iranians, but rather a pathetic jealous little child whom can't hide his inferiority complex.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

mohsen said:


> Nebo, one of the Russian's most advanced radars, specially counter stealth, and it's an AESA radar.NNIIRT Nebo SVU / RLM-M Nebo M / Assessing Russia's FirstMobile VHF AESAs


----------



## That Guy

King Of Persians said:


> Excellent comeback! When you can't argue back against someone, try to find a little error
> 
> Why do you keep saying "I actually stay away from Iranian threads", and yet coming back to our section? Either come here and get embarrassed or stay away.
> You're no friend to Iranians, but rather a pathetic jealous little child whom can't hide his inferiority complex.


Says the man that ignored my entire comment, and proceeded to do a circle jerk.

I'm coming back because you replied to me, simple.

I'm no friend to liars, Iranians in general are pretty cool people.


----------



## Malik Alashter

yavar said:


>


Excuse me I don't know about radars. But I can see the modules of the NEBO radar clearly while I don't see them on the ghadir radar all I can see antenas any one please show me the modules on it thanks.


----------



## SajeevJino

SOHEIL said:


> size ?



Size Means ...The Size of Target ..Majority of Radars Can't Detect Maneuvering Cruise Missiles ..that's why I asked..? 
The Israeli Supplied Swordfish can detect the Size of Golf Ball Sized Target


----------



## ALPfollowerOF373

SajeevJino said:


> Size Means ...The Size of Target ..Majority of Radars Can't Detect Maneuvering Cruise Missiles ..that's why I asked..?
> The Israeli Supplied Swordfish can detect the Size of Golf Ball Sized Target


Why it couldn't detect the hezbollah's drone for 1 hours flying air field of invaded palestinian lands if it was capable of

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## rmi5

What's so advanced about this radar? enlighten us ...
for me, it looks like a WW2 radar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

rmi5 said:


> What's so advanced about this radar? enlighten us ...
> for me, it looks like a WW2 radar



This is a *3D phased array* radar with a range of 1100km which make this radar a very good and useful achievement.

For your information 3D radars had not been developed during the WW2.

Edit:not to mention its 300km altitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## MTN1917

mohsen said:


> just for Iranian.
> the article which mashreghnews referred to it is this one:
> Israel Defense | חשיפה: מכ"ם מתקדם לאיראנים | עוד כותרות
> they thought this is the Qadir radar:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> من نمیدونم کی این مقاله ها رو مینویسه، ولی نکته جالبش اینکه حتی بعد از رونمایی از رادار قدیر هنوز دوزاریشون نیفتاده کی به کی بوده


I think that this is the ''Najm-802'', it was seen for the first time during the supreme leader's visit of Iran's military achievement exhibition some time ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kaku1

SOHEIL said:


> size ?
> 
> View attachment 33754



Is it real that Iran replicated and tested the RQ-170?


----------



## SOHEIL

kaku1 said:


> Is it real that Iran replicated and tested the RQ-170?



True ... but Iranian version still passing ground tests ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kaku1

SOHEIL said:


> True ... but Iranian version still passing ground tests ...
> 
> View attachment 33863
> View attachment 33864



But how that possible, this program required a whole constellation of satellites


----------



## rahi2357

kaku1 said:


> But how that possible, this program required a whole constellation of satellites


@SOHEIL knows better  but what i know:
iran got LPS system .and i'm not sure about other systems.. but don't forget when iran controlled US RQ-170 by jamming satellite signals and captured the drone intact then sure they have a nice way to do it. also iran uses various radars and electro optical systems to find stealth planes like RQ-170.





( IRAN watching US RQ-170 by an electro optical system )


and some other systems

























etc..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> each military ship has a restricted zone (nationality doesn't matter), it's totally idiotic if anybody thinks they wont shoot toward an intruder plane or boat.
> 
> for those who think Americans or other western countries wont shoot toward Iranian speed boats, watch this:
> http://old.jamnews.ir/Images/News/AtachFile/29-5-1390/FILE634494666335937500.flv
> as the video clearly shows, they start to shoot toward Iranian boat when it get closer than 100 meters.
> also American's history of killing fishermen in Persian gulf just because they got too close to them is another proof.
> what about American's starwars laser canon? if they intend to not shoot Iranian drones (as some members claim), then why they chose the Persian gulf for testing this prototype gun? to shoot Arabia's drones down?
> -------
> 
> and how do you want to explain the Hezbollah's drone "Ayoub"? after flying over the whole NATO and Israel fleet in Mediterranean sea, bypassing the coastal units and military bases (undetected during the whole time), finally it was detected near Israel's nuclear reactor *visually* (and not by their radars) using their surveillance balloons.



Oh how did Al Qaeda hit the USS Cole? Why wasn't it destroyed when it came within 100 meters? How high was your UAV when you observed our carriers? Less than 100 meters?


----------



## King Of Persians

Okay guys, @SOHEIL 

I apologize. I could not see it. 
Can someone post more information about it then...


----------



## 500

MTN1917 said:


> This is a *3D phased array* radar with a range of 1100km which make this radar a very good and useful achievement.
> 
> For your information 3D radars had not been developed during the WW2.
> 
> Edit:not to mention its 300km altitude.


R U sure?






Radar Basics

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

500 said:


> R U sure?



They are talking non-sense as usual. The problem of Iranian members is that none of them have any knowledge to understand what are they copy pasting. At the best case, it is a low-frequency radar, which is too big, immobile, uses the same frequencies as television, navigation, and communication systems. These system don't have enough accuracy to guide anything with it. these WW2 type of radars, can only roughly say that something is somewhere in the sky.


----------



## Archdemon

500 said:


> R U sure?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Radar Basics



Antennas are only a part of radar system, not less important is the processing unit, sowtware.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 500

Archdemon said:


> Antennas are only a part of radar system, not less important is the processing unit, sowtware.


I just replied on his claim (which received 8 thanks), that there were not *3D phased array* radars in WW2.


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> They are talking non-sense as usual. The problem of Iranian members is that none of them have any knowledge to understand what are they copy pasting. At the best case, it is a low-frequency radar, which is too big, immobile, uses the same frequencies as television, navigation, and communication systems. These system don't have enough accuracy to guide anything with it. these WW2 type of radars, can only roughly say that something is somewhere in the sky.



It's not supposed to be mobile or too accurate according to its primary purpose which is an *early* warning radar. since it's not economical to use air-based radars (AEW&C) which are more accurate, especially with limited funds as in case of Iran, maybe not for U.S. Now even U.S and Russia are beginning to use OTH early warning radars again, since it's much more cheaper and easier to operate. The U.S, Russia, France, China and Australia are currently using these radars for different purposes.

Australian OTH radar, named Jindalee (It's the most extensive radar system in Australia, operated and maintained by Lockheed Martin)










Russian woodpecker (Duga)






Russian Voronezh OTH radar system:















Voronezh radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Over-the-horizon radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jindalee Operational Radar Network - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Duga-3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AN/TPS-71 ROTHR (Relocatable Over-the-Horizon Radar

Lockheed Martin · Jindalee Over-the-Horizon Radar


Also, they are usually high frequncy radars, not LF ones, despite what you are claiming. They operate between 3-30 MHz.

*



The High Frequency Band (3 to 30 MHz) is a candidate for radar because it enables surface to surface radar to target distances well beyond the horizon. Radar to target ranges of 1000 nmi and more are typical. Use of the 10 to 60 meter wavelengths associated with HF radar requires physically large antennas. Each ROTHR achieves a nominal half degree azimuth angular resolution with a 2.58-km-long linear phased receiving array consisting of 372 twin-monopole elements.

Click to expand...

*
So before accusing other members of not having knowledge, it's always better to study about the case first before trying to simply bash others.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rmi5

Simply, you are wrong. First of all, USA does not investing big in this type of radars, and it is China and Russia, who are investing in these radars to make them mobile. Second, it has nothing to do with price, and the reason to use these radars is that stealth aircrafts can be roughly detected in these systems. Third, the accuracy of these systems is ultra-terrible in which it can recognize many things in sky as an enemy fighter, and they really cannot give any useful information about the exact position of the enemy fighter or even a good estimate about it, so they are almost uselss. Fifth, did you now get why I said that Iranian members know nothing about the technical details? 



Serpentine said:


> It's not supposed to be mobile or too accurate according to its primary purpose which is an *early* warning radar. since it's not economical to use air-based radars (AEW&C) which are more accurate, especially with limited funds as in case of Iran, maybe not for U.S. Now even U.S and Russia are beginning to use OTH early warning radars again, since it's much more cheaper and easier to operate. The U.S, Russia, France, China and Australia are currently using these radars for different purposes.
> 
> Australian OTH radar, named Jindalee (It's the most extensive radar system in Australia, operated and maintained by Lockheed Martin)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian woodpecker (Duga)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian Voronezh OTH radar system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voronezh radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Over-the-horizon radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Jindalee Operational Radar Network - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Duga-3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> AN/TPS-71 ROTHR (Relocatable Over-the-Horizon Radar
> 
> Lockheed Martin · Jindalee Over-the-Horizon Radar
> 
> 
> Also, they are usually high frequncy radars, not LF ones, despite what you are claiming. They operate between 3-30 MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> So before accusing other members of not having knowledge, it's always better to study about the case first before trying to simply bash others.


----------



## MTN1917

500 said:


> R U sure?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Radar Basics



This radar is named Mammut it was *phased array radar* which had a detection range of 300km and altitude of 8km, Mammut and Wassermann radars were world's first phased array radars.

But during WW2 radars were 2D and they instead used *Height finder*s, so no 3D radar.



rmi5 said:


> They are talking non-sense as usual. The problem of Iranian members is that none of them have any knowledge to understand what are they copy pasting. At the best case, it is a low-frequency radar, which is too big, immobile, uses the same frequencies as television, navigation, and communication systems. These system don't have enough accuracy to* guide anything with it*. these WW2 type of radars, can only roughly say that something is somewhere in the sky.


What is wrong the a low frequency radar, it will be useful in detecting stealth plane.

This radar will not guide anything, as serpentine said it is an early warning radar, Iran is developing other radar for systems like Bavar-373 and etc.

Iran is working on these kind of radar like Shahab and Thamen, Sepehr OTH radar will have a range of 2500km.

These radars will help Iran detecting an attack against itself sooner, so will be more prepared but these things doesn't matter to you and it appears that you are saddened by the progress of your nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 500

MTN1917 said:


> This radar is named Mammut it was *phased array radar* which had a detection range of 300km and altitude of 8km.
> 
> But during WW2 radars were 2D and they instead used *Height finder*s, so no 3D radar..


Its 3D phased array radar. Longwave radars are very primitive 70 years old technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

500 said:


> Its 3D phased array radar. Longwave radars are very primitive 70 years old technology.


Even if it was 3D and I was wrong, ghadir is much more different and evolved

Concepts like cruise and ballistic missiles and etc all have been introduced by germans in WW2 but that doesn't make them obsolete, Iranian Ghadir is one them 

Antenna setting of Ghadir is much more different than these two





Also I forgot to put this in the first post, Ghadir has a 360 degree detection(it is faced 4 sides).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> Simply, you are wrong. First of all, USA does not investing big in this type of radars, and it is China and Russia, who are investing in these radars to make them mobile. Second, it has nothing to do with price, and the reason to use these radars is that stealth aircrafts can be roughly detected in these systems. Third, the accuracy of these systems is ultra-terrible in which it can recognize many things in sky as an enemy fighter, and they really cannot give any useful information about the exact position of the enemy fighter or even a good estimate about it, so they are almost uselss. Fifth, did you now get why I said that Iranian members know nothing about the technical details?



Well that's what I call over-exaggerated self-confidence.
1. After the cold war, U.S has developed and implemented a new OTH radar system named as ROTHR (Relocatable Over-the-Horizon Radar) for monitoring both inland and also 1500 miles off the U.S coast. It doesn't matter if U.S invests big in these radars, what matters is that they are operating them right now and as I mentioned, it's already Australia's most important radar system to monitor Chinese movements. Also U.S has a huge fleet of Awacs and other radar systems which can not be compared to other countries.

2. Not only they can detect conventional planes, but they are also claimed to be capable of detecting stealth aircrafts.



> _Over-the-horizon radar is a concept increasing radar's effective range over conventional radar. The Australian JORN Jindalee Operational Radar Network can overcome certain stealth characteristics. It is claimed that the HF frequency used and the method of bouncing radar from ionosphere overcomes the stealth characteristics of the F-117A. In other words, stealth aircraft are optimized for defeating much higher-frequency radar from front-on rather than low-frequency radars from above._



_



Using a modified weather over-the-horizon radar, named Jindalee (an aboriginal term for "bare bones"), they knew that although the stealth bomber did indeed absorb standard aircraft tracking radar (which detect solid objects) with its micro-wave absorbing foam cover, such protection did not extend to the "wake" created as the bomber ploughed through the air. Even at high altitudes where the air is much thinner, there is sufficient turbulence to register on weather radar. After all that is why it was designed -- to check turbulent weather ahead so modern airliners could divert and avoid danger and inconvenience to passengers.

Click to expand...


Over-the-Horizon Radar: A Better Way to Watch the Skies · Lockheed Martin_



3,4. It seems you are still unfamiliar with basics of an early warning radar system. These radars are not supposed to track objects with interception purposes, but only to to give warning when an intruding ballistic missile/jet fighter/cruise missile comes towards your air space. There are other radar and missile systems to precisely detect the location of intruders and shoot them down.



> For years, OTH radars have formed the back bone of territorial defense for the world’s superpowers. The United States currently operates an OTH radar network that can spot target as far as 3,000 kilometers from U.S. shores.
> 
> Australia, a potential target of Chinese strategic bombers, has the new Jindalee OTH sensor, with a similar range.
> 
> To achieve such incredible performance, OTH radars take advantage of a unique natural phenomenon. Instead of emitting radio waves directly into the target space, OTH radars blast very long wave pulses into the ionosphere.
> 
> Waves of certain frequencies bounce _back down_ to the target area, enabling the radar to look at objects from above and identify them even behind ground terrain such as hills and mountains.
> 
> In addition to detecting stealth warplanes, OTH radars can also pick out ballistic missiles and even satellites in low orbit. Their long range makes them impervious to small-scale attacks by anti-radiation missiles and jammers.
> 
> On the down side, OTH radars are bulky, immobile and imprecise. *The distance error in detecting a typical target can be as high as a kilometer*. OTH radars also need enormous power sources.




So an accuracy of one kilometer is not bad at all for giving a rough position of any flying object, considering that it's an early warning radar system.

5. It's now obvious who is not having sufficient information considering that electronic is not my specialty and I'm not the one boasting about studying PhD in electronics and hitting it like a hammer in others' head.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## raptor22

500 said:


> Its 3D phased array radar. Longwave radars are very primitive 70 years old technology.



*Stealth useless against longwave RADAR*

*



*
*Low-frequency radars may be used to overcome "Stealth" technology*

*"Low-frequency radars, destined to become the base element of any detection system against LO aircraft and guided missiles, enjoy increasing confidence of military hardware developers, as computing capabilities of modern radars and sophistication of computing algorithms are rapidly growing and allow to identify even the smallest characteristics of aircraft designs using "Stealth" technology.*

*A recently published article from Aviation Week & Space Technology, based on the interview with a US Navy pilot, who participated in the planning of strikes against Iraqi air defense during the early stages of the operation Desert Storm, indicates that there is "nothing invisible in the radar frequency range below 2GHz" [reverse translation from Russian] and with a well-designed low-frequency radar it is possible to "see even a dragonfly at a great distance" [reverse translation from Russian].*

*According to another high-ranking US Navy official, following an evaluation of current radar systems, used by the US in combat condition today, it became clear that the approach selected for the development of some of the earliest radar was quite effective. "If it would be possible to filter out the noise, then long-wave, low-frequency radars will be capable of detecting a variety of objects [reverse translation from Russian].*

*In particular, former defense partners of USSR and China have a considerable quantities of older low-frequency radars still in service. These radars use very basic technology, however their performance can be drastically improved through the application of latest computer microprocessor technology. Well-known modifications of such radars include the Iraqi "Tiger Song" radar, Chinese "Nantsin" radar and a number of older Soviet-made long-range radars.*

*According to the official spokesman for the US Navy, today these countries invite specialists in the area of microprocessors, who will concentrate their efforts on creating computing algorithms for noise filtration. A possibility appeared of using these modified old radars in networks, maximizing the effectiveness in combat situations. "Now it is known that certain type of radar signals present a threat, even though in the past such types of signals were not considered dangerous. Characteristics of a combat zone have drastically changed" [reverse translation from Russian].*

*According to the same US Navy representative, " a positive side of such low-frequency radar systems is their large size, making them vulnerable in the area of combat, even though it is extremely difficult to jam such radars. These type of radars are difficult to transport. Attempts to introduce rapid changes in a network of low-frequency radars may damage the network's performance even without the "help" of enemy aviation" [reverse translation from Russian]. A negative side of low-frequency radar networks is that American military planners may not be aware of all components of such air defenses, if they do know the specifics of communications among the individual elements of early detection networks.*

*However, in industrialized countries low-frequency bands are normally used by a wide variety of communications systems, navigation equipment and television. Intensive use of low-frequency bands by secondary systems makes it difficult to find bandwidths wide enough for military planners to use low-frequency radars.*

*



*

*Soviet-made Bar Lock long-range radar*

*Soviet-built low-frequency "Bar Lock" and "Spoonrest" radars were used for detecting targets at great distances. These radars operated in the UHF and L-band frequency ranges when it was possible to make use the half-wave resonance effect. This effect can be observed when the length of an aircraft or a cruise missile roughly corresponds to the half of the wavelength, thus creating phase-coherent reflections from the terminal points of the target. Dipole reflector, developed during the Second World War, used this effect to jam radars of that era. Metallic film, cut into strips of the length corresponding to half of the wavelength, resonate with the incoming radar signal, creating an illusion of a large target. Using the resonance effect it is relatively easy to detect even the most advanced LO aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles.*

*On the other hand, the width of low-frequency bands makes it difficult to detect a target with sufficient accuracy (in the range of 30-50m), to provide targeting information to SAMs or AAAs. Thus LO aircraft and missiles at the moment continue to enjoy the advantages of stealth."*

*(my translation of RNTI ITAR-TASS article from 04-05-99)*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MTN1917

An article about Ghadir


> *Iran Can Now Detect U.S. Stealth Jets at Long Range*
> *New over-the-horizon radar negates stealth advantage*
> On June 2, an Iranian military Mi-17 helicopter flew over the desert east of Tehran toward one of the most secretive facilities belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The helicopter landed in a remote area near two buildings surrounded by huge wire nets. Guests disembarked.
> 
> Brig. Gen. Farzad Ismaeli, commander of Iran’s air-defense force, and several masked IRGC personnel, waited to introduce a new radar system—one that could be able to detect American stealth warplanes at long range.
> 
> Ismaeli described the complex of wire nets and buildings as the _Ghadir_radar, Iran’s first operational over-the-horizon sensor. OTH radars can detect stealthy and small targets at very long ranges, regardless of the target’s altitude.
> 
> It’s a capability that promises to dramatically improve Iran’s ability to detect and defend against an aerial attack, potentially altering the military balance of power in the Persian Gulf.
> 
> For years, OTH radars have formed the back bone of territorial defense for the world’s superpowers. The United States currently operates an OTH radar network that can spot target as far as 3,000 kilometers from U.S. shores.
> 
> Australia, a potential target of Chinese strategic bombers, has the new Jindalee OTH sensor, with a similar range.
> 
> To achieve such incredible performance, OTH radars take advantage of a unique natural phenomenon. Instead of emitting radio waves directly into the target space, OTH radars blast very long wave pulses into the ionosphere.
> 
> Waves of certain frequencies bounce _back down_ to the target area, enabling the radar to look at objects from above and identify them even behind ground terrain such as hills and mountains.
> 
> In addition to detecting stealth warplanes, OTH radars can also pick out ballistic missiles and even satellites in low orbit. Their long range makes them impervious to small-scale attacks by anti-radiation missiles and jammers.
> 
> On the down side, OTH radars are bulky, immobile and imprecise. The distance error in detecting a typical target can be as high as a kilometer. OTH radars also need enormous power sources.
> 
> 
> Compared to other countries’ OTH radars, Ghadir seems to possess modest performance. Ismaeli claimed it has an 1,100-kilometer range and a maximum detection altitude of 300 kilometers.
> _
> Ghadir _has four transmitters for 360-degree coverage, but given the huge amount of energy they require, it’s not clear that all four can broadcast at once. The phased-array layout closely resembles the Soviet _Duga-3_ radar near Chernobyl, perhaps indicating a fairly old-style design.
> 
> Ismaeli announced a plan to construct a _more_ powerful OTH radar called_Sepehr _that could feature a 3,000-kilometer range.
> 
> _Ghadir _is unlikely to survive very long in an intensive war with the United States, but in the case of a limited engagement such as an American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the OTH radar could help Iran organize its defenses.
> 
> The sensor would likely recognize an aerial strike package long before it reached Iranian borders, giving people enough time to evacuate essential facilities, alerting air-defense crews and prompting the air force to launch defensive fighters.
> 
> _Ghadir _should be able to cover all of Saudi Arabia. The more powerful _Sepehr_could also detect targets inside Israel. Both systems could prove a boon to Iran’s ally Syria.
> 
> The United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia have no way of countering the new radar short of a full-scale attack. America has poured much of its military research effort into stealth aircraft, but OTH radars by their nature negate the stealth advantage.


Iran Can Now Detect U.S. Stealth Jets at Long Range — Medium

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 500

MTN1917 said:


> An article about Ghadir
> 
> Iran Can Now Detect U.S. Stealth Jets at Long Range — Medium


First of all this radar cant guide anything because of terrible accuracy.
Secondly its prone to jamming.
Finally I hope u realize that if US decided to attack Iran this radar will be destroyed in first minutes of the attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

500 said:


> First of all this radar cant guide anything because of terrible accuracy.
> Secondly its prone to jamming.
> Finally I hope u realize that if US decided to attack Iran this radar will be destroyed in first minutes of the attack.


alongside being full digital and multichannel which gives an anti jamming capability to it, this radar has another feature too and that's very low signal/noise ratio which makes it's detection almost impossible for your anti radiation missiles, first try to reach it and we will see how you can destroy it.
---------
just a reminder for Iranian, this was the radar which detected the American's predator over Persian gulf.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MTN1917

500 said:


> First of all this radar *cant guide* anything because of terrible accuracy.
> Secondly its prone to jamming.
> Finally I hope u realize that if US decided to attack Iran this radar will be *destroyed in first minutes* of the attack.



It is an *Early warning radar* so it doesn't guide anything, it will give us time to ready ourself for an attack

The long range of radar means that it wont be destroyed before it detects an attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MOHSENAM

500 said:


> First of all this radar cant guide anything because of terrible accuracy.
> Secondly its prone to jamming.
> Finally I hope u realize that if US decided to attack Iran this radar will be destroyed in first minutes of the attack.


Wrong - all of US destroyers will be destroyed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 500

mohsen said:


> alongside being full digital and multichannel which gives an anti jamming capability to it, this radar has another feature too and that's very low signal/noise ratio which makes it's detection almost impossible for your anti radiation missiles, first try to reach it and we will see how you can destroy it.
> ---------
> just a reminder for Iranian, this was the radar which detected the American's predator over Persian gulf.


I understand that Iranian super mega radars are not affected by anti radiation missiles. But that huge immobile monster dos not need any anti radiation missile.



MTN1917 said:


> It is an *Early warning radar* so it doesn't guide anything, it will give us time to ready ourself for an attack
> 
> The long range of radar means that it wont be destroyed before it detects an attack.


Nice, so it could give to radar crew a warning to run away.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MOHSENAM

500 said:


> I understand that Iranian super mega radars are not affected by anti radiation missiles. But that huge immobile monster dos not need any anti radiation missile.
> 
> 
> Nice, so it could give to radar crew a warning to run away.


When I see u in the site 99% of your writing is lie and nonsense.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MTN1917

500 said:


> Nice, so it could give to radar crew a warning to run away.


Or to set up and prepare AD systems



MOHSENAM said:


> When I see u in the site 99% of your writing is lie and nonsense.


500 is always here for Iran, if my memory serves me wright I do recall that 500 claimed that Raad AD is some fake missiles on fire truck, when Iran unveiled Shahed-129 500 claimed that it was fake and the size of those two drones which were shown in pictures were different and Shahed-129 was small and not a MALE uav

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## rmi5

The funny point is that you don't even have the basic knowledge or the decency to accept that you don't have knowledge.
1) Are you an expert about Australian military? is the geography of Australia the same as Iran? What is the distance between the targets in Iran, like Bushehr, and US fleet in Persian gulf? what is the distance between the closest point in China and Australia? ....

2) BTW, This radars are so easy to be jammed, they are so primitive and useless with terrible accuracy that US did not invest on it.

3) As I told you before, these systems even detect some other stuff in the sky, as fighter jets, and their accuracy is awful. so, they are obviously terrible as warning radar system for a country that its enemies are either its neighbors, or they have bases in her close proximity.

Did you get it now, or you want to continue your trolling and chest thumping? 



Serpentine said:


> Well that's what I call over-exaggerated self-confidence.
> 1. After the cold war, U.S has developed and implemented a new OTH radar system named as ROTHR (Relocatable Over-the-Horizon Radar) for monitoring both inland and also 1500 miles off the U.S coast. It doesn't matter if U.S invests big in these radars, what matters is that they are operating them right now and as I mentioned, it's already Australia's most important radar system to monitor Chinese movements. Also U.S has a huge fleet of Awacs and other radar systems which can not be compared to other countries.
> 
> 2. Not only they can detect conventional planes, but they are also claimed to be capable of detecting stealth aircrafts.
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Over-the-Horizon Radar: A Better Way to Watch the Skies · Lockheed Martin_
> 
> 
> 
> 3,4. It seems you are still unfamiliar with basics of an early warning radar system. These radars are not supposed to track objects with interception purposes, but only to to give warning when an intruding ballistic missile/jet fighter/cruise missile comes towards your air space. There are other radar and missile systems to precisely detect the location of intruders and shoot them down.
> 
> 
> So an accuracy of one kilometer is not bad at all for giving a rough position of any flying object, considering that it's an early warning radar system.
> 
> 5. It's now obvious who is not having sufficient information considering that electronic is not my specialty and I'm not the one boasting about studying PhD in electronics and hitting it like a hammer in others' head.





500 said:


> First of all this radar cant guide anything because of terrible accuracy.
> Secondly its prone to jamming.
> *Finally I hope u realize that if US decided to attack Iran this radar will be destroyed in first minutes of the attack.*



That's exactly right. That's why Russians and Chinese are trying to make these radars mobile to avoid them getting destroyed at the first attacks, but, still these radars seem to be inherently bulky with low mobility.


----------



## SajeevJino

ALPfollowerOF373 said:


> Why it couldn't detect the hezbollah's drone for 1 hours flying air field of invaded palestinian lands if it was capable of




Result of the Drone ..? after coming Israel without Visa


----------



## raptor22

SajeevJino said:


> Result of the Drone ..? after coming Israel without Visa


 Humiliation of your air defence systerm.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kaku1

raptor22 said:


> Humiliation of your air defence systerm.


Humiliation of our Air Defense system? In which sense?


----------



## MTN1917

kaku1 said:


> Humiliation of our Air Defense system? In which sense?


He meant Israel not India.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> The funny point is that you don't even have the basic knowledge or the decency to accept that you don't have knowledge.



Your post shows which person your sentence represents.



rmi5 said:


> 1) Are you an expert about Australian military? is the geography of Australia the same as Iran? What is the distance between the targets in Iran, like Bushehr, and US fleet in Persian gulf? what is the distance between the closest point in China and Australia? ....



Since when one should be an expert on Australian military to know that they are currently using these radars to monitor areas north of Australia as far as 3,000 kilometers?
This radar's main purpose is not for monitoring U.S fleet in Persian gulf, that's the weirdest usage to consider for a radar like this because there are other precise radars with range of 200-300 Km. Its main usage is to monitor Iran's air space from east and west, especially from Israel's direction. and for like millionth time, EARLY warning radars are not used to intercept airplanes or missils, they are used to detect attacking jet fighters and warn you before they enter your air space, hence you can get ready to intercept them with other radar/missile systems. They are not meant to show plane's location with pinpoint accuracy.



rmi5 said:


> 2) BTW, This radars are so easy to be jammed, they are so primitive and useless with terrible accuracy that US did not invest on it.



How many times have you jammed these radars? They are not impossible to jam indeed, like most other electronic devices that can be disabled/jammed by different means, however there are no any major report/incidents in which these radars are jammed. I already provided you info about U.S investing in these radars right AFTER cold war and U.S navy is currently using a modified version called ROTHR. By the way, U.S doesn't need any massive use of these radars because it's not facing any threat from south or north. If you look at the U.S map again, you will understand that it's pointless for a country like U.S to use them in all parts of the country because except perhaps Venezuela and Cuba (which are no serious enemy to U.S), the closest U.S enemy is 10,000 kilometers away and U.S has many other means to detect their activity. Also, no one is supposed to do whatever U.S does like a monkey, countries have difference in logistics, defense doctrines, geography and number/situation of enemies.




rmi5 said:


> 3) As I told you before, these systems even detect some other stuff in the sky, as fighter jets, and their accuracy is awful. so, they are obviously terrible as warning radar system for a country that its enemies are either its neighbors, or they have bases in her close proximity.



It's not supposed to be the only way to detect flying objects. OTH radars are meant to reduce/deter the element of surprise since you can monitor air space of neighboring countries and can detect mass movements of jet fighters/ballistic missiles. It's not meant to guide missiles toward them since it doesn't have precise accuracy in a frequency between 3-30 MHz.




rmi5 said:


> Did you get it now, or you want to continue your trolling and chest thumping?



How is it trolling when you don't have proper answers and also we are talking about technical aspects of these radars which is ON topic. Do you have anything else to say besides flaming/accusing others of not having knowledge?

I don't claim to be an expert in in all this like you do, and I'm talking about the most basic aspects of a radar. If I'm convinced that you are right and I'm wrong, I'd have absolutely no problem admitting it since there is nothing to be ashamed of. People are not supposed to be masters in all fields.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## rmi5

There is a face palm needed after reading your post.
1) For the millionth time, these radars can detect everything as enemy fighters. That's why an operator would not give a damn to these radars after a few time of sitting behind these systems.
2)Instead of writing rants, clearly say that what is the purpose of these radars? Iran is not Australia whose enemies are thousands of miles away from its country. All of Iran's enemies are in her close proximity. The only one which is a bit far is Israel, and almost every country in the region is willing to gave free access of their airspace to Israel in the case that they want to invade mullahs. BTW, If you have ever take a look at the map of western parts of Iran, and its mountains, ... you would have know that how much incapable these radar systems would be.


> How many times have you jammed these radars?


That's the most stupid comment of your post. You really know nothing. Just ask an expert with the tolerance of Noah, to explain to you why these primitive systems are easy to be jammed.




Serpentine said:


> Your post shows which person your sentence represents.
> 
> 
> 
> Since when one should be an expert on Australian military to know that they are currently using these radars to monitor areas north of Australia as far as 3,000 kilometers?
> This radar's main purpose is not for monitoring U.S fleet in Persian gulf, that's the weirdest usage to consider for a radar like this because there are other precise radars with range of 200-300 Km. Its main usage is to monitor Iran's air space from east and west, especially from Israel's direction. and for like millionth time, EARLY warning radars are not used to intercept airplanes or missils, they are used to detect attacking jet fighters and warn you before they enter your air space, hence you can get ready to intercept them with other radar/missile systems. They are not meant to show plane's location with pinpoint accuracy.
> 
> 
> 
> How many times have you jammed these radars? They are not impossible to jam indeed, like most other electronic devices that can be disabled/jammed by different means, however there are no any major report/incidents in which these radars are jammed. I already provided you info about U.S investing in these radars right AFTER cold war and U.S navy is currently using a modified version called ROTHR. By the way, U.S doesn't need any massive use of these radars because it's not facing any threat from south or north. If you look at the U.S map again, you will understand that it's pointless for a country like U.S to use them in all parts of the country because except perhaps Venezuela and Cuba (which are no serious enemy to U.S), the closest U.S enemy is 10,000 kilometers away and U.S has many other means to detect their activity. Also, no one is supposed to do whatever U.S does like a monkey, countries have difference in logistics, defense doctrines, geography and number/situation of enemies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not supposed to be the only way to detect flying objects. OTH radars are meant to reduce/deter the element of surprise since you can monitor air space of neighboring countries and can detect mass movements of jet fighters/ballistic missiles. It's not meant to guide missiles toward them since it doesn't have precise accuracy in a frequency between 3-30 MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is it trolling when you don't have proper answers and also we are talking about technical aspects of these radars which is ON topic. Do you have anything else to say besides flaming/accusing others of not having knowledge?
> 
> I don't claim to be an expert in in all this like you do, and I'm talking about the most basic aspects of a radar. If I'm convinced that you are right and I'm wrong, I'd have absolutely no problem admitting it since there is nothing to be ashamed of. People are not supposed to be masters in all fields.


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> There is a face palm needed after reading your post.
> 1) For the millionth time, these radars can detect everything as enemy fighters. That's why an operator would not give a damn to these radars after a few time of sitting behind these systems.
> 2)Instead of writing rants, clearly say that what is the purpose of these radars? Iran is not Australia whose enemies are thousands of miles away from its country. All of Iran's enemies are in her close proximity. The only one which is a bit far is Israel, and almost every country in the region is willing to gave free access of their airspace to Israel in the case that they want to invade mullahs. BTW, If you have ever take a look at the map of western parts of Iran, and its mountains, ... you would have know that how much incapable these radar systems would be.



The range of radar is 1100 Km and it's located in middle of Iran, which means this radar monitors roughly 500 Km out of Iran's borders. What 'thousands of miles' are you talking about? This means even a quarter of KSA's territory for example is not covered by this radar. Get your facts right.

And about detecting everything, that's why OTH radars are also used to monitor civilian airlines. But since obviously you didn't know, the path of civilian airliners before entering Iran's air space is pre-determined according to international aviation laws and also there is a clear difference between speed of a civilian airliner and a ballistic missile or jet fighter. Also, since the radar is called an early warning system, it means it'll give you a warning of existence of a flying object, it's up to you analyze location/direction and path of that object and to decide whether it should be considered as a threat or not. No country will give their air space to Israel and all of those currently named by the media have already denied it, including Turkey, Iraq and KSA.



rmi5 said:


> BTW, If you have ever take a look at the map of western parts of Iran, and its mountains, ... you would have know that how much incapable these radar systems would be.



If you call my post stupid, then for God's sake, what do you call this? Wow. You don't even know how most OTH radars work and you don't know they don't send signals directly towards the object, they send it first towards Ionosphere in upper atmosphere and detect the reflection, which means mountain won't be in its way.







Thanks for proving any further discussion about this is pointless. Let's just spare our times and 'waste' it on something more constructive.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL

@rmi5 ... you made my day !

you just proving your stupidness day by day ...

when I read that part about Western mountains I just laughed in my pants !

if you can't see something , it doesn't mean it's nonexistent !

indeed ... you are an atheist !

you have same idea about the God too 

stupid ... we are not going to show all we got just for proving something for stupids ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 1000

@Serpentine 

We got nothing to stop Israeli aircraft, they can violate it and Jordan's airspace is open for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

Serpentine said:


> The range of radar is 1100 Km and it's located in middle of Iran, which means this radar monitors roughly 500 Km out of Iran's borders. What 'thousands of miles' are you talking about? This means even a quarter of KSA's territory for example is not covered by this radar. Get your facts right.
> 
> And about detecting everything, that's why OTH radars are also used to monitor civilian airlines. But since obviously you didn't know, the path of civilian airliners before entering Iran's air space is pre-determined according to international aviation laws and also there is a clear difference between speed of a civilian airliner and a ballistic missile or jet fighter. Also, since the radar is called an early warning system, it means it'll give you a warning of existence of a flying object, it's up to you analyze location/direction and path of that object and to decide whether it should be considered as a threat or not. No country will give their air space to Israel and all of those currently named by the media have already denied it, including Turkey, Iraq and KSA.
> 
> 
> 
> If you call my post stupid, then for God's sake, what do you call this? Wow. You don't even know how most OTH radars work and you don't know they don't send signals directly towards the object, they send it first towards Ionosphere in upper atmosphere and detect the reflection, which means mountain won't be in its way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving any further discussion about this is pointless. Let's just spare our times and 'waste' it on something more constructive.



Again, you did not understand my point. I did not say that it only takes passenger jets like Boing 747 mistakenly as the enemy fighter. First, try to understand what I am saying, then start writing apologizing coments for these stupid system.


----------



## SOHEIL

some systems getting unveiled after 7 years (from getting operational ... )

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

SOHEIL said:


> @rmi5 ... you made my day !
> 
> you just proving your stupidness day by day ...
> 
> when I read that part about Western mountains I just laughed in my pants !
> 
> if you can't see something , it doesn't mean it's nonexistent !
> 
> indeed ... you are an atheist !
> 
> you have same idea about the God too
> 
> stupid ... we are not going to show all we got just for proving something for stupids ...



Again, you came here, with your trolling, off-topic comments.
BTW, what's new Soheil? did you made your spaceship to fight enemies of mullahs in Andromeda galaxy?!!!



SOHEIL said:


> some systems getting unveiled after 7 years (from getting operation) ...


like Qaher-313?



1000 said:


> @Serpentine
> 
> We got nothing to stop Israeli aircraft, they can violate it and Jordan's airspace is open for them.


Also you can add KSA, Turkey, Azerbaijan, ... airspaces to the list as well who would willingly give their airspace to them.

PS. even mullahs cannot do too much about it either.
PPS. I forget about Qaher-313 which can destroy andromeda, let alone Israel and USA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

1000 said:


> @Serpentine
> 
> We got nothing to stop Israeli aircraft, they can violate it and Jordan's airspace is open for them.



ha ha ha 

for real !?



rmi5 said:


> Again, you came here, with your trolling, off-topic comments.
> BTW, what's new Soheil? did you made your spaceship to fight enemies of mullahs in Andromeda galaxy?!!!
> 
> 
> like Qaher-313?
> 
> 
> Also you can add KSA, Turkey, Azerbaijan, ... airspaces to the list as well.



exactly like qaher - 313 !

stupid ... do you really think the real qaher is like that unveiled mockup !?

ha ha ha ... please don't stop posting about qaher ... 

you are going to touch down on a dildo when the time comes

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

SOHEIL said:


> ha ha ha
> 
> for real !?
> 
> 
> 
> exactly like qaher - 313 !
> 
> stupid ... do you really think the real qaher is like that unveiled mockup !?
> 
> ha ha ha ... please don't stop posting about qaher ...
> 
> you are going to touch down on a dildo when the time comes



LOL, Soheil, you are really the biggest joke among Iranians. You not only embarrass yourself, but also embarrass mullahs as well. I think you still clearly remember that you posted that photo of Qaher in this section, and how one of the most well-known military websites, wrote an article about it, and mocked mullahs. keep up your good work!!! We are in the same front.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

rmi5 said:


> Again, you did not understand my point. I did not say that it only takes passenger jets like Boing 747 mistakenly as the enemy fighter. First, try to understand what I am saying, then start writing apologizing coments for these stupid system.



You made a serious mistake in your post, it would be nicer if you admitted it instead of writing this. I've done mistakes in the past and I admitted to them. I never make fun of someone for not knowing something because people shouldn't know everything in this world, but I don't like when people not only ignore and don't accept their mistake, but also attack others to cover it.

So let's just end it, from now on, this discussion would be pointless and also will lack technical value too and will turn in to an internet fight.



1000 said:


> @Serpentine
> 
> We got nothing to stop Israeli aircraft, they can violate it and Jordan's airspace is open for them.



It's different when you 'can't' stop them or when you won't allow them. Iraq may not be able to stop them, but it doesn't mean it agrees with it. I'm talking about political aspect. All countries including KSA and Turkey have officially denied that they will open their air space for Israel. Iraq is the most probable route for any attack and there are means to stop them. Also Iraq will soon but some decent air defense systems adding them to F-16s.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

looks like our Zionist troll has forgotten how Iranian protect their airspace:





the name of his disease is *Lacunar amnesia* (also known as selective amnesia), so no cure.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacunar_amnesia

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rmi5

mohsen said:


> looks like our Zionist troll has forgotten how Iranian protect their airspace:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the name of his disease is *Lacunar amnesia* (also known as selective amnesia), so no cure.



Talking non-sense and trolling and being a fool are your only expertise. A RQ-170 had crashed inside Iran's airspace which it implies that USA sends regularly its drone into the heartland of mullahland and this drone which had a maintenance issue crashed in mullah land in one of its missions. What is the point then? Go and have fun with the Qaher-313 in your avatar, and I wish you luck in invading andromeda with your Qaher.


----------



## Malik Alashter

MTN1917 said:


> I think that this is the ''Najm-802'', it was seen for the first time during the supreme leader's visit of Iran's military achievement exhibition some time ago.


This radar looks aesa no doubt. it looks like these aesa or oesa radars has variation in modules designs because this najm radar looks different than the Ghadeer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

rmi5 said:


> There is a face palm needed after reading your post.
> 1) For the millionth time, these radars can detect everything as enemy fighters. That's why an operator would not give a damn to these radars after a few time of sitting behind these systems.
> 2)Instead of writing rants, clearly say that what is the purpose of these radars? Iran is not Australia whose enemies are thousands of miles away from its country. All of Iran's enemies are in her close proximity. The only one which is a bit far is Israel, and almost every country in the region is willing to gave free access of their airspace to Israel in the case that they want to invade mullahs. BTW, If you have ever take a look at the map of western parts of Iran, and its mountains, ... you would have know that how much incapable these radar systems would be.
> 
> That's the most stupid comment of your post. You really know nothing. Just ask an expert with the tolerance of Noah, to explain to you why these primitive systems are easy to be jammed.



You talk garbage, and you prove with every one of your posts how deep is you ignorance. Who told you Iran does not have a Friend/Foe system, it is your country that just came out of the cave, although I defended it many times in its war against Armenia, some of you seem to be more pragmatists than pragmatism itself, you deal with Israel mostly, and now you understand that they are fake. I can not blame you that much, since your Islam is pretty shaky at best for having lived for the last century as atheists. But please try to respect old and powerfull nations, they have more experience than you can imagine or even for the US to imagine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rmi5

The SC said:


> You talk garbage, and you prove with every one of your posts how deep is you ignorance. Who told you Iran does not have a Friend/Foe system, it is your country that just came out of the cave, although I defended it many times in its war against Armenia, some of you seem to be more pragmatists than pragmatism itself, you deal with Israel mostly, and now you understand that they are fake. I can not blame you that much, since your Islam is pretty shaky at best for having lived for the last century as atheists. But please try to respect old and powerfull nations, they have more experience than you can imagine or even for the US to imagine.


Bunch of off-topic rants from another Iranian member in this thread. parts of your comment is not comprehendible because of your english language, but, anyway, I don't have time, nor this thread is appropriate to answer your bogus claims. but, just notice that a powerful nation does not knee down before its enemy to receive 4 billion dollars for six months. Just try to wake up from the imaginary dreamland that you have created for yourself in your mind.


----------



## raptor22

rmi5 said:


> Talking non-sense and trolling and being a fool are your only expertise. A RQ-170 had crashed inside Iran's airspace which it implies that USA sends regularly its drone into the heartland of mullahland and this drone which had a maintenance issue crashed in mullah land in one of its missions. What is the point then? Go and have fun with the Qaher-313 in your avatar, and I wish you luck in invading andromeda with your Qaher.



I don't know why American drones crash only and only in Iran air space, I think even our atmospher has got problem with Americans ....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

raptor22 said:


> I don't know why American drones crash only and only in Iran air space, I think even our atmospher has got problem with Americans ....



I thought you shared your awesome technology to the Pakistanis because we are experiencing many drone crashes there. Even one of our stealth helos crashed during the raid to kill Osama.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

@rmi5 Well I think you believe that a plane like rq-170 can crash from the altitude of 10km and stay intact.

Interesting

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

right, crash!!!




crashed hegemony maybe.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Oldman1 said:


> I thought you shared your awesome technology to the Pakistanis because we are experiencing many drone crashes there. Even one of our stealth helos crashed during the raid to kill Osama.


Wasn't that involved with a little firefight.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rmi5

JEskandari said:


> @rmi5 Well I think you believe that a plane like rq-170 can crash from the altitude of 10km and stay intact.
> 
> Interesting



A UAV is not a "Khompaareh Salavati", and it has control systems which make them enable to land with low damages, even in the worst cases.


----------



## SOHEIL

> it has control systems which make them enable to land with low damages, even in the worst cases.



worst case !?








rmi5 said:


> At least, try to be funny, dude. Anyway, In addition to Tehrani Moghaddam, who died not long time ago, Haji zadeh, and Khamenei, do you have Gabriel on your speed dial as well?
> Honestly, I am afraid that you claim that your prophecies are coming from your revelations.
> BTW, in that case, there is a special type of hospital for people like you which is called mental hospital.



& you just tried to be funny !? 

FAILURE

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

SOHEIL said:


> + none of them were a flying wing drone !



Maybe you can teach them how to land after multiple crashes. Hey Pakistanis, you hijacked a dozen drones and have yet to land one intact.



JEskandari said:


> Wasn't that involved with a little firefight.



Yeah Osama died. And the Pakistanis hijacked the helo with your technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Oldman1 said:


> Maybe you can teach them how to land after multiple crashes. Hey Pakistanis, you hijacked a dozen drones and have yet to land one intact.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah Osama died. And the Pakistanis hijacked the helo with your technology.



It seems you don't know anything about ossama case !!!

The helly which downed by a MANPAD destroyed by American troops ... Only tale survived from the explosion ...

And is there any similarity between these two incidents !?

RQ-170 hijacked from the high altitude without any hard action ...







A piece ... Not in one piece !

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

rmi5 said:


> A UAV is not a "Khompaareh Salavati", and it has control systems which make them enable to land with low damages, even in the worst cases.


The control system need electricity and without that it can't do shit.and there is only one source of providing electricity in that UAV
And again you guys are insulting American intelligence by claiming they designed this secret spy plane so it will land in the enemy land intact .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SajeevJino

raptor22 said:


> Humiliation of your air defence systerm.



That's not the Correct answer for that Question ..Between Israel facing Many no of Spies in His Land ..But Survived each and every Attack They faced ..and The Attacker get what the Drone Gets


----------



## Falcon29

SajeevJino said:


> That's not the Correct answer for that Question ..Between Israel facing Many no of Spies in His Land ..But Survived each and every Attack They faced ..and The Attacker get what the Drone Gets



We're back with this queer avatar BS ....


----------



## MOHSENAM

Hazzy997 said:


> We're back with this queer avatar BS ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Falcon29

MOHSENAM said:


>



His avatar is messed up and gay.


----------



## The SC

rmi5 said:


> Bunch of off-topic rants from another Iranian member in this thread. parts of your comment is not comprehendible because of your english language, but, anyway, I don't have time, nor this thread is appropriate to answer your bogus claims. but, just notice that a powerful nation does not knee down before its enemy to receive 4 billion dollars for six months. Just try to wake up from the imaginary dreamland that you have created for yourself in your mind.


 So Qaher-313 is on topic , and asking you to stop your rants is off topic.

You have learned some tricks from the Zionists, like jumping from a defensive position to an offensive one by attacking Iran again for its diplomacy this time, this just shows how ignorant you are of the real balanced situation.
I am glad you have learned some English in the US, but that does not save you from your cave like mentality, that is why you find my English unaccessible to your limited comprehension.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

SOHEIL said:


> It seems you don't know anything about ossama case !!!
> 
> The helly which downed by a MANPAD destroyed by American troops ... Only tale survived from the explosion ...
> 
> And is there any similarity between these two incidents !?
> 
> RQ-170 hijacked from the high altitude without any hard action ...
> 
> View attachment 34080
> 
> 
> A piece ... Not in one piece !



What MANPAD? The Taliban didn't claim to shoot it down. Nor did Al Qaeda or the Pakistanis. Only conclusion is Pakistani hijacking it with Iranian tech. And RQ170 did crashed with its wings sheared off and had to be put back together with duct tape and glue as your pics have shown. So yeah they are similar where they crashed in pieces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Oldman1 said:


> What MANPAD? The Taliban didn't claim to shoot it down. Nor did Al Qaeda or the Pakistanis. Only conclusion is Pakistani hijacking it with Iranian tech. And RQ170 did crashed with its wings sheared off and had to be put back together with duct tape and glue as your pics have shown. So yeah they are similar where they crashed in pieces.


that's not a sign of crash , that's a sign of bad landing in rough terrain


----------



## mohsen

Oldman1 said:


> What MANPAD? The Taliban didn't claim to shoot it down. Nor did Al Qaeda or the Pakistanis. Only conclusion is Pakistani hijacking it with Iranian tech. And RQ170 did crashed with its wings sheared off and had to be put back together with duct tape and glue as your pics have shown. So yeah they are similar where they crashed in pieces.


those wings were separated by Iranian troops to ease the transportation.


















you seriously think these fine cuts are the result of crash???

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Oldman1 said:


> What MANPAD? The Taliban didn't claim to shoot it down. Nor did Al Qaeda or the Pakistanis. Only conclusion is Pakistani hijacking it with Iranian tech. And RQ170 did crashed with its wings sheared off and had to be put back together with duct tape and glue as your pics have shown. So yeah they are similar where they crashed in pieces.



For real !?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

mohsen said:


> those wings were separated by Iranian troops to ease the transportation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you seriously think these fine cuts are the result of crash???



Where do you think the wings are at connected to the fuselage, of course they be weaker at? Have you ever considered why they never showed a video or picture of the aircraft intact before cutting the wings as you claimed? Or never showed the landing gear when they first showed it on tv? Up close you can see damaged parts on the wings. You guys are really bad at cutting it if you damage the wings like that.












SOHEIL said:


> For real !?



For real. How else would Pakistan get a dozen Predator drones to crash?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Oldman1 said:


> Where do you think the wings are at connected to the fuselage, of course they be weaker at? Have you ever considered why they never showed a video or picture of the aircraft intact before cutting the wings as you claimed? Or never showed the landing gear when they first showed it on tv? Up close you can see damaged parts on the wings. You guys are really bad at cutting it if you damage the wings like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For real. How else would Pakistan get a dozen Predator drones to crash?


are those marks belong to falling from 10km or it's sign of landing in a rough terrain

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Behrooz Boonabi

JEskandari said:


> are those marks belong to falling from 10km or it's sign of landing in a rough terrain




If it fell 10Km, it would be just a pile of debris. It looks more like it was taken control of but they didn't know how to properly land it as they have never flown one at that point.


Also, they might of landed it without using a runway. It could have also been damaged when moving it or dissembling it for safety concerned.



Oldman1 said:


> Where do you think the wings are at connected to the fuselage, of course they be weaker at? Have you ever considered why they never showed a video or picture of the aircraft intact before cutting the wings as you claimed? Or never showed the landing gear when they first showed it on tv? Up close you can see damaged parts on the wings. You guys are really bad at cutting it if you damage the wings like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For real. How else would Pakistan get a dozen Predator drones to crash?





Oldman1 said:


> Where do you think the wings are at connected to the fuselage, of course they be weaker at? Have you ever considered why they never showed a video or picture of the aircraft intact before cutting the wings as you claimed? Or never showed the landing gear when they first showed it on tv? Up close you can see damaged parts on the wings. You guys are really bad at cutting it if you damage the wings like that.



I have never worked on a drone that didn't have removable wings. 








For real. How else would Pakistan get a dozen Predator drones to crash?[/quote]


It doesn't look like it crashed.


----------



## Archdemon




----------



## Cohen1984

Archdemon said:


>



this is technically impossible for a drone like RQ-170. RQ-170 is aero dynamically unstable.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Archdemon

Cohen1984 said:


> this is technically impossible for a drone like RQ-170. RQ-170 is aero dynamically unstable.



This is actually possible, RQ-170 is great for autorotation.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Archdemon said:


> This is actually possible, RQ-170 is great for autorotation.


only if it has power on-board to run its computer that stabilize the plane and also mechanical part inside it, and that's only possible if there is no failure in its engine as there is no other source of power inside that airplane

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Archdemon

JEskandari said:


> only if it has power on-board to run its computer that stabilize the plane and also mechanical part inside it, and that's only possible if there is no failure in its engine as there is no other source of power inside that airplane



No.


----------



## SOHEIL

Archdemon said:


> No.



Yes !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cohen1984

Archdemon said:


> No.



elaborate please.


----------



## ghauri05

Congratz to Iran!!!

Just out of curiosity,How much is the range and altitude of radars under use of Pakistan and India?


----------



## Archdemon

Cohen1984 said:


> elaborate please.


Autorotation (fixed-wing aircraft) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hakan

I would like to get some info about iranian air defence systems that are currently in use and those that will be used in the future.
Pictures, specs, videos, and brochures would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks. 

Edit:
I found this but the thread is 2 years old someone needs to update it perhaps. 

IRANIAN Air defense systems that are manufacturing in Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gilamard

Kaan said:


> I would like to get some info about iranian air defence systems that are currently in use and those that will be used in the future.
> Pictures, specs, videos, and brochures would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Edit:
> I found this but the thread is 2 years old someone needs to update it perhaps.
> 
> IRANIAN Air defense systems that are manufacturing in Iran



Honestly I'm not very knowledgeable about it but Talash AD system is the most interesting thing unveiled so far.

Iran inaugurates production line of Sayyad-2 AD missile






Then we have Raad and it's different variants:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LordTyrannus

Kaan said:


> I would like to get some info about iranian air defence systems that are currently in use and those that will be used in the future.
> Pictures, specs, videos, and brochures would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Edit:
> I found this but the thread is 2 years old someone needs to update it perhaps.
> 
> IRANIAN Air defense systems that are manufacturing in Iran



You gave me warning for trolling in turkish subforum but here you are doing the exact same thing. SHAME ON YOU! You are not worth to be a mod!!!!!


----------



## IR5

@Kaan
Shahab Thaeqeb - Iranian version of the HQ-7 (Mk 1)




Ya Zahra - Iranian version of the HQ-7 (Mk 2)




Herz-9 - Iranian version of the HQ-7 (Mk 3)




SM-1 - copy of RIM-66 Standard




Sayyad 1 - Iranian version of the S-75




Sayyad 2 - Updated Sayyad 1





Mersad - Iranian version of MIM-23 (Use many eatch missiles)




Raad - iranian version of Buk-M/SA6




Raad 2 - iranian version of Buk (80 km range - I don't have pictures)
Tabas - another iranian version of Buk




3: e Khordad - iransk version av Buk M2




More in next Reply..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## IR5

Talash - Iranian air defence system (lock like Pateriot..)





Sayyad 3 Air defence system (No pictures, but i ask konstantin sivkov in a email-messege about IADF, and he anwser.. the Sayyad 3 is more like S300PMU1 - and konstantin sivkov is Russian military Insider to know)

Bavar-373 - Iranian version of S300, will be lanuched 2016.

Many another systems are under test, Konstantin Spoke to me in response to the email that the victor (Russian Air Force commander) saw 12 different air defense systems of the IRGC and IADF in Iran).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aspahbod

The Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and Iran Electronics Industries (IEI) will join forces to develop and produce active- and passive-radar systems for civilian and military interests.

The joint venture is the first of its kind in the telecommunications field, as out of the two, Iran is considered to have the edge in technological advances and transfer of technology.

LIPI telecommunications division head Mashury Wahab told The Jakarta Post recently in Batam, Riau Islands, that LIPI would work with IEI to develop and manufacture radar systems by collaborating with Indonesian company PT Dirgantara Aviation Enterprise.

They will develop both active- and passive-radar systems. The passive-radar system detects signals from a different party, while an active radar system has the capability to resist enemies.

“Iran and Indonesia will work together in developing and producing the [two] radar systems. They will be used in the interest of the Indonesian Military’s [TNI] main weaponry system as well as civil aviation at commercial airports,” Mashury said.

“Iran possesses the technological edge in this field, such as radius capacity of up to 500 kilometers. Iran also has good technology and components as they are used by more than 52 countries,” he said on the sidelines of the 3rd International Conference on Radar, Antenna, Microwave, Electronics and Telecommunications (ICRAMET) in Batam.

According to Mashury, the collaboration is expected to be realized this year, so PT Dirgantara Aviation Enterprise could immediately produce the radar systems.

The products will be branded as “made in Indonesia”, while for military use, LIPI will convey the matter to the Defense Industry Policy Committee (KKIP) to be included in TNI’s main weaponry systems.

Meanwhile, IEI representative Ali Nasheer Ahmadi addressed the audience at the ICRAMET conference, saying that technology could provide security for Indonesia and Iran.

“Indonesia and Iran, as Muslim countries, can work together to develop a variety of telecommunications technologies in the future,” he said.

Based on a statement from LIPI, IEI is an Iranian state enterprise involved in technological development and employs up to 5,000 people.

Source: LIPI, Iran Electronics to develop radar systems | The Jakarta Post

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Indos

*Indonesia equips frigates, corvette with stealth radars*
*Ridzwan Rahmat, Singapore* - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
14 April 2014






Kapitan Pattimura-class corvette. Source: Indian Navy

The Indonesian Navy (Tentera Nasional Indonesia - Angkatan Laut: TNI-AL) will equip a total of four Ahmad Yani (Van Speijk)-class guided missile frigates and one Kapitan Pattimura (Parchim I)-class corvette with low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) naval radars.

The radars will be built by Indonesian naval sensor manufacturer PT Infra RCS, company officials told [i>IHS Jane's on 11 April.

The company describes its equipment, the IRCS LPI Radar, as a stealthy sea-based X-band (SBX) radar with frequency modulated continuous wave technology.

"It has a maximum power output of only 10 W, making it quiet and virtually invisible to radar warning receivers on enemy vessels", said Prihatno Susanto, Technical Advisor for the company. "This allows our warships to detect hostile surface combatants without being discovered".

The IRCS LPI Radar has an effective range of 24 n miles and is equipped with tracking software known as Maritime Tracking Aid that allows for automatic radar plotting aid functionality. The system's antenna rotates at 20 rpm and has a gain of about 30dB.

The radar is available as a stand-alone system but can also be integrated with a vessel's electronic chart display and information system (IRCS) and combat management system.

The vessels now equipped with the radar are the guided missile frigates KRI _Ahmad Yani_ and KRI _Abdul Halim_ Perdanakusuma. Both began upgrade works in December 2013. Undergoing the equipment fixture currently are similar vessels in class KRI _Yos Sudarso_ , KRI _Oswald Siahaan_ and the Kapitan Pattimura-class corvette KRI _Sultan Taha_ .

Besides LPI naval radars, the company has also won a contract to equip _Oswald Siahaan_ and _Yos Sudarso_ with naval electronic support measures (ESM) systems that can detect electromagnetic emissions from electronic devices on enemy ships such as radar, communications equipment, jammers and missile targeting systems.

"The IRCS ESM has electronic intelligence (ELINT) capabilities that can pick up signals emitted by hostile warships from up to 90 n miles away via a passive radar", said Susanto. "Once these electromagnetic emissions are detected, a computer software that comes with the system will be able to identify, classify and pin-point the exact location of the source for commanders to take action."

The company has indicated that it is currently embarking on an effort to market both systems internationally.

Indonesia equips frigates, corvette with stealth radars - IHS Jane's 360

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

its more of a tech transfer than a JV .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Iran's Air Defense Operation Center (ADOC) مركز عمليات پدافند هوايي ايران

September 1, 2014 (Persian calendar 1393/6/10)

Commander of Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base پايگاه پدافند هوايي خاتم النبيا interview inside Air Defense Operation *Center 250 meters (820 foot, 273 yard) underground bunker.*
In this underground center Iran's air space is monitors using all Iran's Active and Passive radars and they control all defense systems. All data from radars across the country collect and analyze using Iran's air defense secure network and air defense systems.
Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili سرتيپ فرزاد اسماعيلي says the country’s air defense range will be expanded from 3'600 spots to 5'000 in the near future.

He says, we was tracking Israel made Hermes drone about 41 minutes, we waited and tracked the drone to make sure it's out of international passengers planes corridor and we was interested to know where the exact destination of spy drone is then we decided to take it down before it reaches Natanz nuclear facilities مركز هسته اي نطنز.
He didn't mention from which side of Iran's borders Hermes drone has been passed and violated Iran's territory.


[Iran national TV Ch5 - Persian]


Credit goes to Persian_boy for uploading this video.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar

Kaihan radar

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Norwegian

Still a thousands years behind Israel.


----------



## ghauri05

Pakistan kuch to bana lo yaar air defense k hawale se!!!


----------



## syedali73

Norwegian said:


> Still a thousands years behind Israel.


30 years in almost complete isolation and that is what they have achieved in-spite all the odds against them. Why comparing with Israel that has every country in the west on her back? Well done Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## SOHEIL

Norwegian said:


> Still a thousands years behind Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Norwegian

SOHEIL said:


>



Can't compete with Green Pine:
EL/M-2080 Green Pine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## yavar

Norwegian said:


> Can't compete with Green Pine:
> EL/M-2080 Green Pine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


can this one do ??




or maybe this one ??





















or bigger size of this one ??





or maybe this one does btter job ??

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rahi2357

Norwegian said:


> Can't compete with Green Pine:

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## MTN1917

IRIADF unveiled two new Radars and several other projects

*Kayhan*: 2D mobile radar which can detects the target's distance, angle, direction and its speed.

*Arash 2*: a solid state L band 2D radar with 360 degree coverage, range of 400km and detection altitude of 100,000 feet.

*Hadi information relaying project *with capability to transfer information to 100km, it is also equipped with direction finding, altitude finding and identification radars.

*FIC2 flight plane system*: related to commercial aircraft traffic.

*Commander assistant system:* which gather and process information from local radars and provides it to the commander.

دستاوردهای جدید پدافند در حوزه رادار رونمایی شد+عکس - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir

Keyhan radar





Arash 2 radar









Tropo scatter





Line of sight communication system





Information relaying systems





Push mobile HAWK system





Several target UAVs and a Mohajer 









Mock up of Shahab or Thamen radar(some one should correct me)





More pics here:
رونمایی از دستاوردهای جدید پدافند هوایی
گزارش های تصویری: مراسم رونمایی از چند دستاورد پدافند هوایی
ایسنا - گزارش تصویری -‌ رونمایی از دستاوردهای جدید قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء
مجله تصویری باشگاه خبرنگاران

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## yavar

better quality videos

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## farhan_9909

Now i am wondering how much is Iran per year R&D budget?and how much is the latest figure of Official Defence Budget(Approved every year)?

I really doubt the $8Billion as Defence Budget,Seem more like atleast 15Billion Dollars

Anyway congrats as Radar is one of the most important sector of Defence,

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Penguin

I haven't clicked the video's but imho this thread would be much better with some write up on the various systems of which pics are shown i.e. name, type, capabilities, status, prospects.

Just my 2 cents worth...


----------



## MTN1917

Penguin said:


> I haven't clicked the video's but imho this thread would be much better with some write up on the various systems of which pics are shown i.e. name, type, capabilities, status, prospects.
> 
> Just my 2 cents worth...


See my post above, although Arash radar itself was not shown.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Donatello

yavar said:


> can this one do ??




Free Wifi?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

New video with Arash 2 radar visible in 1:27





Credit for the video goes to persian boy

Arash 2 radar

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar

Donatello said:


> Free Wifi?


NO it is free danda


----------



## MTN1917

As it appears the radar which was introduced as Arash 2 strongly resemble Square Pair radar(minus its radar station unit) so the possible explanations are that either Arash 2 is an upgraded copy of Square Pair which is solid state(we have already seen its new radar station unit) also the old Square Pair has a range of 270km but Arash 2 has a range of 400km(according to a poster), the other explanation is that IRIB have shown the wrong footage which based on its record is not far from mind.

Arash 2 radar station unit

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

MTN1917 said:


>



I'm sure now by publishing this picture somebody comes and claim the system is not Iranian at all because the air-conditioner in It is LG.
another probability is US treasury sanction LG because of their role in Iran Missile and Nuclear program and use this picture as evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MTN1917

*More long-range Iranian early-warning radars revealed*


> *Key Points*
> 
> Iran is making significant progress in building a network of long-range early-warning radars.
> IHS Jane's has identified what appears to be the 3,000 km range Sepehr radar in the northwest of the country, as well as a prototype facility for the Ghadir radar that was unveiled in June.
> Satellite imagery obtained by _IHS Jane's_ shows that Iran has two more long-range, early-warning radar sites in addition to the one that was unveiled earlier this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's unveiled its long-range Ghadir radar near Garmsar in early June. (Fars News Agency)
> 
> 
> The previously known site near Garmsar in Semnan province was publicly unveiled during a ceremony held on 2 June, when the Iranian media released photographs and video footage showing a facility with four horizontal arrays arranged in a square around a vertical array and support buildings.
> 
> Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, the commander of Iran's air defence forces, stated that the Ghadir radar could perform well against electronic warfare systems and would be difficult to destroy using anti-radar missiles. "The radar system uses a system that resonates the frequency and can trace targets more than 1,000 km in distance," he said.
> 
> The available satellite imagery of the site, which is 15 km southeast of Garmsar (35.133722° 52.469314°), shows that the Ghadir resembles Russia's Rezonans-NE system and indicates it was operational by the end of 2012 after a construction process that took 8-10 months.
> 
> The four primary arrays are approximately 39 m in width and together form a square with sides measuring approximately 55 m. Assuming a detection range of 1,000 km, this configuration provides 360° coverage of nearly all Iran and Iraq, the far southeast of Turkey and parts of northeast Saudi Arabia.
> 
> There also appears to be a prototype Ghadir radar site located at an air defence base between the towns of Andisheh and Qods in Tehran province (35.707617° 51.074084°). Satellite imagery shows a single primary array; a vertical, tower-mounted, Yagi-style antenna; and three support buildings were constructed between late-2009 and early-2010.
> 
> Like the Garmsar site, the horizontal array is approximately 39 m long. It faces southeast at approximately 151° so should be able to cover most of central Iran and the Gulf. Recent satellite imagery indicates that the facility remains active.
> 
> Several Iranian statements during early 2011 almost certainly referred to this facility. Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), stated in February 2011 that: "The final phase of research to produce long-range radars is complete and the production phase will start soon."
> 
> Four months later, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, said: "The Ghadir radar system, which covers areas 1,100 km in distance and 300 km in altitude, was put into operation for the first time [during the recent Great Prophet 6 exercise]. The Ghadir radar system has been designed and built to identify aerial targets, radar-evading aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles as well as low-altitude satellites."
> 
> The third and most recently constructed radar was built 350 km to the west of the prototype in a mountainous part of Kordestan province. Airbus Defence and Space satellite imagery shows construction at the site 27 km north of the city of Bijar began in mid-2012 and was mostly complete by October 2013.
> 
> Like the Garmsar radar, it has four primary arrays, each 39 m in length. However, the large openings left at the corners mean the resulting square has far longer sides. A central vertical array had not been constructed by October 2013, but all the corners have dual towers housing supporting components such as height-finding arrays.
> 
> The primary arrays are oriented in such a way that they provide excellent overlapping coverage with the Ghadir system near Garmsar.
> 
> The differences between the two sites suggest the possibility that the one in Kordestan is the 3,000 km-range Sepehr system that Iranian officials have referred to in recent years.
> 
> Brig Gen Esmaili said in March 2013 that the Sepehr would become operational in the Iranian year that ended on 20 March 2014. He expanded upon this the following August, saying: "The executive stages of the Sepehr space radar with a range of over 2,500 km have been accomplished and the point for its deployment has also been specified."
> 
> The timeline subsequently slipped. Brig Gen Esmaili stated on 16 February that the Sepehr would be operational before the end of the following Iranian year.
> 
> If the Kordestan radar is the Sepehr and has a detection range of 3,000 km, it would provide 360o coverage of all Iran as well as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Turkey and Pakistan. It also provides partial coverage of Eastern Europe, southwest Russia (including Moscow), western India and most of the Arabian Sea.



More long-range Iranian early-warning radars revealed - IHS Jane's 360

Probable Sepehr radar complex


----------



## yavar

*Western military charter plane lands in Iran*
*
By Adam Goldman and Karen DeYoung September 5 at 3:37 PM 
An aircraft chartered by coalition forces in Afghanistan, en route from Bagram air base to Dubai, landed Friday in Bandar Abbas, Iran, after Iranian officials questioned its flight plan, U.S. officials said.

The plane had been contacted by Iranian air traffic controllers, who instructed it to return to Afghanistan and file the correct plan. When the pilots informed the Iranians they did not have enough fuel to return to Bagram, they were asked to land.

One official said Iranian fighter jets had escorted the plane, which was carrying approximately 100 Americans and possibly a pair of Canadians, to the ground. Other officials denied that, and said the plane landed on its own. It was expected to resume its flight quickly.

The plane was chartered from Fly Dubai, a company based in the United Arab Emirates.

A spokeswoman for the UAE Embassy in Washington said she was aware of the incident but did not have additional information.*

Western military charter plane lands in Iran - The Washington Post

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran announces progress on long-range SAMs




[size=10pt]Iran's air defence commander, Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, claimed in a series of announcements made on 28 August and 1 September that the Islamic Republic is making progress on two indigenous long-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) programmes.

He said on 28 August that the Bavar-373 SAM had been successfully test-fired for the first time. This announcement came almost three years after he revealed the system was being developed to replace the S-300 mobile, long-range SAM systems that Iran ordered from Russia, but which were cancelled after the UN imposed an arms embargo in 2010.

Although no imagery of the test was released, the Bavar-373 missile appears to have been shown for the first time in Iranian television footage of a military exhibition in Tehran on 28 August. The footage fleetingly showed a white missile with '373' written on it that appeared to be roughly the same size and shape as the ones used with the S-300P series.

It was displayed next to another previously unseen missile and a vehicle-mounted, rotating, planar-array radar that could be part of a mobile SAM system.

Brig Gen Esmaili said that Iran was working on another long-range SAM based on the old Russian S-200 system called the Talash-3, which he said had been successfully tested and would be unveiled on 22 September during Sacred Defence Week.

"Talash-1 and -2 were designed and unveiled in 2012 and 2013 with a short- and medium-range capability," the Iranian news agency Mehr quoted him as saying. "Talash-3, which is a combination of the S-200 and localised technology, has been designed and produced in 2014."

The only previous reference to an air defence system called Talash appears to have been made by Defence Minister Hossein Dehghan in November 2013, when he suggested it was a radar and/or command-and-control system for the Sayyad-2 SAM he was unveiling at that time.

"The Talash defence system was designed and built to detect and intercept targets for the Sayyad-2 missile," he said.

The Sayyad-2 is a land-based version of the RIM-66 (SM-1) naval SAM, while the Sayyad-1 is a copy of the Chinese HQ-2/Russian S-75 SAM.

Brig Gen Esmaili unveiled two new radar systems on 1 September: the Arash-2 and Keihan (or Keyhan).

Iranian television footage suggested the Arash-2 is a development of the 'Square Pair' target engagement radar used with the S-200 SAM.

"In the past, Arash-1 radar was designed and produced by Iran's army, but needed to be upgraded to be capable of quickly discovering micro air vehicles," Mehr quoted Esmaili as saying. "Arash-2 radar greatly facilitates the air defence and is compatible with the world's modern technology."

The Iranian media published photographs of the Keihan, showing what appeared to be a mobile, low frequency, early warning radar. Brig Gen Esmaili said it has "a long range and hybrid frequencies capable of discovering micro air vehicles and cruise missiles". He said it was better than its predecessor because it was mobile.

Brig Gen Esmaili said Iran was also introducing a new system called the FIC2 that receives and processes information from Iran's automated air traffic control centre and sends it to air defence command-and-control bases.

This system should make unintentional engagements of civilian airliners less likely. A classified Pentagon report obtained by The New York Times in 2012 said that Iranian SAM batteries had fired at civilian airliners at least three times during 2007-2008.

Brig Gen Esmaili added that Iran has developed the Hadi data transfer system to share information across its integrated air defence network.

Iranian officials have pointed to the alleged shooting down of an Israeli-made Hermes 450 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) near the Natanz uranium enrichment facility on 24 August as evidence of the improvements made in the country's air defence network in recent years.

Israel would more likely use its Heron TP Eitan high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs to spy on Iran, not its Hermes 450s, which would be more vulnerable to Iranian air defences and at the limit of their operational range when over Natanz. Iran's ambassador in Baku said the UAV had not come from Azerbaijan.[/size]

Iran announces progress on long-range SAMs - IHS Jane's 360

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## nomi007

yavar said:


> Iran's Air Defense Operation Center (ADOC) مركز عمليات پدافند هوايي ايران
> 
> September 1, 2014 (Persian calendar 1393/6/10)
> 
> Commander of Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base پايگاه پدافند هوايي خاتم النبيا interview inside Air Defense Operation *Center 250 meters (820 foot, 273 yard) underground bunker.*
> In this underground center Iran's air space is monitors using all Iran's Active and Passive radars and they control all defense systems. All data from radars across the country collect and analyze using Iran's air defense secure network and air defense systems.
> Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili سرتيپ فرزاد اسماعيلي says the country’s air defense range will be expanded from 3'600 spots to 5'000 in the near future.
> 
> He says, we was tracking Israel made Hermes drone about 41 minutes, we waited and tracked the drone to make sure it's out of international passengers planes corridor and we was interested to know where the exact destination of spy drone is then we decided to take it down before it reaches Natanz nuclear facilities مركز هسته اي نطنز.
> He didn't mention from which side of Iran's borders Hermes drone has been passed and violated Iran's territory.
> 
> 
> [Iran national TV Ch5 - Persian]
> 
> 
> Credit goes to Persian_boy for uploading this video.


share utube link


----------



## JUBA

Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements"


----------



## Hasbara Buster

JUBA said:


> Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements"




What does Saudi Arabia make, camels?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## JUBA

Hasbara Buster said:


> What does Saudi Arabia make, camels?



I thought Camels are creation of God ? Are you saying that Saudis are your Gods ? Also don't you have some Piss TV news to go make a thread about ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

JUBA said:


> Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements"



We put this metal pipes in deserved asses!

You can have one of them! 

But be careful... Don't use them without oil...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## JUBA

SOHEIL said:


> be careful... Don't use them without oil...



I see you have experience 

I'm sorry though i don't swing that way 

But be careful and don't let anyone know or they'll hang you.


----------



## raptor22

JUBA said:


> Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements"



Shows us on of the sophisticated advanced Saudi-made radars which we could call them "achievement".

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## yavar

raptor22 said:


> Shows us on of the sophisticated advanced Saudi-made radars which we could call them "achievement".


here it is . I do nt know how miss it .
this is radar with two big hear which can pick up any noise around it .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hasbara Buster

It really baffles me how someone from primitive Arabia has the nerve to "ridicule" Iran. It just doesn't make sense whatsoever. Iran is a far more advanced society than Arabia. Despite sanctions and threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL

JUBA said:


> I see you have experience



I use people's experince ... people like you! 



raptor22 said:


> Shows us on of the sophisticated advanced Saudi-made radars which we could call them "achievement".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JUBA

raptor22 said:


> Shows us on of the sophisticated advanced Saudi-made radars which we could call them "achievement".



It sure as hell won't be a bunch or rusty metal welded together, tell me though can this advanced radar of yours detect your other mockup i mean advanced super stealth fighter the Qaher-313 ?!



yavar said:


> here it is . I do nt know how miss it .
> this is radar with two big hear which can pick up any noise around it .




Looks like an Iranian to me, did he get that bread on his donkey after standing in the long waiting lines at that sewer called Tehran ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## spiderkiller

@JUBA i thought you were on your way to iraq to help your jihadi brothers. they definitely need you there.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JUBA

Hasbara Buster said:


> It really baffles me how someone from primitive Arabia has the nerve to "ridicule" Iran. It just doesn't make sense whatsoever. Iran is a far more advanced society than Arabia. Despite sanctions and threats.



I find it interesting how a shawarma Turk like you keep licking Mullah's a$$ every 24/7 on this forum, in one of your posts you said you're even willing to kill your own countrymen to protect your Mullahs, that just shows that Shiites around the world are loyal to one entity only, all countries around the world should deport you to Iran so you can stand in the bread lines as well.



spiderkiller said:


> @JUBA i thought you were on your way to iraq to help your jihadi brothers. they definitely need you there.



They're doing good on their own, i like seeing them killing your proxies over there while they get killed as well, it's a win win for us Saudis.



SOHEIL said:


> I use people's experince ... people like you!



Hmm so you let people experiment on you ? nah dude keep your sexual fantasies to yourself, already told you i don't swing that way.


----------



## spiderkiller

JUBA said:


> They're doing good on their own, i like seeing them killing your proxies over there while they get killed as well, it's a win win for us Saudis.
> 
> .


a terrorist nation. looks like we're facing a new phenomenon here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JUBA

spiderkiller said:


> a terrorist nation. looks like we're facing a new phenomenon here



Are you terrorized ? don't be afraid they won't hurt you if you remain an illegal immigrant in the west like most of your fellow Iranians on here who escaped your hell hole of a country.


----------



## Gold Eagle

JUBA said:


> Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements"



Thanks to these so called metal pipes and wooden mock ups!! Iran's air space is the most secure in the region. and it has been completely proved. you should remember the Incident happened for the RQ-170 and recently for the Israeli drone! If you have any doubts, you can send one of your flying toys to our air space, of course if you have the balls! 

Oh and i was forgetting to mention that these rusty metal pipes even has foreign customers!

LIPI, Iran Electronics to develop radar systems | The Jakarta Post

Indonesia and Iran collaborate on radar systems - IHS Jane's 360

So if you don't have any technical information to tell us in the field of Radars and AD systems, I recommend yo to STFU!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JUBA

Gold Eagle said:


> you should remember the Incident happened for the RQ-170 and recently for the Israeli drone!



You shot down an RC plane ? Wow now that's a real achievement 



Gold Eagle said:


> If you have any doubts, you can send one of your flying toys to our air space, of course if you have the balls!



Our modern fighters don't even need to enter your airspace, we could obliterate these rusty pipes using long range cruise missiles, you wouldn't even know what hit you.


----------



## ResurgentIran

JUBA said:


> You shot down an RC plane ? Wow now that's a real achievement
> 
> 
> 
> Our modern fighters don't even need to enter your airspace, we could obliterate these rusty pipes using long range cruise missiles, you wouldn't even know what hit you.



The fact is that Iran has an indigenous arms industry, and saudi arabia does not. So before mocking Iran, take a look at your own country which cant even produce a plastic spoon by itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Falcon29

ResurgentIran said:


> The fact is that Iran has an indigenous arms industry, and saudi arabia does not. So before mocking Iran, take a look at your own country which cant even produce a plastic spoon by itself.



Arabs produce a lot of silverware.


----------



## Mosamania

ResurgentIran said:


> The fact is that Iran has an indigenous arms industry, and saudi arabia does not. So before mocking Iran, take a look at your own country which cant even produce a plastic spoon by itself.



This is your Agent who will be sentenced to death for treason in a few days, he was spewing a bunch of bullsh!t as propaganda for your regime. By the way, we have the largest plastic spoon industry in the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ResurgentIran

Mosamania said:


> This is your Agent who will be sentenced to death for treason in a few days, he was spewing a bunch of bullsh!t as propaganda for your regime. By the way, we have the largest plastic spoon industry in the region.



I couldnt care less about him. But what he spoke in the video was the truth. lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mosamania

ResurgentIran said:


> I couldnt care less about him. But what he spoke in the video was the truth. lol



The Iranian truth maybe, but not the real truth. By the way good news, they also found evidence of him co-operating with Bahraini wing of Hizboullah, a terrorist organization. So if you want to take his word for it go ahead. But expect Made in Saudi Arabia plastic spoons to go up Iranian collective asses in due time. Not all Iranians though, just your kind of Iranians, you know the stupid repulsive and racist mongrels ones.


----------



## JUBA

ResurgentIran said:


> The fact is that Iran has an indigenous arms industry



You don't, building mockups is not considered an indigenous industry.



ResurgentIran said:


> and saudi arabia does not. .



We do

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ResurgentIran

Mosamania said:


> The Iranian truth maybe, but not the real truth. By the way good news, they also found evidence of him co-operating with Bahraini wing of Hizboullah, a terrorist organization. So if you want to take his word for it go ahead. But expect Made in Saudi Arabia plastic spoons to go up Iranian collective asses in due time. Not all Iranians though, just your kind of Iranians, you know the stupid repulsive and racist mongrels ones.



Well I wont hold my breath, waiting for that fiction to happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mosamania

ResurgentIran said:


> Well I wont hold my breath, waiting for that fiction to happen.



It might happen sooner than you think, especially since you sound so eager to have something stuffed up your azz.


----------



## ResurgentIran

JUBA said:


> You don't, building mockups is not considered an indigenous industry.
> 
> 
> 
> We do










Mosamania said:


> It might happen sooner than you think, especially since you sound so eager to have something stuffed up your azz.



Oooooh my senses are tingling...not

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mosamania

JUBA said:


> You don't, building mockups is not considered an indigenous industry.
> 
> 
> 
> We do



Don't they are not wroth it, let them keep living in their vanity it changes nothing in the ground. In fact it is to our advantage that they believe they are so advanced. So let them continue to overestimate themselves and underestimate their enemies, the very same Persian mentality that took them down Empire after Empire is displaying itself once more, so let's just let nature take its course.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Frosty

Every time i go into a Saudi-Irani discussion and go through the comments I take moments of silence and think to myself ... Thank goodness the two countries have no direct borders.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## JUBA

ResurgentIran said:


>




A loser will always laugh at the end of an argument to try and cover up his embarrassment, You're out.


----------



## Irfan Baloch

Norwegian said:


> Can't compete with Green Pine:
> EL/M-2080 Green Pine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


you are right
but its not a Vs thread


----------



## Irfan Baloch

*





hmm..

Iran announces the achievement
get the checklist*


1. Ayat Ullah Picture in the Back ground [ CHECK]
2. Murg Ber Amrika slogan [ Missing ]
3. Creativity scale [ 10% ]
4. Repainted 1970s Western Tech [CHECK]
5. Clueless Mullah's on Site [CHECK]
6. Design Inconsistency scale [ 98.99%]
7. Poster Score [70 ]
8. Serious looking fellas [ CHECK]
9. Chance of this Thing working [MAKE A GUESS}
10. SAUDI's taking it personal [CHECK]
11. Comparison with Israel [CHECK]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Luftwaffe

@Serpentine check this Thread it needs cleaning.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gilamard

Mosamania said:


> Don't they are not wroth it, let them keep living in their vanity it changes nothing in the ground.* In fact it is to our advantage that they believe they are so advanced. So let them continue to overestimate themselves and underestimate their enemies*, the very same Persian mentality that took them down Empire after Empire is displaying itself once more, so let's just let nature take its course.



Take a look at your compatriots comments before claiming such a thing.
And you need to stop your obsession with Persians, your enemies are Iranians and their country is called Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SOHEIL

Irfan Baloch said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hmm..
> 
> Iran announces the achievement
> get the checklist*
> 
> 
> 1. Ayat Ullah Picture in the Back ground [ CHECK]
> 2. Murg Ber Amrika slogan [ Missing ]
> 3. Creativity scale [ 10% ]
> 4. Repainted 1970s Western Tech [CHECK]
> 5. Clueless Mullah's on Site [CHECK]
> 6. Design Inconsistency scale [ 98.99%]
> 7. Poster Score [70 ]
> 8. Serious looking fellas [ CHECK]
> 9. Chance of this Thing working [MAKE A GUESS}
> 10. SAUDI Brothers commenting [CHECK]
> 11. Comparison with Israel [CHECK]



You can't go so long! 

I have good responses for you...

Sectarian mind

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## raptor22

JUBA said:


> It sure as hell won't be a bunch or rusty metal welded together, tell me though can this advanced radar of yours detect your other mockup i mean advanced super stealth fighter the Qaher-313 ?!



Still I'm waiting to be amazed by sophisticated advanced Saudi-made radars which we could call them "achievement".
We are sanctioned but we are making progress in our own domestic military industry.



Mosamania said:


> Don't they are not wroth it, let them keep living in their vanity it changes nothing in the ground. In fact it is to our advantage that they believe they are so advanced. So let them continue to overestimate themselves and underestimate their enemies, the very same Persian mentality that took them down Empire after Empire is displaying itself once more, so let's just let nature take its course.



Are you blind? who started underestimating the other side? it was your fellow Juba who started trolling .... 

Welding a bunch of rusty metal pipes together won't make you a radar. You're becoming the laughing stock for the whole world with these "achievements" ​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Irfan Baloch

SOHEIL said:


> You can't go so long!
> 
> I have good responses for you...
> 
> Sectarian mind


I despise sectarian mindset. do note that I condemn the people of my own country many times more than I do Iran or Saudi Arabia for fighting the sectarian war.

but please. coming to the subject matter. I cringe every time and feel embarrassed whenever these claims are made. just look up some of the models and you will find that they belong to the technology transferred to Iran during Shah's time. these missile for example are 60s Hawk missile lookalike.

Iran is run by an Islamic and theocratic setup but follows the model of the Communists with very tall claims lacking substance. I hate it specially when all those who religiously and politically hate Iran come around and poke holes on such claims.
your regime is repressive, shah was no saint he was a pillock but thats the past. move with the time, keep your values and your customs dear dont compromise on principles but please try making friends around.

your country has the history, the knowledge and people are skilled and have potential but need to get rid of the rhetoric and be honest.

the videos and pictures make good propaganda but for anyone with some basic knowledge about military technology can tell a difference between BS and truth

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Irfan Baloch said:


> I despise sectarian mindset. do note that I condemn the people of my own country many times more than I do Iran or Saudi Arabia for fighting the sectarian war.
> 
> but please. coming to the subject matter. I cringe every time and feel embarrass whenever these claims are made. just look up some of the models and they belong to the technology transferred to Iran during Shah's time. these missile for example are 60s Hawk missile lookalike.
> 
> Iran is run by an Islamic and theocratic setup but follows the model of the Communists will very tall claims lacking substance. I hate it specially when all those who religiously and politically hate Iran come around and poke holes on such claims.
> your regime is repressive, shah was no saint he was a pillock but thats the past. move with the time, keep your values and your customs dear dont compromise on principles but please try making friends around.
> 
> your country has the history, the knowledge and people are skilled and have potential but need to get rid of the rhetoric and be honest.
> 
> the videos and pictures make good propaganda but for anyone with some basic knowledge about military technology can tell a difference between BS and truth



I can't accept your point!

Because I have enough knowledge about Iran's capabilities ...

How can you tell that to me !?

Yes this things are only upgraded systems ...

But does it mean we don't have better and far more advanced systems!?

Do you remember what you said about Iranian version of RQ-170?

a plastic model !!!

For your information this so called plastic model had it's first flight successfully!

You can have the video soon!

So should I believe my own eyes & wisdom or your false judgment instead!?

I have patience !

People don't ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

It is a bit saddening to see an empty and childish talk between fellow Muslims. Both countries have made more progress in the last decade than ever before. And I have to concede that SA just awakened to the west's game that played too much with its money and resources for others benefits , while Iran has awakened much before, since both were in the same situation in the hands of foreign powers.
Iran's achievements are real and innovative just like the Chinese ones that no one contests anymore, while the Saudi ones are in a beginning phase and high tech due to market's availability. Iran has more achievements by force of things , since I think if there were no sanctions Iran would have purchased some of the most sophisticated weapon systems on the international market, but even with these sanction and following its philosophy of self reliance it is almost in par with the most recent technologies, and that is sufficient to defend its land, since it does not have any hegemonic aims. Neither do KSA, who can efficiently defend its land, but it is still Dependant on western suppliers, although with some ToT now a days, a positive sign of aiming towards self sufficiency too.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Abii

Mosamania said:


> This is your Agent who will be sentenced to death for treason in a few days, he was spewing a bunch of bullsh!t as propaganda for your regime. By the way, we have the largest plastic spoon industry in the region.


Good, one less saudi/arab. You actually thought any of us care if he gets his head chopped? 

silly, silly Mosa.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Irfan Baloch

SOHEIL said:


> I can't accept your point!
> 
> Because I have enough knowledge about Iran's capabilities ...
> 
> How can you tell that to me !?
> You can have the video soon!
> 
> So should I believe my own eyes & wisdom or your false judgment instead!?
> 
> I have patience !
> 
> People don't ...


good luck and power to you


----------



## Irfan Baloch

JUBA said:


> You don't, building mockups is not considered an indigenous industry.
> 
> 
> 
> We do


this MRAP my dear is my favorite
is a beast Al Masmak right?
it can chew on insurgents like there is no tomorrow.



ResurgentIran said:


> Well I wont hold my breath, waiting for that fiction to happen.


you got a fixated smirk
why is that?
I must say I copied your smile when i saw some pictures of the exotic radars in the beginning of the thread.

specially this one is the best
if any aeroplane flies between these two radars .. they will never miss it


----------



## yavar

Irfan Baloch said:


> if any aeroplane flies between these two radars .. they will never miss it


t
this what will happen when fool try to talk . this is what it get me .when some one who comes from failed state says this about others . but we have to let fools have there foolish freedom .
he doesnt even no difference between troposcatter and radars . what can i say

Iranian made Troposcatter TTS-480









Russian S400

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

Irfan Baloch said:


> I must say I copied your smile when i saw some pictures of the exotic radars in the beginning of the thread.
> 
> specially this one is the best
> if any aeroplane flies between these two radars .. they will never miss it


Honestly are you for real ?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

Irfan Baloch said:


> specially this one is the best
> if any aeroplane flies between these two radars .. they will never miss it



For real !?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Irfan Baloch

yavar said:


> t
> this what will happen when fool try to talk . this is what it get me .when some one who comes from failed state says this about others . but we have to let fools have there foolish freedom .
> he doesnt even no difference between troposcatter and radars . what can i say
> 
> Iranian made Troposcatter TTS-480


I will never dare to call an Ayatullah between two radars a fool.. if his picture can detect planes then thats fine.


----------



## Irfan Baloch

SOHEIL said:


> For real !?


ya the picture of the respected Ayatullah is for real.
I missed that before
and I have been educated about the difference between a Radar and a troposcatter COMS device. the comment was meant in light gest nothing much
I just scratch my head whenver I see the over used pictures of Ayatullahs everywhere.. you just cant escape them, they are in shopping mall over Mac Donnald and of course on military exhibitions


----------



## SOHEIL

Irfan Baloch said:


> ya the picture of the respected Ayatullah is for real.
> I missed that before
> and I have been educated about the difference between a Radar and a troposcatter COMS device. the comment was meant in light gest nothing much
> I just scratch my head whenver I see the over used pictures of Ayatullahs everywhere.. you just cant escape them, they are in shopping mall over Mac Donnald and of course on military exhibitions



This is your problem!

If you get bothered in McDonalds , bring some strap on bombs next time!

Rest in peace !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Irfan Baloch

SOHEIL said:


> This is your problem!
> 
> If you get bothered in McDonalds , bring some strap on bombs next time!
> 
> Rest in peace !


overdoze of even goodness is not good thats all
Iranian leaders be it the godless shahs or ayatullahs are far more aesthetically easy on the eyes than the crooked eyed fat bellied Arab leaders we see.

propaganda is a good thing but today people have information on their fingertips so they can call the bluff so some homework is needed before making claims, I am disappointed since that q313 stealth plane claim.
despite all the embargoes your education and resolve is admirable 
I want to be a believer in real modest achievements for a start will like to see undoctored footage of this system takking out a drone

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Irfan Baloch said:


> overdoze of even goodness is not good thats all
> Iranian leaders be it the godless shahs or ayatullahs are far more aesthetically easy on the eyes than the crooked eyed fat bellied Arab leaders we see.
> 
> propaganda is a good thing but today people have information on their fingertips so they can call the bluff so some homework is needed before making claims, I am disappointed since that q313 stealth plane claim.
> despite all the embargoes your education and resolve is admirable
> I want to be a believer in real modest achievements for a start will like to see undoctored footage of this system takking out a drone



I know ... Q-313 unveiling was a real failure !

But what if you see the real one in the future !?

This is completely different !

Future is fantastic & unbelievable ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MTN1917

Irfan Baloch said:


> overdoze of even goodness is not good thats all
> Iranian leaders be it the godless shahs or ayatullahs are far more aesthetically easy on the eyes than the crooked eyed fat bellied Arab leaders we see.
> 
> propaganda is a good thing but today people have information on their fingertips so they can call the bluff so some homework is needed before making claims, I am disappointed since that q313 stealth plane claim.
> despite all the embargoes your education and resolve is admirable
> I want to be a believer in real modest achievements for a start will like to see undoctored footage of this system takking out a drone


The red missile in Soheil's post is Sayyad-3 which will be used by Talash-3 AD system and it has not yet been unveiled.

The picture below of SAM launcher belong to Talash-2 mediam range AD system which has not been unveiled.

But Talash-2 missile(Sayyad-2) has been unveiled a year ago, although then Talash was still not yet completed, they have shown the footage of it firing a missile at a drone, they will show more footage during the system actual unveiling.
*Sayyad-2 missile*





But here you can see the missile test of equally important and new Raad TEL and 3rd Khordad TELAR.(footage from 2 years ago), although Raad and it variants have not yet been mass produced and we will surely witness more footage during its actual unveiling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Irfan Baloch

SOHEIL said:


> I know ... Q-313 unveiling was a real failure !
> 
> But what if you see the real one in the future !?
> 
> This is completely different !
> 
> *Future is fantastic & unbelievable ... *


*totally*
the poster and the Ayatullah in the background there for good measure.
wish I had continued learning Persian. but I like to think that it says America wont make this mistake again

Ghalti= mistake
numi= not



MTN1917 said:


> The red missile in Soheil's post is Sayyad-3 which will be used by Talash-3 AD system and it has not yet been unveiled.


thanks second video contains 1 minutes of driving of the platforms which was not necessary.but tests looks conclusive going by the footage

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Irfan Baloch said:


> *totally*
> the poster and the Ayatullah in the background there for good measure.
> wish I had continued learning Persian. but I like to think that it says America wont make this mistake again
> 
> Ghalti= mistake
> numi= not


the correct translation is "USA cant do a damn thing".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran on Tuesday unveiled and successfully tested the first phase of a new home-made long-range radar system named Sepehr (Sky) with the capability of detecting satellite and space objects' trajectories.

"The Sepehr radar system covers a range of over 2,500 kilometers and can detect stealth targets and micro UAVs at low, medium and high altitudes while it can also very easily identify and detect ballistic, semi-ballistic and cruise missiles," Lieutenant Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Shahrokh Shahram said addressing the unveiling ceremony today.

The commander underlined that Sepehr could successfully pass all tests.

Earlier today, the radar went under a last test of operation and assessment, and General Shahram said the results were successful and "the information gathered by the radar during its last assessment test today was for the first time fed into the country's integrated radar and air defense network".

The General said Sepehr provides the air defense units to identify hostile targets far from the country's borders, leaving them with more time for decision-making and reaction.

In August 2013, Iran announced that it has finalized construction of space radars to detect satellite and space objects' trajectories, adding that the country is now using new passive phased array radars to detect stealth targets and cruise missiles.

"The executive stages of Sepehr (Sky) space radar with the range of over 2,500km have been accomplished and the point for its deployment has also been specified," Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli told reporters in Tehran at the time .

He also pointed to the designing and building of new passive phased array radars under the name of 'Soundless Project', and said, "The radar is capable of detecting stealth (radar-evading) targets and cruise missiles and enjoys a high movement and mobility capabilities and acts in different ranges."

In recent years, Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing important military equipment and systems.

Iran has locally made radar systems with different ranges up to some 1,850 miles (3,000 kilometers).

In May 2012, Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh said Iran is mass-producing Ghadir Radar systems in great numbers, adding that the radar system covers areas over 1,000km in distance.

"This radar system can cover areas around 1,100 in range and its designing and production project ended early last (Iranian) year and is now being mass-produced," Hajizadeh told FNA at the time.

In June 2011, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps put into operation the new home-made long-range Ghadir radar system that enables its forces to monitor low-altitude satellites.

The Ghadir radar system which covers areas (maximum) 1,100km in distance and 300km in altitude has been designed and built to identify aerial targets, radar-evading aircrafts, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles as well as low-altitude satellites.

The Iranian officials have always stressed that the country's military and arms programs serve defensive purposes and should not be perceived as a threat to any other country.

*Iran Unveils, Tests New Home-Made Long-Range Radar System*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## MandarK

Wonderful

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## !eon

going to install this in Qaher's nose ?


----------



## kaykay

Whoa!! That's huge!! Congratulations to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

thats how we roll in here

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Afridistan

How does iran know for sure that its radar will detect stealth systems?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

Afridistan said:


> How does iran know for sure that its radar will detect stealth systems?


we write stealth on a reflective plate , then we throw it in the air .

if the radar detects it , we've got ourselves a new Stealth-detecting radar 

lol , how do you think we do it genius ? do you know what RCS means ?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## kollang

haman10 said:


> we write stealth on a reflective plate , then we throw it in the air .
> 
> if the radar detects it , we've got ourselves a new Stealth-detecting radar
> 
> lol , how do you think we do it genius ? do you know what RCS means ?



.....................................

Thats impressive!!we can almost monitor the whole ME plus central and southern Asia by 4 or 5 units of it.these early-warning radars are needed for neutralization of possible air strikes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

an article from Jane's defence:
*More long-range Iranian early-warning radars revealed*
*Joseph S Bermudez Jr, Colorado* - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
04 September 2014





Airbus Defence and Space satellite image from 7 October 2013 showing the probable Sepehr radar complex in northwest Iran. Each of the four radar arrays is supported by a possible height-finding array and a sensor mast. (CNES 2013, Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image / IHS)
*Key Points*

Iran is making significant progress in building a network of long-range early-warning radars.
IHS Jane's has identified what appears to be the 3,000 km range Sepehr radar in the northwest of the country, as well as a prototype facility for the Ghadir radar that was unveiled in June.
Satellite imagery obtained by _IHS Jane's_ shows that Iran has two more long-range, early-warning radar sites in addition to the one that was unveiled earlier this year.
Iran's unveiled its long-range Ghadir radar near Garmsar in early June. (Fars News Agency)
The previously known site near Garmsar in Semnan province was publicly unveiled during a ceremony held on 2 June, when the Iranian media released photographs and video footage showing a facility with four horizontal arrays arranged in a square around a vertical array and support buildings.

Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, the commander of Iran's air defence forces, stated that the Ghadir radar could perform well against electronic warfare systems and would be difficult to destroy using anti-radar missiles. "The radar system uses a system that resonates the frequency and can trace targets more than 1,000 km in distance," he said.

The available satellite imagery of the site, which is 15 km southeast of Garmsar (35.133722° 52.469314°), shows that the Ghadir resembles Russia's Rezonans-NE system and indicates it was operational by the end of 2012 after a construction process that took 8-10 months.

The four primary arrays are approximately 39 m in width and together form a square with sides measuring approximately 55 m. Assuming a detection range of 1,000 km, this configuration provides 360° coverage of nearly all Iran and Iraq, the far southeast of Turkey and parts of northeast Saudi Arabia.

There also appears to be a prototype Ghadir radar site located at an air defence base between the towns of Andisheh and Qods in Tehran province (35.707617° 51.074084°). Satellite imagery shows a single primary array; a vertical, tower-mounted, Yagi-style antenna; and three support buildings were constructed between late-2009 and early-2010.

Like the Garmsar site, the horizontal array is approximately 39 m long. It faces southeast at approximately 151° so should be able to cover most of central Iran and the Gulf. Recent satellite imagery indicates that the facility remains active.

Several Iranian statements during early 2011 almost certainly referred to this facility. Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), stated in February 2011 that: "The final phase of research to produce long-range radars is complete and the production phase will start soon."

Four months later, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, said: "The Ghadir radar system, which covers areas 1,100 km in distance and 300 km in altitude, was put into operation for the first time [during the recent Great Prophet 6 exercise]. The Ghadir radar system has been designed and built to identify aerial targets, radar-evading aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles as well as low-altitude satellites."

The third and most recently constructed radar was built 350 km to the west of the prototype in a mountainous part of Kordestan province. Airbus Defence and Space satellite imagery shows construction at the site 27 km north of the city of Bijar began in mid-2012 and was mostly complete by October 2013.

Like the Garmsar radar, it has four primary arrays, each 39 m in length. However, the large openings left at the corners mean the resulting square has far longer sides. A central vertical array had not been constructed by October 2013, but all the corners have dual towers housing supporting components such as height-finding arrays.

The primary arrays are oriented in such a way that they provide excellent overlapping coverage with the Ghadir system near Garmsar.

The differences between the two sites suggest the possibility that the one in Kordestan is the 3,000 km-range Sepehr system that Iranian officials have referred to in recent years.

Brig Gen Esmaili said in March 2013 that the Sepehr would become operational in the Iranian year that ended on 20 March 2014. He expanded upon this the following August, saying: "The executive stages of the Sepehr space radar with a range of over 2,500 km have been accomplished and the point for its deployment has also been specified."

The timeline subsequently slipped. Brig Gen Esmaili stated on 16 February that the Sepehr would be operational before the end of the following Iranian year.

If the Kordestan radar is the Sepehr and has a detection range of 3,000 km, it would provide 360o coverage of all Iran as well as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Turkey and Pakistan. It also provides partial coverage of Eastern Europe, southwest Russia (including Moscow), western India and most of the Arabian Sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Khalid Newazi

Now get a better ballistic missile and fighter jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Huskar

Wonderful development by Iran inspite of the sanction crunch by the West.
Congratulations

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

Khalid Newazi said:


> Now get a better ballistic missile and fighter jets.


The ability to DISCOVER targets is one of the most high tech part of a sophisticated air defense system... It has three layers in Iran... Long Range Early Warning Radars that is already complete by installing 4 Sepehr OTH radars + Spys deep into enemy soil + Ghadir +1100 km Space radar+ hidden spying elements in each and every hostile country. Worth mentioning that these 3000 KM range Sepehr Radars has the capability to locate and expose targets with RCS of only 0.005 cm. It has a super computer processor with complex algorithm to distinguish electronic warfare waves and avoid them. Then there is a middle layer that is fully capable of discovering almost any known targets in a range of 550 and 700km and the last defense layer is different radars with different bands and frequencies and all these beside the SPOT PROTECTION units around highly sensitive sites. This was all for info of those who think it is an open sky over Iran. If you use Flightradar24 website you can easily see which countries has the safest skies in world. 

Now, if you think by any chance that Iranian defense industries and its scientists are naive to make such unique and sophisticated radars without a WEAPON to materialize the DOWNING of target then you must have no military knowledge at all... Iran started 15 years ago, some 55 projects to build the latest (21th century practical) Anti-aircraft, Anti-cruise, Anti-stealth and Anti-Ballistic missiles and guidance systems. at least %70 of all these projects came into existence and finished their tests. The latest of these projects are all the sub systems of Bavar 373. Few has came out of this project publicly but as far as I know, it will be a three layer Long range, Medium Range and Close range Air defense system. It will be better than S-300 PMU in some aspects and equal to it in some other aspects not to forget the upgraded version that might come out soon after the first version. Beside this, google the newly announced "IRANIAN FUTURE SOLDIERS" under the project code of سرباز ولایت . The system will be connected to each and every soldier and can use the camera and sensors of each soldier mounted on the back pack. This means if a soldier identifies a bird that is not Discovered by Radars... it can connect directly to the mothership which is the command center and there will be many central commands with same duty. In case of losing one , there will be a substitute. As far as I know, Iran intends to invent an all new military system that no other nation ever had. This makes sense as Ayatullah Khamenei always talks about Iran being in a route to surpass latest modern systems instead of trying to just catching up to them!! 

Regarding the Better Fighters, I should say... Since Iran is fully under sanctions and even Russia doesn,t sell fighters.. Iran started to focus on its own programs and as far as I know, Iran will introduce a fully tested , operation -ready 4.5 or 5th generation fighter by 2018 or 2019. All the sub systems of these aircrafts have been distributed as high tech projects in between some capable Iranian universities. As far as I know, most of the systems are ready... there are a few that is not finished yet. and the funny thing is that even friends like Russia and China don,t help Iran as they are the same super power non sense countries as USA. I was never surprised when I,ve heard they won,t offer any help. Even in Iranian project of building a heavy commercial aircraft of 150 passengers there is no help from friends. I guess in general, they backstab themselves by not providing Iran what he needs. This way stubborn Iranian will make it by themselves and they will come up as a competition for them in future.... If I was Russia or China..or even USA.. I would give Iran whatever she needs..so I can have the throut of Iran in my hands... 

beside that, Iran has managed to overhaul most of his fleet of worthy fighters and UPGRADED them with new weaponery and Radar and Avionic systems... This makes them literally new fighters..as fuselage is just the frame... with +300 km radars that Iran is producing now for its future fighters or +150 km ones that already installed on the nose of SAEGHE fighters... and new AA missiles with +250 range... It is pretty naive to underestimate Iranian air force.. although it still has some steps to be able counter some F-22 style air crafts... Iran has focused on upgrading existing birds first and meanwhile is working on its fuly scale 5th generation aircrafts that even in 2020 it will be quite competitive... 

Plus, There is a unique system in Iranian dafus university giving valuable lessons in terms of strategy and tactic to existing IRAF pilots. For them to be able to offset the lack of hardware when countering American planes. 
I have read an article by American mercenary military advisers that most Middle eastern armies lack practically when it comes to real battle. They listed the reasons and all the faults come from Arabian culture that lacks..responsibility, principle and initative free mindset... That article praised Iranian, Turkish and Israeli army soldier for having principle and the ability to act properly when they don,t have commander around. This was mentioned the sole reason behind all the defeats Arabian armies had in last 100 years. 

After reading this article I found out that barely half of army strength comes from equipment but the system that those armies are based on. and sadly the armies are the exact mirror of real societies and their cultures. 

Always remember, Iranian leaders are not dumb... They already learned that if they don,t have enough resources to have advanced planes they instead can focus on a sophisticated Missile program... they filled the lack of a modern air force by their missile program... they learned to focus on building highly capable UCAVs instead of fighters.. although Air force has its own use so Iran is planning to build a new air force too... but when I hear of some small country is stronger becoz they have a few F-16 or F-15, I smile if not laugh... WAR is a full scale Capabilities Vs Capability... it is not only planes.. 200 precise Ballistic missiles with CEP of lower than 20 m will be even more lethal than 200 F-16s. 

By the way, anybody of you heard the news about reducing the CEP of all ballistic missiles of Iran from 300 km Fateh 110 and Khalije Fars Ground to Sea, to Ghadr and Sedjil and Shahabs to AS LOW AS 5 Meters?? CEP of 5m!!! that is dangerous..!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

scythian500 said:


> By the way, anybody of you heard the news about reducing the CEP of all ballistic missiles of Iran from 300 km Fateh 110 and Khalije Fars Ground to Sea, to Ghadr and Sedjil and Shahabs to AS LOW AS 5 Meters??


i am not sure if that CEP (like khalije fars) is applicable to missiles like shahab 1,2 and 3 .

what i know is that in the latest generations of Fateh 110 and PG missile , the CEP is LOWER than 5 meters ! 

that as u mentioned is ridiculously low .



scythian500 said:


> and new AA missiles with +250 range


if i'm not mistaken , maghsood has 300km range .

its going to get unveiled pretty soon

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

haman10 said:


> i am not sure if that CEP (like khalije fars) is applicable to missiles like shahab 1,2 and 3 .
> 
> what i know is that in the latest generations of Fateh 110 and PG missile , the CEP is LOWER than 5 meters !
> 
> that as u mentioned is ridiculously low .
> 
> 
> if i'm not mistaken , maghsood has 300km range .
> 
> its going to get unveiled pretty soon



Yes, you are probably right... but I have read an article in Mashregh news a few days ago that says specifically, that beside Khalije fars and Fateh 110 missiles, they have reduced the CEP of most +2000Km missiles with Solid fuel to as low as 5 meters... Becoz for demonstration they gave examples of hitting certain building or plane in Isreal.. I guess it is a huge deal to have missile by that CEP without having GPS satellites on your side, but they MENTIONED exactly that they INVENTED some new guidance systems in which bring those +5 MACH speedy ballistics missiles as dangerous as it should be... I hope it is true... my general perception about Iranian strategic Missile forces is that it is one different field of high tech for Iran so I guess most of these claims are credible to my eyes... Have you heard about the military variant of GHAEM SLV project? I have heard it is capable of delivering a 1500kg MIRV warhead to as far as +12000 kms. Any updates on this?? I have heard they made all the sub systems for this ICBM but they never install it as far as there is no RED ALERT. I have heard it only needs 48 hours to be mounted ready to shoot. I guess if 1500kg MIRV warhead is true then even 50 m CEP would be enough...

for Maghsoud 300km A-A missile, what I,ve heard is that it will be +250km missile guided by multiple guidance systems at once. I guess a inertial system+ a TV and IR seeker would do it in this case. I heard Iranian air force had focused on this very much project to be able offset the lack of 5th gen fighter. I also heard it is a intelligent missile with artificial intelligence to analyse and decide if any counter masses were used against it... the fact is I have heard a lot about it..but if is what I think it is... let,s wait and see..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

i agree on everything u said , but :



scythian500 said:


> Have you heard about the military variant of GHAEM SLV project?


no such thing my friend .

Ghaem project is an SLV and an SLV only , what you heard is about a completely separate project whose name is not publicized .

the missile is capable of delivering a warhead to 5-10 thousand km of range (maybe i am not allowed to say exactly whats the range) which can be upgraded to an ICBM with 11000-13000 kms of range .

so there is no Ghaem "variant" , maybe "equivalent" but not a "variant" .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sree45

Tehran: Iran successfully tested its Skyguard Air Defence System Saturday to shoot down hypothetical enemy drones in the massive drills in the southern parts of the country, media reported.



The Skyguard missile defence system was put on test on the third day of the ongoing military exercises which are underway with the participation of Iranian ground, naval and air forces, Xinhua reported citing the semi-official Fars news agency.

The missiles fired "successfully" had hit several drones of the hypothetical enemy, including the home-made Hazem Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, according to the report.

The Skyguard Air Defence System is a laser-based system to protect aircraft against a variety of military threats.

The six-day joint drills by Iranian army`s ground, naval and air forces backed by Khatam al-Anbia Air Defence Base is scheduled to be held in the southern part of the country, including waters extended from east of Hormuz Strait to the north Aden Gulf.

Iran test fires air defence system | Zee News

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Skyguard what?!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

mohsen said:


> Skyguard what?!!!


Samavat AD systrm is an upgraded skyguard system which uses thermal cameras and a couple of oerlikon canons to shoot down low to medium altitude aicrafts

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

haman10 said:


> Samavat AD systrm is an upgraded skyguard system which uses thermal cameras and a couple of oerlikon canons to shoot down low to medium altitude aicrafts


I was referring to this line:
"The Skyguard Air Defence System is a laser-based system to protect aircraft against a variety of military threats"
bro

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

mohsen said:


> I was referring to this line:
> "The Skyguard Air Defence System is a laser-based system to protect aircraft against a variety of military threats"
> bro


my bad , i missed that line .

lol

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

As far as I know Skyguard is radar of 35 mm cannon beside zu-23 as low air defense system and latest defense layer , and they use optical, thermal and laser and I fired Zu-23 and have seen 35 mm firing but "protecting aircraft against a variety of military threats" is sth new that I have not heard ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## I FLY HIGH

is it a SAM or AAM system , it is not clear from the post ?


----------



## SipahSalar

An old but great article on placement of Irani Air Defence systems.

Strategic SAM Deployment in Iran

Strategic SAM Deployment in Iran 

Technical Report APA-TR-2010-0102
Sean O'Connor, BA, MS (AMU)
January 2010
Updated April, 2012Text © 2009 Sean O'Connor Line Artwork, Layout © 2009 - 2012 Carlo Kopp










5V28 / SA-5 GAMMON launch. 


Introduction/Background
Iran's Strategic SAM Force
Early Warning / Surveillance Coverage
SAM Coverage
HQ-2 / SA-2 GUIDELINE
MIM-23 HAWK
S-200 / SA-5 GAMMON
Tactical SAM Sites
Empty SAM Sites

Strategic SAM Force Capability
National S-200 Coverage
Point Defense
Defending the Straits

Air Defense Issues
Conclusion
Impact of S-300PMU1 / SA-400 Deployment
Notes/Sources

*

*
*[paste:font size="3"]


The following image depicts the overall SAM coverage provided by Iranian air defense sites. Using the same color scheme applied in the previous image, HQ-2 sites are red, HAWK sites are orange, S-200 sites are purple, 2K12 sites are bright green, and Tor-M1E sites are faded green.*
*[paste:font size="3"]

*
*[paste:font size="3"]


[paste:font size="3"]


*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SipahSalar

*S-200 / SA-5 GAMMON*
There are currently 7 active S-200 sites identified inside Iran. The S-200 represents the longest ranging strategic SAM asset operationally employed by the Iranian military.

The following image depicts the coverage provided by Iran's S-200 sites:




*

*
*[paste:font size="3"]

*
*[paste:font size="4"]large elevated concrete platforms was an expensive attempt to overcome this limitation.

Iranian S-200 sites appear to be intentionally limited in their composition. Each site consists, unusually, of one 5N62 SQUARE PAIR engagement radar and two launch rails. For more information on this unusual practice, reference the following article on this site: S-200 SAM Site Analysis .
*
*[paste:font size="3"]


*
*There are two HAWK sites and one HQ-2 site in the vicinity of Esfahan. One of the HAWK sites, as well as the S-200 site in the area, are located on the grounds of Esfahan AB, with the HAWK site likely situated to provide point defense of the airbase. The HQ-2 site and the remaining HAWK site are located south of Esfahan proper. An empty HAWK site is also located in Esfahan, likely representing a dispersal site for the battery at Esfahan AB.*
*
The following image depicts SAM coverage in the vicinity of Esfahan:




Nuclear related facilities near Natanz are afforded a layered defense by recently-deployed tactical and strategic SAM ssytems. Natanz is defended by one HQ-2 site, three HAWK sites, one 2K12 battery, and four Tor-M1E TELARs. The tactical systems were deployed between September 2006 and September 2009; the increased air defense posture may signify an increase in activity at the nuclear facility.

The following image depicts SAM coverage in the vicinity of Natanz:




The Bushehr region, which contains a key nuclear facility, is defended by four HAWK sites and an HQ-2 battery. Two HAWK sites are located on the grounds of the Bushehr military complex, with a third site being located offshore on Khark Island, while the HQ-2 battery is located further inland from the military complex nearer to Choghadak. Bushehr AB is also home to an S-200 battery. There are three unoccupied HQ-2 sites and a single unoccupied HAWK site in the area as well. Three unoccupied sites are situated around the nuclear complex, perhaps suggesting that any weapons-related work has been moved from the facility to one of the various inland nuclear research and development locations such as Natanz. This would appear to be a sensible course of action given the serious vulnerability of the coastal Bushehr nuclear facility to enemy activity approaching from the Persian Gulf region. The remaining unoccupied HQ-2 site is located on an islet northeast of Khark island.

The following image depicts SAM coverage in the vicinity of Bushehr:




Bandar Abbas, home to most of the Iranian Navy fleet, including the deadly Kilo SSK fleet, is defended by one HQ-2 battery and one HAWK battery. There is an S-200 site in the region as well. 

The following image depicts SAM coverage of Bandar Abbas:



*
*[paste:font size="3"]Defending the Straits

The S-200 sites located in the vicinity of both Bushehr and Bandar Abbas provide Iran with a significant air defense capability over not only a good portion of the Persian Gulf, but also over the critical Straits of Hormuz. This SAM coverage, which can be further expanded thanks to the presence of unoccupied, prepared HAWK sites on the islands of Abu Musa and Lavan, allows Iran to provide increased air defense in conjunction with fighter aircraft to protect any naval operations in the region, including the potentially catastrophic mining of the Straits of Hormuz.
Air Defense Issues
The problem with Iran's strategic SAM deployment is the evident over-reliance on the S-200 system to provide air defense over most of the nation. The S-200 is certainly a threat to ISR aircraft such as the U-2R or E-3, but the primary threat which Iran must consider is that of standoff cruise missiles and strike aircraft featuring comprehensive EW suites. Against these types of low-RCS or maneuverable targets, the S-200 cannot be counted upon to be effective. Libyan S-200 systems proved completely ineffective against USN and USAFE strike aircraft in 1986, and the Iranian S-200s would logically be expected to fare no better in a much more challenging contemporary air combat environment. 

As stated previously, the remainder of the SAM assets are primarily situated to provide point or local area defense and as such do not represent a serious threat to a dedicated and sophisticated enemy. Even lesser-equipped nations would be able to explot the various gaps and vulnerabilities in the coverage zones, provided the S-200s could be neutralized in some fashion, be it through ECM, technical capability, or direct attack. This raises the question of the importance of SAM systems to Iran's overall air defense network. Given the current deployment strategy, the small number of sites, and the capability of the systems themselves, it is likely that Iran places more importance on the fighter force as an air defense element. This would explain the continued efforts to retain an operational fleet of F-14A Tomcat interceptors. The short range of the HQ-2 and HAWK systems, coupled with the inability of the S-200 to effectively deal with low-RCS targets, also explains well documented Iranian attempts to purchase advanced SAM systems from Russia and China.

It is possible that Iran simply does not feel that a robust SAM network is necessary. Given the aforementioned terrain constraints in some areas of the nation, as well as the lack of a large number of what may be regarded by the Iranian government as potentially critical targets inside Iran, the Persian nation may have simply taken a minimalist posture, relying on the S-200 for long-range defense and the other systems as point defense weapons to defend Iran's critical military and political infrastructure.

Another reason for the lack of deployed SAM systems could be that the shorter-ranged HQ-2 and HAWK systems are no longer viewed as being effective enough to warrant widespread use. HQ-2 sites are currently 33% occupied, with HAWK sites being approximately 50% occupied, perhaps signifying more faith in the HAWK system but still demonstrating a potential overall trend of perceived un-reliability. Iran does have reason to suspect the reliability of the HAWK SAM system against a Western opponent, as the missile was an American product and has been in widespread use throughout the West for decades. The HQ-2, however, should be regarded as potentially more reliable, as it is not a standard (and widely exploited) S-75 but rather a Chinese-produced weapon with which the West should have a lesser degree of technical familiarity insofar as electronic counter-countermeasures performance, if not kinematic performance, is concerned.

A high ratio of unoccupied sites could be due to financial reasons (lack of operating funds may have resulted in a number of batteries placed in storage) or simple attrition (they may have been expended or destroyed in the Iran-Iraq War), of course, but those facets of the equation cannot be examined through imagery analysis alone. It should be mentioned that one possible source of attrition for the HQ-2 system is the conversion of many missiles to Tondar-69 SSMs to complement CSS-8 SSMs (HQ-2 derivatives) obtained from China. Many batteries may also be out of service for modification to Sayyad-1 standard, which represents a modification of the HQ-2 design with some indigenous components. *

*Conclusion*

Superficially, Iran's ground-based air defense picture appears to be relatively robust thanks to the presence and reach of the seven S-200 batteries. However, a closer analysis reveals an overall coverage which is currently full of holes and vulnerabilities that a potential aggressor could exploit. The Iranian strategic SAM force is clearly in need of a serious upgrade, one which is more substantial than simply producing modified HQ-2 missiles. The presence of air interceptors and numerous terrain constraints do explain away some of the negative aspects of Iran's SAM network, but taken as a whole it represents a relatively ineffective form of defense against a modern agressor. Given the current political climate, it would be in the best interest s of the Iranian military to proceed with a widespread upgrade, with the most effective option being the purchase of S-300PMU-2 or S-400 SAM systems for Russia, or perhaps the more cost-effective and similarly capable HQ-9 SAM system from China. Incorporating either purchase into a package deal with modern fighter aircraft such as the Su-30MK or J-10 would result in a much more robust air defense capability.
*Impact of S-300PMU1 / S-400 Deployment*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## he-man

s-200 is a relic now.
But iran was_ claiming _they have made an indigenous system similar/better to s-300 last year/this year??


----------



## SipahSalar

he-man said:


> s-200 is a relic now.
> But iran was_ claiming _they have made an indigenous system similar/better to s-300 last year/this year??



Yes, western air forces have tremendous experience going against S-200, they can easily counter it.

They make a lot of claims, it's hard to seperate milk from water.


----------



## he-man

SipahSalar said:


> Yes, western air forces have tremendous experience going against S-200, they can easily counter it.
> 
> They make a lot of claims, it's hard to seperate milk from water.



Without a valid video all is bullshit.
I would say even s-300 and 400 are lagging behind western stuff in sophistication as even the main radar of s-400 is still pesa,,it will be aesa for s-500 though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SipahSalar

he-man said:


> Without a valid video all is bullshit.
> I would say even s-300 and 400 are lagging behind western stuff in sophistication as even the main radar of s-400 is still pesa,,it will be aesa for s-500 though.



Having a PESA or AESA is not everything, i believe for a ground based SAM, its more important to have a very strong ECM suite that can fight jamming.


----------



## he-man

SipahSalar said:


> Having a PESA or AESA is not everything, i believe for a ground based SAM, its more important to have a very strong ECM suite that can fight jamming.



Thats why aesa is far superior than a pesa,,otherwise range and power is almost comparable.
The true game changer will be GaN aesas post 2020 though.


----------



## The Last of us

It is precisely because this is an old article that you should not be posting it.
Iran has made so many advancement since this article was written.
In terms of radar, Iran has the 1100km OTH ghadir and soon to be made seperh with range of 3000km. And so many other radars.
Iran now has the sayyad 2 with range 60-100 km.
Sayyad-3 with range of 200km.
The ra'ad air defence system which currently have missiles with range of 50km but missiles with ranges of 100km and 200km are in development.

There is an alam al hoda air defence system with a very long range missile called sadid with is in development.
And let's not forget the bavar-373 will be a system compromising of 3 missiles, short range, medium, and long range.

Pictures of these missiles have already been provided in this forum but not all have been officially unveiled yet. 

This article only concentrates on the older Iranian missiles. Hence it is useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SipahSalar

The Last of us said:


> It is precisely because this is an old article that you should not be posting it.
> Iran has made so many advancement since this article was written.
> In terms of radar, Iran has the 1100km OTH ghadir and soon to be made seperh with range of 3000km. And so many other radars.
> Iran now has the sayyad 2 with range 60-100 km.
> Sayyad-3 with range of 200km.
> The ra'ad air defence system which currently have missiles with range of 50km but missiles with ranges of 100km and 200km are in development.
> 
> There is an alam al hoda air defence system with a very long range missile called sadid with is in development.
> And let's not forget the bavar-373 will be a system compromising of 3 missiles, short range, medium, and long range.
> 
> Pictures of these missiles have already been provided in this forum but not all have been officially unveiled yet.
> 
> This article only concentrates on the older Iranian missiles. Hence it is useless.



Well do you have a better article that is also by a professional?


----------



## AUz

Iranian Air Defense might be able to stop Iraq. Might hinder Israeli plans for a little while before Israel goes ahead and complete the mission---but infront of the U.S, Iranian defenses are non-existent.


----------



## mohsen

AUz said:


> Iranian Air Defense might be able to stop Iraq. Might hinder Israeli plans for a little while before Israel goes ahead and complete the mission---but infront of the U.S, Iranian defenses are non-existent.


if there is an airforce, then there should be an airbase too, and our ballistic missiles will take care of them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## IRAN 1802

AUz said:


> Iranian Air Defense might be able to stop Iraq. Might hinder Israeli plans for a little while before Israel goes ahead and complete the mission---but infront of the U.S, Iranian defenses are non-existent.


Iraq war was about 30 yeras ago ! If u say Iranian defence in front of US is non existent then I will say Pakistani defence in front of India is non existent.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SipahSalar

I think the most important part of the article is the conclusion:

_*Conclusion*
Superficially, Iran's ground-based air defense picture appears to be relatively robust thanks to the presence and reach of the seven S-200 batteries. However, a closer analysis reveals an overall coverage which is currently full of holes and vulnerabilities that a potential aggressor could exploit. The Iranian strategic SAM force is clearly in need of a serious upgrade, one which is more substantial than simply producing modified HQ-2 missiles. The presence of air interceptors and numerous terrain constraints do explain away some of the negative aspects of Iran's SAM network, but taken as a whole it represents a relatively ineffective form of defense against a modern agressor. Given the current political climate, it would be in the best interest s of the Iranian military to proceed with a widespread upgrade, with the most effective option being the purchase of S-300PMU-2 or S-400 SAM systems for Russia, or perhaps the more cost-effective and similarly capable HQ-9 SAM system from China. Incorporating either purchase into a package deal with modern fighter aircraft such as the Su-30MK or J-10 would result in a much more robust air defense capability._

So that raises the question what is Iran doing to make up for the failure of S-300 sales? What is a good alternative? Home made SAMs? Upgraded HAWKs will not be enough since they are tactical SAMs with limited range which Iran has deployed as Strategic SAMs.


----------



## yavar

IRAN 1802 said:


> Iraq war was about 30 yeras ago ! If u say Iranian defence in front of US is non existent .



brother you need to stop responding to every nonsense post .
his understanding of Iran air defence capability is Zero , a big Zero
his just posting old article which is not a wear of anything . ]

look at what he said S200 can easily be countered .
he doesn't even understand that the Iranian S200 are not Russian S200 .
the only think which Iranian S200 has similar to Russian S200 is only airframe and rocket motors all rest inside missile has been totally changed everything even the seeker

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IRAN 1802

yavar said:


> brother you need to stop responding to every nonsense post .
> his understanding of Iran air defence capability is Zero , a big Zero
> his just posting old article which is not a wear of anything . ]
> 
> look at what he said S200 can easily be countered .
> he doesn't even understand that the Iranian S200 are not Russian S200 .
> the only think which Iranian S200 has similar to Russian S200 is only airframe and rocket motors all rest inside missile has been totally changed everything even the seeker


Ok brother sorry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haman10

yavar said:


> brother you need to stop responding to every nonsense post .
> his understanding of Iran air defence capability is Zero , a big Zero
> his just posting old article which is not a wear of anything . ]
> 
> look at what he said S200 can easily be countered .
> he doesn't even understand that the Iranian S200 are not Russian S200 .
> the only think which Iranian S200 has similar to Russian S200 is only airframe and rocket motors all rest inside missile has been totally changed everything even the seeker


not so long ago the AD systems of my city (kermanshah , a western province of iran) sucked real bad . as the article mentions only medium Airforces would face challenge by my city's AD systems .

US could suppress our systems and make their way out to hamedan (again a western city with a much more sophisticated AD systems )

but now , with new systems in place , i dare anyone to come even close to our city 

they'll get smacked so hard they won't have enough time to eject 

let me put it this way : the defense network in kermanshah can engage targets deep into iraq now . any aggressor will be engaged not in our airspace but far from iran and deep into iraq .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

the B373 will be commissioned at what time? 2015? What are these characteristics? his worn? are radar system?

le B373 sera mis en service a quel date? 2015? quel sont ces caractéristique? sa porté? sont systeme radar?


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


>



*This is Sayyad-2 AD System, if someone curiouse, looks like prototype, some years old.
Told Soheil several times he should ad descriptions to his pics....*

*Here final product:*

*



*

*Does anyone know which radars this system is using?*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Surenas

Draco.IMF said:


> *This is Sayyad-2 AD System, if someone curious looks like prototype, some years old.*



Sayyad-2 is not a system, but the name of the missile of the Talash-2 system.



> *Does anyone know which radars this system is using?*



Its unclear what radars this system uses, but an unknown multi-spectral sensor was displayed at a recent parade alongside the system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

They r gonna no longer to use civilian truck in their next talash 3 system.
may be zafar is designed for this purpose.Zafar is a 8x8 tactical heavy play-load vehicle.







already in service,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Talash-3 should have been unveiled last year, any infos out there?
I found some that this system is based on the old S-200 

"
Brig Gen Esmaili said that Iran was working on another long-range SAM based on the old Russian S-200 system called the Talash-3, which he said had been successfully tested and would be unveiled on 22 September during Sacred Defence Week.

"Talash-1 and -2 were designed and unveiled in 2012 and 2013 with a short- and medium-range capability," the Iranian news agency Mehr quoted him as saying. "Talash-3, which is a combination of the S-200 and localised technology, has been designed and produced in 2014."
"

Source:

Iran announces progress on long-range SAMs - IHS Jane's 360


----------



## Shams313

*Iran to Unveil New Missile Defense Shield in April*​




TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli announced Iran's plans to unveil a new home-made missile defense system, named 'Talash (Endeavor) 3', in mid April.
*"Talash 3 defense system will be unveiled on April 18 on the occasion of the Army Day (in Iran)," Esmayeeli said Saturday.*

Noting that the defense system has been fully manufactured by Iranian experts, he said, "The capability and might of the Armed Forces, specially Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base, will be displayed to the enemies again and we will once again see tumult among the ill-wishers."

Esmayeeli stressed that Iran has the safest airspace in the Middle-East, and added that at present 3,600 spots are under the control and monitoring of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base in the country, while the number will soon increase to 5,000 spots.

In relevant remarks in September, Esmayeeli announced that Iran would unveil and launch several new hi-tech radar and air defense systems with various capabilities, including trace and identification of small flying objects, this year.

"Arash 2 radar system with the capability of discovering small flying objects which is based on the world's state-of-the-art technology is one of the latest achievements" of Iran's air defense, Esmayeeli said in a press conference on the occasion of the Air Defense Day in Iran.

He described indigenization of systems and equipment as a priority for Iran's defense system, and said, "Since last year, 4 systems have become fully operational, which will be unveiled and added to the air defense cycle soon." "One of these systems is a long-range space radar with combined frequencies and the capability of discovering small flying objects and cruise missiles."

Esmayeeli also elaborated on the new defense systems built by the country's specialists, and said, "All Talash 1, 2 and 3 missile systems which enjoy the capability of engagement have been tested and will join the integrated (missile defense) network soon."

Iran in November unveiled and successfully tested Sepehr radar system with the capability of detecting satellite and space objects' trajectories.

"The Sepehr radar system covers a range of over 2,500 kilometers and can detect stealth targets and micro UAVs at low, medium and high altitudes while it can also very easily identify and detect ballistic, semi-ballistic and cruise missiles," Lieutenant Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Shahrokh Shahram said addressing the unveiling ceremony.

The commander underlined that Sepehr could successfully pass all tests.

At the same time, the radar went under a last test of operation and assessment, and General Shahram said the results were successful and "the information gathered by the radar during its last assessment test today was for the first time fed into the country's integrated radar and air defense network".

The General said Sepehr provides the air defense units to identify hostile targets far from the country's borders, leaving them with more time for decision-making and reaction..........................................
Source: Farsnews

*Satisfied??................@Draco.IMF*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SipahSalar

What system is it based on?


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

I think so,




@SOHEIL 




SipahSalar said:


> What system is it based on?


@SOHEIL ,
Ans him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Surenas

This is the best and most updated analysis of Iran's air defense systems and the improvements Iran has made in his defense sector for the past few years. Anyone interested in Iran's AD network should read it.

*Iran’s Developing Military Capabilities Part III: Air Defences Section I*

For many years Iran’s air defences mainly consisted of aged (pre-1979) American and Soviet-era surface to air missiles (SAMs) and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). Linking these systems was a radar network also composed of (pre-1979) outdated Soviet-era and pre-1979 American radar. Moreover, Iran’s air force is a pale shadow of its former glory. It has just a few dozen aircraft operational and combat-capable at any time due to a severe shortage of spare parts (mainly for its pre-1979 supplied American aircraft) and an increasingly aging fleet.

Prior to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the breakdown in relations with the United States, Iran developed a large air force and bought hundreds of the most capable aircraft made in the United States. These aircraft not only allowed Iran to develop a powerful offensive air force, but were also the mainstay of Iran’s air defences. The country’s vastness and its mountainous terrain are not conducive to ground-based air defences. As such, analysts looking at Iran’s air defences in the context of a Israeli and/or American airstrike on nuclear facilities have prudently written off Iran’s air defences. But in the past few years, Iran has revealed impressive developments that while insufficient for _preventing_ the United States from engaging in a pre-emptive air strike, certainly reduce Israel’s chances and increase the risk for both Washington and Jerusalem.

The first sign of Iran’s air defence modernization emerged with the unveiling of the Mersad SAM system in 2010. The Mersad is a reverse engineered derivate of the American medium-range Hawk SAM system (40km range), the mainstay of Iran’s SAM forces. The ‘original’ American-supplied Hawk is old in terms of its electronic components, and has insufficient range to deal with aircraft conducting ‘standoff’ (i.e., long way from target) airstrikes with precision guided munitions. Nevertheless, the Mersad provides Iran with a Hawk SAM system that is fully digital and is Iran’s first serious attempt to address the shortcomings of its air defence system. In addition to upgrading the Hawk system’s radar, Iran has also upgraded the system’s missiles with the Shahin and Shalamcheh missiles. Iran has also developed a mobile version of the Mersad system known as the Ghader.

Iran has also been busy upgrading its older air defence systems. It has been upgrading the missiles and the launchers of the (very) long-ranged static SA-5 system, reportedly even making the system mobile to an unspecified degree (the SA-5 is a very heavy and bulky system). Similarly, the Chinese derivate of the French Crotale system, the FM-80, has been modernized into the Ya Zahra towed short-range system and its mobile truck-mounted variant, the Herz-9. Iran has also upgraded its medium-range SA-6 system. Most noticeably, it has developed a more cost-effective and lower-signature truck-based launcher to replace the tracked launcher the system was originally mounted on. This upgraded system, the Ra’ad-1, also incorporates at least two new sensors (1, 2) that combine radar and electro-optical detection in addition to the SA-6’s organic sensors.

The increasing use of electro-optical sensors is important in that they will function even in a heavily jammed electronic environment where radar may cease to function. A similar system utilizes a missile similar to that used by the Russian/Soviet Buk system, the Soviet successor system to the SA-6. This system, theRa’ad-2, is believed to utilize the same combined radar and electro-optical detection systems used by the Ra’ad-1 and a new missile, believed to be derivate from that used by the Buk, known as the Taer missile family (more below). In other words, Iran has adopted a newer, longer-ranged and more sophisticated missile for its upgraded SA-6 SAMs.

The origins of the Ra’ad-2 system are unclear in that Iran is not reported to have received the Buk system from Russia or any other country. While Iran may have received the systems from Syria and/or Belarus (amongst others), the large number of units displayed makes the Iranian claim that the system is being nationally produced more credible. Moreover, the missiles exhibit a number of important design distinctions that makes them more than mere copies.

The Ra’ad-2 and its associated missiles (Taer-1, Taer-2, Taer-2B; no details are given on the difference(s) between the models) are utilized by a confusing array of mobile launchers. Moreover, these launchers utilize different radar systems in addition to the system apparently associated with the SA-6. The Taer missile is used by two different SAM systems that utilize two distinct search/engagement radar systems. The least-sophisticated radar that used on the Tabaslauncher, is similar to the ‘Fire Dome’ radar used by the Buk M1. The other launcher, the Third of Khordad, uses a phased array radar similar in general appearance, but different from the radar used on the latest version of the Buk, the Buk M2. Regardless of the launcher or radar used, the Taer missile has a range of approximately 50 kilometers, making it a medium-range system. It should be noted that the Taer missiles have a much higher reported flight ceiling (altitude) than the missiles used by Iran’s HAWK SAMs.

In addition to the aforementioned radar, there is also a longer-ranged search radar system known as the Bashir. Notably, it is used by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and not the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defence Forces (IRIADF). As such, the system is likely intended to defend vital political infrastructure (such as the Supreme leader’s palace) and protect Iran’s ballistic missile units.

Iran also appears to have produced an enlarged version of the Taer missile family. This missile,the Sadid-630, has been depicted on a poster present at a major Iranian arms exhibition alongside the Alam-ol-Hoda radar. The Alam-ol-Hoda is said to be a very high frequency (VHF) fire control radar that will guide the Sadid-630. Little is known about the Sadid-630 and the Alam-ol-Hoda radar. However, the imagery of the radar and the missile indicate that these systems have already been built and are at least at the prototype stage of development.

While the IRGC has adopted the various Taer missile equipped SAM systems, the IRIADF has adopted a different new medium-range SAM system, the Talash-2 SAM. The Talash utilizes theSayyad-2 missile, a reverse-engineered derivate of the American RIM-66 Standard missile. The range of the Sayyad-2 missile is not known but is almost certainly at least 60km. It is unclear what radar(s) the Talash II utilizes, but an unknown multi-spectral sensor was displayed at a recent parade alongside the system. Iranian officials have previously described the Talash-2 SAM as being developed to serve as a medium-range component of the (very) long range SA-5 SAM system, but Iran will likely deploy the system as an independent SAM system as well.

Prior to the unveiling of the new surface to air (SAM) systems mentioned in the previous article, Iran’s air defence modernization’s success appeared predicated on it receiving a number of Russian-made S-300 SAM systems. The S-300 in its latest of many variants constitutes what is perhaps the most capable SAM system in the world. In 2010, due to new United Nations Security Council sanctions on Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons program, Russia cancelled the deal, beginning a diplomatic and economic dispute between the two countries that has not yet been resolved.

Complicating matters, an Iranian military officer told semi-official news in 2010 that Iran had received four S-300 batteries. The officer reportedly stated that two came from Belarus and two from an unspecified source. Further confusing matters, it later became known that Iran reportedly obtained an unspecified number of S-300s from Croatia.Adding to the confusion, while Russia cancelled the delivery of S-300s to Iran, in 2010 Iran unveiled what were widely considered to be crude mock-ups of a S-300 battery’s components at a military parade.

At the same parade, Iran displayed an extremely sophisticated  Nebo SVU VHF radar. The Nebo SVU is an optional component of the S-300 system and Iran may have received it prior to the delivery of the S-300 battery itself. In addition, Iran displayed a radar similar to the 30N6 radar of early S-300 variants, raising suspicions that Iran received at least some S-300 components from Russia (the Nebo SVU) and from other sources (the ‘30N6’ radar).

After the S-300 deal with Russia was cancelled, Iranian officials announced a project to build an indigenous SAM system equivalent to the S-300 dubbed the Bavar-373. While the claim was not taken seriously in most circles, in late summer 2014 Iran unveiled two radar (Mersad andunknown) and two missiles (Bavar and Sayyad-3) assumed to be associated with the Bavar-373. If these systems work as advertised, Iran may have developed an analogue to the S-300 system. If true, it is likely that Iran received a number of S-300 components from a variety of sources over a number of years to assist in reverse-engineering parts of the system. It should be noted that the Sayyad-3 might also be paired with the S-200 SAM system, thus improving the capabilities of the S-200. Moreover, the Mersad radar may also be utilized for other tasks, such as a punitive medium-long range SAM system that utilizes the Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles.

Beyond air defence missiles, Iran has also been upgrading its sensors and air defence command and control. Seeking to enhance its (very) long-range air surveillance capabilities, Iran has developed a number of systems. No information is available other than the name and whatever can be ascertained from the sole image of the radar on the Najm-802, a new phased array radar.. It also unveiled an unnamed static VHF early-warning radar in 2014.

Two over-the-horizon (OTH) radar have also been discussed by Iranian officials. The first, the 1,000 km range Ghadir OTH radar was unveiled in 2014. The second, the Sepehr radar, has not yet been unveiled as it is believed to be under construction. The Sepehr is said to have a 3,000 km range. These systems will allow Iran to conduct very long range air surveillance and will provide Iran early warning of any impending air strikes coming its way.

Beyond (very) long range air surveillance, Iran has been busy purchasing and developing a large number of sensors, most of them unique and quite distinctly ‘Iranian.’ In addition to radar mentioned in conjunction with Iran’s SAM systems, the country has developed two variants of the Matla-ul Fajr mobile VHF radar, as well as the mobile Alim passive sensor, the mobile Kaihan VHF radar, the mobile Fath-2 passive sensor, a number of variants of the mobileKashef radar, the static Arash radar, the Asr naval radar, the semi-mobile Melli radar, the mobile Kavosh radar, and a number of other unnamed but unveiled systems.

In addition to the Russian mobile Nebo radar already mentioned, it has also purchased a number of systems from China, Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine. Iran is known to have acquired Russian mobile Kasta 2E radar, Russian mobile Avtobaza passive sensors, Belorussian mobileVostok-E radar, and is suspected of having acquired the Ukrainian mobile Kolchuga passive sensor. In addition, it has acquired a number of Chinese radar systems such as the static JY-14. Iran has also developed a number of other radar systems and sensors, most of which are unidentified by name or have not been identified in publicly available imagery.

To connect this impressive growing array of sensors, Iran has been working on a mobile Line of Sight (LOS) communications systems (1 and 2) and tropospheric communications systems. These mobile communications system facilitate the transfer of radar data and *commands between* surveillance radar, command posts, and mobile SAM batteries.

At the lowest tier, that of last-ditch short-range air defence against aircraft, bombs, and cruise missiles, Iran has mainly resorted to anti-aircraft artillery (AAA), not missiles. Iran already has large quantities of the Soviet/Russian-origin ZU-23-2 twin-barrelled 23mm AAA and the Swiss-origin Oerlikon twin-barrelled 35mm AAA and its associated Skyguard radar system. Iran has apparently reverse engineered the Skyguard radar system and the Oerlikon-35mm and added a number of new optical sensors to it. This system, along with the Mesbah radar and a number of optical sensors serve to guide Iran’s AAA.

Iran has also developed a three-barrelled ‘gattling’ gun version of the 23mm cannon used in the ZU-23. It has also developed an eight-barrelled version of the 23mm AAA system to destroy incoming targets. To target incoming munitions at higher altitudes, Iran has reverse-engineered and upgraded the World War II era Soviet KS-19 100mm AAA system, pairing it with the Mesbah radar and EO sensors. It should be noted that these AAA are increasingly becoming automated.

To complement these AAA systems in last-ditch defence, Iran has purchased 29-32 units of the Russian Tor M1 self-propelled short-range SAM and is rumoured to have acquired a smaller number of Russian Pantsyr S1 self-propelled short-range combined SAM/AAA systems via Syria. These two systems were designed at the outset to protect high value facilities and vehicles against all kinds of incoming munitions, as well as aircraft. It is unclear if Iran is trying to develop an indigenous system similar in function to the Tor and the Pantsyr, but such a development should be unsurprising.

Iran’s air defence modernization has become increasingly visible in recent years. Just a decade ago, Iran’s air defences posed little if any threat to American and/or Israeli aircraft trying to strike Iran’s nuclear program. This is no longer true as Iran has invested significant financial and industrial resources to purchase, copy, and develop an impressive array of radar, passive sensors, missiles, and SAM systems. Moreover, the vast majority of these systems are mobile, improving their survivability, and are connected to Iran’s air defence network by a number of mobile communications systems. In coming years, Iran’s air defences will only increase in sophistication and pose a greater threat to any potential enemy conducting an aerial bombardment campaign over the country.

Atlantic Council of Canada » Iran’s Developing Military Capabilities Part III: Air Defences Section I

Atlantic Council of Canada » Iran’s Developing Military Capabilities Part IV: Air Defences Section II

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Lets hope Talash 3 can keep up with S-300 PMU-2 (which was intodruced 18 years! ago)
Noone will f..k with Iran airspace


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> Lets hope Talash 3 can keep up with S-300 PMU-2 (which was intodruced 18 years! ago)
> Noone will f..k with Iran airspace


S300-PMU2


----------



## Cyberian

Has Iran got any AEW&C?


----------



## Shams313

SUPARCO said:


> Has Iran got any AEW&C?


Still working,Soon it will birth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyberian

Optimus prime said:


> Still working,Soon it will birth.
> View attachment 212049



How close is Iran to acquiring one?

I was surprised to learn that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey all have fleets of AEW&Cs but not Iran despite having such a large area to defend.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Any timeline for unveiling of Bavar-373?
Cold launch?


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> Any timeline for unveiling of Bavar-373?


May be this year.


Draco.IMF said:


> Cold launch?


Hope so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> Any timeline for unveiling of Bavar-373?
> Cold launch?



2015 / 2016 / 2017 !!!

& yes ... Cold launch ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


> 2016 / 2017 !!!


 .............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Optimus prime said:


> .............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


>



i'm 21

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

SUPARCO said:


> How close is Iran to acquiring one?
> 
> I was surprised to learn that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey all have fleets of AEW&Cs but not Iran despite having such a large area to defend.


Does Iran need AWACS as a prority as she already has many ultra long range early warning radars entered the network?? Ghaem OTH(+1100 km), Sepehr OTH (+3000km) and many around 500 km radars?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Higher quality ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


> Higher quality ...

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## SOHEIL

Optimus prime said:


>



???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


> ???

Reactions: Like Like:

4


----------



## The Last of us

@scythian500

Salam dadash. Brother what is your thoughts on the sadid-630 missile? That is one large missile relative to the taer missiles.







This comment blow it not aimed at your Scythian bro.
There seems to be some confusions about sayyad-d 3 missile and hat it is. The red missile below is the sayyad-3 missile, it has a range of more than 200km:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

I think yavar once mentioned the sadid-630 missile is double the size of Taer missile (150-200km?), its called Alamolhod air defense system.

curiouse how the system will look like, how many sadid-630 missiles on a platform.

there are so many AD systmes right now in Iran, i lost the overview.
The RAAD system alone has so many names and variants, crazy....

Im a huge fan of the Mersad system, especially the newer variant with the *Shalamche *missile (~60km)
Hope to see soon any news about it, Mersad is also already mobile (old truck has been shown), maybe soon more modern design?

Also I heard some time back there should be unveiling mobile version of S-200, but we are still waiting.
Curious how it will look like.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> ...??.....?.....???.....?....!....?????...... ?



Alam ol Hoda !


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


> Alam ol Hoda !



one missile per truck?
low resolution of pic, cant see.
is it possible that THIS! is the mobile version of "S-200"?


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> one missile per truck?
> low resolution of pic, cant see.
> is it possible that THIS! is the mobile version of "S-200"?



No idea !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> @scythian500
> 
> Salam dadash. Brother what is your thoughts on the sadid-630 missile? That is one large missile relative to the taer missiles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This comment blow it not aimed at your Scythian bro.
> There seems to be some confusions about sayyad-d 3 missile and hat it is. The red missile below is the sayyad-3 missile, it has a range of more than 200km:


I have nothing to add aside the official announcements... It is a little bigger than Taer-2 missile, probably has a different kind of seeker... and range is probably between 100 km to 200 kms...

I'm not sure if this Alam al hoda or Sadid 630 are parts of any of two systems I am aware of being under development (or already developed by this time)... All I know is that both khatam ol anbia air defense force and IRCG space force have two seperate developements at the moment...
I know IRCG has put in charge for two long range and space defense systems... I can't talk about what I heard precisely but these two systems will have the capability of intercepting and hitting aerial targets as stealth as F-35 or F-22 in distances of *maybe* 200 km... (maybe less maybe more... u know what I mean)... and one other system integrated into the first system to be able to hit LEO satellites... It is already tested in simulators and it is very probable it remains in secret until the battle day.. ye eshare oon khabare marboot be az kar andakhtane mahvareye jasoossie amricayee hast ke bakhshi az hamin system bood...

Khatam al anbya is also working on its own system that will cover the gap between IRCG systems and medium range systems already in service...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

scythian500 said:


> Khatam al anbya is also working on its own system that will cover the gap between IRCG systems and medium range systems already in service...



you mean range up to 20-30km? something like Pantsir?
Iran has Ya Zahra and Herz 9, this are up to ~ 8-15km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

Draco.IMF said:


> you mean range up to 20-30km? something like Pantsir?
> Iran has Ya Zahra and Herz 9, this are up to ~ 8-15km


no actually it has a range of 2 to 3 kms... you over estimating Iran... did u think Iran is Russia to have such long ranges?


----------



## yavar

*باور ۳۷۳ در ۲۹ فروردین*


* فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) از انتشار اخباری خوب از باور ۳۷۳ (اس ۳۰۰ ایرانی) در روز ۲۹ فروردین امسال خبر داد و اعلام کرد: دستاوردهای ما در حوزه موشکی، راداری و شنود الکترونیکی خواهد بود. *
به گزارش پایگاه اطلاع رسانی شبکه خبر، امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی از رونمایی جدیدترین دستاوردهای پدافند هوایی در روز 29 فروردین امسال همزمان با روز ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران خبر داد.
باور 373 سامانه موشکی زمین به هوای برد بلندی است که متخصصان کشورمان در حال طراحی و ساخت آن هستند.

به گزارش تسنیم این سامانه مدل بومی شده اس-300 روسیه است و به گفته مقامات کشورمان این سامانه خلاءهای سامانه موشکی اس-300 را برطرف کرده است.

این سامانه قادر به پاسخگویی تهدیدها در برد کوتاه، متوسط و بلند است.


«باور ۳۷۳» در ۲۹ فروردین


* خبرهای خوبی از «باور۳۷۳» در ۲۹ فروردین اعلام خواهیم کرد *
* خبرگزاری تسنیم: فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) گفت: ان‌شاءالله خبرهای خوبی از باور۳۷۳ (اس۳۰۰ ایرانی) در ۲۹ فروردین خواهیم داشت. *

امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) در گفت‌و‌گو با خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری تسنیم، از رونمایی جدیدترین دستاوردهای پدافند هوایی در 29 فروردین خبر داد و گفت:‌ ان‌شاءالله دستاوردهای ما در حوزه موشکی، راداری و شنود الکترونیکی خواهد بود.

وی افزود: ان‌شاءالله از باور373 (اس300 ایرانی) در این روز (29 فروردین) خبرهای خوبی خواهیم داشت.

خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - خبرهای خوبی از «باور۳۷۳» در ۲۹ فروردین اعلام خواهیم کرد​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

Draco.IMF said:


> you mean range up to 20-30km? something like Pantsir?
> Iran has Ya Zahra and Herz 9, this are up to ~ 8-15km



*Khatam al anbya is also working on its own system that will cover the gap between IRCG systems and medium range systems already in service...*

IRCG systems are strategic ones with ultra long range missiles, maybe in service, maybe not yet... CIA knows better!
Normal multi layer Khatam Al anbya air defense force arrangements comprise of multiple radar detection layers and multiple intercepting battery type layers... some special areas has more layers... some parts of these layers are fixed... some parts are moving irregularly adjusting to threats... so it is possible to have for example, 3 system of X and 2 system of Y in Z area today but see it changed by tomorrow... it is unpredictable as they change it under irregular algorithms...

They increased the number of air defense spots to more than 5000 spots not because they had an area uncovered but because they want to add layers... It for sure will have defense traps too...

what was missing in Iranian arsenal was the ability to detect and intercept stealth targets but since a while now, every spot in Iran is equipped with anti-stealth radars and units...

so, Iran needed three more capabilities to add to its existing air defense units... first, an ultra long range system to cripple LEO reconnaissance sats and to hit hostile targets in depth... second, a capable 3 in 1 system that has short, medium and long range capability at once... Third, stealth target detection and interception ... It is possible that Iran already put all these in service... but maybe not!!

My personal perception is that instead of trying to acquire new generation air force, Iran soon realized they can protect the air space and do the air force job by spending the funds and minds in two assymetric measures:

*Normally air force is needed to intercept hostile planes + support ground forces + bombing hostile countries when necessary*

Iran has acquired this capability by :

1- developing agile and precise surface to surface missiles up to the ranges of at least 3500 kms... This missile arsenal can do the job of air force with a cost and risk much lower... the long range missile's bigger CEPs are being offset by bigger numbers...

2- Developing a reliable air defense system so hostile targets get suppressed...

I think this policy will stay in place until Iran can make or acquire enough numbers of 5th gen planes...

Although missiles like Shalamche is way better than its original old model but don't you for a second think that Iran is going to encounter incoming cruise missiles and F-22s with Shalamche!!! They are not stupid to put something in place to encounter something that is way superior... Sometimes I wish a country send its planes to see how these irregular systems work against them... One more thing is that Iran designed a defense network that no American or ISraeli attempt to bomb nuclear sites has a chance to stay limited... They have no choice... attackers must involve a full force war or nothing...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

5 days left until unveiling of Talash 3, cant wait

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SHAHED



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> 5 days left until unveiling of Talash 3, cant wait


Soheil will rejoin in April-18....

u gonna see nazim 802 on that day.......Aesa one





Thanks to @SOHEIL

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

Optimus prime said:


> Soheil will rejoin in April-18....
> 
> u gonna see nazim 802 on that day.......Aesa one
> 
> View attachment 214752
> 
> Thanks to @SOHEIL



Mobile AESA radar?
Part of Talash3 system?


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> Mobile AESA radar?
> Part of Talash3 system?


Wait.....April 18...just keep up ur patience.


----------



## mister

Optimus prime said:


> Soheil will rejoin in April-18....
> 
> u gonna see nazim 802 on that day.......Aesa one
> 
> View attachment 214752
> 
> Thanks to @SOHEIL



that is najm 802 aesa radar, which may be a part of bavar 373 system:





but




is HAFEZ aesa radar that will used as mersad's search radar.
Mersad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran launches production line of 3 new radar systems

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran defense minister:contract to supply S300 AD will be signed and delivered by end of this year*


*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran Brigadier Gen Amir Ahmad Reza Pordastan on Bavar 373 air defence system*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

I want to know what are the characteristic of S-300 AD.


if bavar-373 was better than the S-300 iran have never agreed to purchase this system.its shows that the bavar373 talash3 and are not as effective as its.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Tomyris said:


> I want to know what are the characteristic of S-300 AD.
> 
> 
> if bavar-373 was better than the S-300 iran have never agreed to purchase this system.its shows that the bavar373 talash3 and are not as effective as its.....


That's why they r purchasing it to compare the performance...
Besides ur avatar is so attractive. 





Bay max loves it.


----------



## like_a_boss

Optimus prime said:


> Besides ur avatar is so attractive


her avatar is shaghayegh (claudia lynx) former iranian singer

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

yes. but I'm not here to talk avatar. I want a ser disctution on bavar373. iran will negotiate the S-400. or something else, but not the S-300 unless it is no longer performand system. so the bavar373 and talash3 is of low capacity....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CHI RULES

Perhaps lady is right Iran is not fully satisfied by their Air defense systems, similarly considering better infrastructure Russia must also be upgrading it's existing S-300, similarly may be they are not willing to share their latest S-400 system with Iran.


----------



## Shams313

CHI RULES said:


> Perhaps lady


----------



## CHI RULES

Perhaps she is a woman


----------



## Tomyris

Optimus prime said:


>


why are you laughing?


CHI RULES said:


> Perhaps lady is right Iran is not fully satisfied by their Air defense systems, similarly considering better infrastructure Russia must also be upgrading it's existing S-300, similarly may be they are not willing to share their latest S-400 system with Iran.



i do not know. but if Iran better than the S-300 will need to order something else.

is more we do not know the characteristic of S-300 Iran



CHI RULES said:


> Perhaps she is a woman


yes I am a woman, but its what you can do to find out? -_- it is to talk about Iranian military

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Tomyris said:


> yes I am a woman, but its what you can do to find out? -_- it is to talk about Iranian military



  @Tomyris


----------



## Draco.IMF

So we have B-373 or Talash3 unveiling in 3 days?
I personally dont believe B-373 will be shown in public till its massproduced...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> I personally dont believe B-373 will be shown in public till its massproduced...


A few parts only.......may be...
@SOHEIL will return in that day.......i'm waiting 4 him.
miss u so, @SOHEIL .


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> I want to know what are the characteristic of S-300 AD.
> 
> 
> if bavar-373 was better than the S-300 iran have never agreed to purchase this system.its shows that the bavar373 talash3 and are not as effective as its.....


It is already announced officially that in parallel to Iranian local systems, a bunch of S-300 batteries would help Iranian integrated network greatly... this does not mean Iranian systems are not as effective... actually Talash-3 is S-300+1 and Bavar-373 is something between S-300 PMU2 and S-400 per my information... so it is not about effectiveness... It takes years for Iran to build large numbers of its local systems... so why not accepting S-300 while they are working on producing more Iranian batteries? Iran is under direct threat to be bombed by West, so TIME is Iran's most dangerious enemy and Iran can save time by acquiring some S-300s, protecting its sky while working to produce more of its local systems... another issue is that Iran has a lawsuit with Russian S-300 batteries so If they deliver them although late but Iran can close this source of panic for bilateral relations..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> It is already announced officially that in parallel to Iranian local systems, a bunch of S-300 batteries would help Iranian integrated network greatly... this does not mean Iranian systems are not as effective... actually Talash-3 is S-300+1 and Bavar-373 is something between S-300 PMU2 and S-400 per my information... so it is not about effectiveness... It takes years for Iran to build large numbers of its local systems... so why not accepting S-300 while they are working on producing more Iranian batteries? Iran is under direct threat to be bombed by West, so TIME is Iran's most dangerious enemy and Iran can save time by acquiring some S-300s, protecting its sky while working to produce more of its local systems... another issue is that Iran has a lawsuit with Russian S-300 batteries so If they deliver them although late but Iran can close this source of panic for bilateral relations..


yes you is right .but 5 battery s-300 does not suffirons. iran can use the S-300 improves bavar373. but you have a good version. the PMU2 if anything, it fauit not accept an older version.

you think iran After the embargo may order hunter ?? must be quickly renewed our aviation.

if you has information on bavar373. acquaints us  I hate to see it. it will take 2 to 4 years for mass production


----------



## Shams313

Tomyris said:


> if you has information on bavar373. acquaints us  I hate to see it. it will take 2 to 4 years for mass production


Dear lady,u will have some data in April -18...Bt the full system will not be unveiled...or may be they do..Talash 3 along with some radar or sub system will be unveiled.
keep up ur patience untill A-18.


----------



## Tomyris

Optimus prime said:


> Dear lady,u will have some data in April -18...Bt the full system will not be unveiled...or may be they do..Talash 3 along with some radar or sub system will be unveiled.
> keep up ur patience untill A-18.


April 18 ??? hhh in two days  inchallah good news

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

from now on if Iran gets these russian systems every single destroyed aircraft will be considered as s300 had destroyed it, even if they brought a fly or b2 stealth bomber it will be thanks to all mighty s300


----------



## mister

Optimus prime said:


> Dear lady,u will have some data in April -18...Bt the full system will not be unveiled...or may be they do..Talash 3 along with some radar or sub system will be unveiled.
> keep up ur patience untill A-18.


Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili (commander of Iranian air defense force):
''Najm 801'' , ''Fath 2'' , ''Fath 14'' , ''Talash 2'' & ''Talash 3'' will unveil on 18 April.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

mister said:


> Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili (commander of Iranian air defense force):
> ''Najm 801'' , ''Fath 2'' , ''Fath 14'' , ''Talash 2'' & ''Talash 3'' will unveil on 18 April.


.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar




----------



## Tomyris

mister said:


> Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili (commander of Iranian air defense force):
> ''Najm 801'' , ''Fath 2'' , ''Fath 14'' , ''Talash 2'' & ''Talash 3'' will unveil on 18 April.


and bavar373?


----------



## Shams313

Tomyris said:


> and bavar373?


...


----------



## kollang

Tomyris said:


> and bavar373?


Very good news will be anounced!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> Very good news will be anounced!


talash3 the mass produced?

and qaher313. it will be presented when?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kollang

Tomyris said:


> talash3 the mass produced?
> 
> and qaher313. it will be presented when?


Talash 2 and 3 will be unveiled and become ful operational.also some advanced radar systems will be unveiled officially.

And about Qaher, no one knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> Talash 2 and 3 will be unveiled and become ful operational.also some advanced radar systems will be unveiled officially.
> 
> And about Qaher, no one knows.


mersi. iran does unveiled a project if it is built mass ?? 



or are aviation project?


----------



## kollang

Tomyris said:


> mersi. iran does unveiled a project if it is built mass ??
> 
> 
> 
> or are aviation project?


it depends on which organization produce the weapon.if IRGC unveil sth that means that thing is probably in mass production stage.they at least anounce the exact process of their projects.for regular army (Artesh) it depends on whch branch is responsible.for Navy and Air defence most of projects get done with delays but our experience says they will eventually produce those weapons.in case of air force, they unveil things before the completion but due to financial or technical issues they close/pause many of them.Shafagh is an example.for ground force, they are a group of poor liars.firstly they are very disorganized and retards, secondly they receive little budjet.they unveil every fancy concept they come up with.hell, we are yet to see a dozen of operational Z-3 MBTs.

@Serpentine positive rating, pleaese!  ...just kidding


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> it depends on which organization produce the weapon.if IRGC unveil sth that means that thing is probably in mass production stage.they at least anounce the exact process of their projects.for regular army (Artesh) it depends on whch branch is responsible.for Navy and Air defence most of projects get done with delays but our experience says they will eventually produce those weapons.in case of air force, they unveil things before the completion but due to financial or technical issues they close/pause many of them.Shafagh is an example.for ground force, they are a group of poor liars.firstly they are very disorganized and retards, secondly they receive little budjet.they unveil every fancy concept they come up with.hell, we are yet to see a dozen of operational Z-3 MBTs.
> 
> @Serpentine positive rating, pleaese!  ...just kidding


I think that Iran has to buy Su-30/35. and build in cooperation with russia or china hunter mad in iran. the Qaher-313 will be a good fighter if there will be cooperation with the fc-31 Chinese.

S-300 can be used to improved the bavar373.

you know what S-300 version is purchased iran? PMU2 ????? antey-2500 ??? S-400 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kollang

Tomyris said:


> I think that Iran has to buy Su-30/35. and build in cooperation with russia or china hunter mad in iran. the Qaher-313 will be a good fighter if there will be cooperation with the fc-31 Chinese.
> 
> S-300 can be used to improved the bavar373.
> 
> you know what S-300 version is purchased iran? PMU2 ????? antey-2500 ??? S-400 ?


Pmu2

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> Pmu2


is that true?  We will receive the PMU2 ???? 

I'm so happy

How battalion?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KhuderMosavi

Tomyris said:


> is that true?  We will receive the PMU2 ????
> 
> I'm so happy
> 
> How battalion?


5.


----------



## Tomyris

KhuderMosavi said:


> 5.


5? that's it? it is not enough


----------



## Shams313

Tomyris said:


> 5? that's it? it is not enough


Enough to protect iran until talash-3 and b-373 mass produced...
Iran gonna declare no fly zone for us falcons...soon..
It's S-300....." Seek and Destroy "...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

Optimus prime said:


> Enough to protect iran until talash-3 and b-373 mass produced...
> Iran gonna declare no fly zone for us falcons...soon..
> It's S-300....." Seek and Destroy "...


5 it is not enough to repel a massive attack must be faster than the talash3 and bavar 373 OPERATIONAL am.

and after it will strengthen aviation


----------



## kollang

Tomyris said:


> 5? that's it? it is not enough


Sis, Iran will receive these SAMs as early as 2015.Bavar-373 tests will be done by the end of year and it will probably enter mass production stage in 2016-17.S-300 is a quick answer to our defensive needs until bavar is completed.

Tomorrow, more information will be released regarding B-373.stay tuned

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

kollang said:


> .Bavar-373 tests will be done by the end of year


Already............

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> Sis, Iran will receive these SAMs as early as 2015.Bavar-373 tests will be done by the end of year and it will probably enter mass production stage in 2016-17.S-300 is a quick answer to our defensive needs until bavar is completed.
> 
> Tomorrow, more information will be released regarding B-373.stay tuned


inshallah  pity he is not information about Qaher 313

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kollang

Optimus prime said:


> Already............


Only its subsystems have been tested (officialy).but according to last news final tests are ongoing and Inshallah it will be completed by the end of 2015.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

kollang said:


> Only its subsystems have been tested (officialy).but according to last news final tests are ongoing and Inshallah it will be completed by the end of 2015.


I hoped that it will be promising

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

Tomyris said:


> I hoped that it will be promising



Hey guys. Question. Is the S-300pmu2 capable of hitting all 4th gen fighters? All modern jets except the B-2, F-22 and F-35 correct? The point being Israel can't attack, that's a given. At best they can attack to provoke a reaction from Iran while the nuclear negotiations are ongoing. But even the US can't send in only the B-2 and F-22. If they were serious about an attack on Iran, that would require hundreds of jets. And the bunker busters can only be carried in the B2 if I'm right. Anyway, much ado about nothing. Just curious.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

IR-TR said:


> Hey guys. Question. Is the S-300pmu2 capable of hitting all 4th gen fighters? All modern jets except the B-2, F-22 and F-35 correct? The point being Israel can't attack, that's a given. At best they can attack to provoke a reaction from Iran while the nuclear negotiations are ongoing. But even the US can't send in only the B-2 and F-22. If they were serious about an attack on Iran, that would require hundreds of jets. And the bunker busters can only be carried in the B2 if I'm right. Anyway, much ado about nothing. Just curious.


hhhh. S-300 PMU2 can destroy the f-22, F-35 and B2


----------



## Oublious

Tomyris said:


> hhhh. S-300 PMU2 can destroy the f-22, F-35 and B2




So whats make you so sure?


----------



## IR-TR

Oublious said:


> So whats make you so sure?


I agree. But having read some articles on what it would take for the US to bomb the Iranian nuclear plants and sites, I am relieved it won't happen. It takes some 200 jets and bombers at least. Guess what, most of them are 4th gen, which the S300 can handle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

IR-TR said:


> I agree. But having read some articles on what it would take for the US to bomb the Iranian nuclear plants and sites, I am relieved it won't happen. It takes some 200 jets and bombers at least. Guess what, most of them are 4th gen, which the S300 can handle.


it is a system with high accuracy, a very high ceiling is a very difficult radar has detected mesh and scrambled it over the system and very mobile, it will be hard has detected is has tracked


----------



## Oublious

IR-TR said:


> I agree. But having read some articles on what it would take for the US to bomb the Iranian nuclear plants and sites, I am relieved it won't happen. It takes some 200 jets and bombers at least. Guess what, most of them are 4th gen, which the S300 can handle.



They have enough systems to fool and attack sam. Really you have to delve article about SEAD. The only way to stop fighters is with fighters in the end. Sam is only a help. You rule the sky you rule the war.


----------



## IR-TR

Oublious said:


> They have enough systems to fool and attack sam. Really you have to delve article about SEAD. The only way to stop fighters is with fighters in the end. Sam is only a help. You rule the sky you rule the war.



Dogrudur. But we all know it's a tad hard to match the USAF. Or even the Israeli AF. What might be possible however, and what should be a goal, is to change their calculus. As in making it very costly to try an air attack. Neyse let's hope it doesn't come to that. As for Turkiye, you thought 2-3 million Syrian refugees are bad? Get ready for another 5-6 million if such an attack were to happen. Allah korusun.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

IR-TR said:


> Dogrudur. But we all know it's a tad hard to match the USAF. Or even the Israeli AF. What might be possible however, and what should be a goal, is to change their calculus. As in making it very costly to try an air attack. Neyse let's hope it doesn't come to that. As for Turkiye, you thought 2-3 million Syrian refugees are bad? Get ready for another 5-6 million if such an attack were to happen. Allah korusun.


one case of attack is to overwrite all idiot who will take us in


----------



## BordoEnes

IR-TR said:


> Dogrudur. But we all know it's a tad hard to match the USAF. Or even the Israeli AF. What might be possible however, and what should be a goal, is to change their calculus. As in making it very costly to try an air attack. Neyse let's hope it doesn't come to that. As for Turkiye, you thought 2-3 million Syrian refugees are bad? Get ready for another 5-6 million if such an attack were to happen. Allah korusun.



Hardly. If you face USAF, Iran or any other nations airforce and defence systems would be whiped out in mather of hours. Their technological advantage over all is simply overwhelming for any nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

BordoEnes said:


> Hardly. If you face USAF, Iran or any other nations airforce and defence systems would be whiped out in mather of hours. Their technological advantage over all is simply overwhelming for any nation.


Well what can be done? I mean surely retalliation is in the cards, via proxies mostly. But just sit back and not at least try to build up the defenses? At least the s-300 will helpl a bit. 
Sometimes I feel sad you know. For a nation trying to not be a lapdog, this is the price Iran has to pay. Sadly Iran couldn't chose Turkey's path, in Iran's case it's either being a lapdog or enemy. Turkey has the protection of being in the European sphere of trade and influence. As long as it doesn't veer too far away from US and Western policies, it's all right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

IR-TR said:


> Well what can be done? I mean surely retalliation is in the cards, via proxies mostly. But just sit back and not at least try to build up the defenses? At least the s-300 will helpl a bit.
> Sometimes I feel sad you know. For a nation trying to not be a lapdog, this is the price Iran has to pay. Sadly Iran couldn't chose Turkey's path, in Iran's case it's either being a lapdog or enemy. Turkey has the protection of being in the European sphere of trade and influence. As long as it doesn't veer too far away from US and Western policies, it's all right.


You know those ''lapdog'' talks are old and stupid to say the least, everyone should do whats best for their own people, Turkey choose to team up with West against Soviet treat and got a lot of tech in return which is the reason it has the strongest army and one of the most advanced defense industries in ME, all thanks to western tech.

Now if you ask me i prefer the path Turkey has choosen over Irans path to isolate the country.
I have yet to see a negative perspective of Turkeys alliance with west, and pls dont come up with independent FP, its just plain BS since we have no restriction about it....


----------



## IR-TR

xenon54 said:


> You know those ''lapdog'' talks are old and stupid to say the least, everyone should do whats best for their own people, Turkey choose to team up with West against Soviet treat and got a lot of tech in return which is the reason it has the strongest army and one of the most advanced defense industries in ME, all thanks to western tech.
> 
> Now if you ask me i prefer the path Turkey has choosen over Irans path to isolate the country.
> I have yet to see a negative perspective of Turkeys alliance with west, and pls dont come up with independent FP, its just plain BS since we have no restriction about it....



If you read my post correctly, I only say that lapdog vs outcast is the only choice for Iran. It's sad Iran wasn't allowed to chose like Turkey did. That's the curse of energy under the ground. What Iranian wouldn't like being in Turkey's position? 

I would never call Turkey a lapdog. Turkey has big interests in Western trade and military coopteration. Other middle eastern nations deserve the name lapdog. Turkey has it's own interests and acts accordingly. It's become big and powerful. So it's not a lapdog in any sense of the word. And I agree with the tech etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xenon54 out

IR-TR said:


> If you read my post correctly, I only say that lapdog vs outcast is the only choice for Iran. It's sad Iran wasn't allowed to chose like Turkey did. That's the curse of energy under the ground. What Iranian wouldn't like being in Turkey's position?
> 
> I would never call Turkey a lapdog. Turkey has big interests in Western trade and military coopteration. Other middle eastern nations deserve the name lapdog. Turkey has it's own interests and acts accordingly. It's become big and powerful. So it's not a lapdog in any sense of the word. And I agree with the tech etc.


Seems like a mistake from my side, thx for clarification.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

BordoEnes said:


> Hardly. If you face USAF, Iran or any other nations airforce and defence systems would be whiped out in mather of hours. Their technological advantage over all is simply overwhelming for any nation.


I would say overwhelming just for you.
some samples of final edge of their technology:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

IR-TR said:


> Hey guys. Question. Is the S-300pmu2 capable of hitting all 4th gen fighters? All modern jets except the B-2, F-22 and F-35 correct?


theory and practical,both simulation r not always exact equal....Bt they r tends to each other..
B-22, f-22 ,and f-35 r theoretically stealth system..they never landed them like fa-18 or f-16...their stealth capability level always remain classified...even same for s-300 system and it's capability..
..........okay..u all may have so much good news today..stay tuned.


----------



## Tomyris

xenon54 said:


> You know those ''lapdog'' talks are old and stupid to say the least, everyone should do whats best for their own people, Turkey choose to team up with West against Soviet treat and got a lot of tech in return which is the reason it has the strongest army and one of the most advanced defense industries in ME, all thanks to western tech.
> 
> Now if you ask me i prefer the path Turkey has choosen over Irans path to isolate the country.
> I have yet to see a negative perspective of Turkeys alliance with west, and pls dont come up with independent FP, its just plain BS since we have no restriction about it....


will look after your land stp .la Turkey is not a power, but a dog, at what price and become turkey develop? How many military operation had to make turkey for nato is killing Muslim to become what it is and aujordhuit? , How Islam was to crush secularism for Devenie what is and aujordhuit? sorry but turkey has lost long ago. ta the ilusion of being a power, but look the truth in the face. turkey and a country conquered and submitted by .now west of poluer stopped talking about this topical most important thing here


----------



## warfareknow

Bavar 373 Showen

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

xenon54 said:


> Seems like a mistake from my side, thx for clarification.



No biggie.


Tomyris said:


> will look after your land stp .la Turkey is not a power, but a dog, at what price and become turkey develop? How many military operation had to make turkey for nato is killing Muslim to become what it is and aujordhuit? , How Islam was to crush secularism for Devenie what is and aujordhuit? sorry but turkey has lost long ago. ta the ilusion of being a power, but look the truth in the face. turkey and a country conquered and submitted by .now west of poluer stopped talking about this topical most important thing here


No no no. That's just wrong. It's not mandatory to be anti West. The Western side of Turkey, where my mother is from, is for all intents and purposes, European. Turkey isn't fully a Middle Eastern country. Honestly, it's cultural and industrial heart is in the Western side. And yes, the Ottomans were conquered in/after ww1, but all that goes up must come down. They had a pretty nice 500-600 year rule. At least Ataturk kept Turkey for Turks. It was unsustainable to keep the entire middle east andd Caucasus.



warfareknow said:


> Bavar 373 Showen



Hope it's good. Iran has smart engineers and it's invested a lot in missile technology. At least it isn't compromised like the S-300 system.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jack 86000



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BordoEnes

Tomyris said:


> will look after your land stp .la Turkey is not a power, but a dog, at what price and become turkey develop? How many military operation had to make turkey for nato is killing Muslim to become what it is and aujordhuit? , How Islam was to crush secularism for Devenie what is and aujordhuit? sorry but turkey has lost long ago. ta the ilusion of being a power, but look the truth in the face. turkey and a country conquered and submitted by .now west of poluer stopped talking about this topical most important thing here



Lol how does the inside of you colon look, because you are pretty far up there


----------



## IR-TR

BordoEnes said:


> I love how you show 1 picture of an UAV as if your implying this would happen if US would launch its entire fleet of thousands F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, F-22s, F-35s, A-10s, B-2 Bombers, B-52 Bombers, Prowlers and etc. At Iran abd you would be able to hold them off.
> 
> Fvck off lol.



B-52 A-10 etc wouldn't be involved in strikes against the nuclear plants. Probably neither of the other 4th gen teen jets. Just the B-2 and F-22. And that isn't enough to strike Iran's sites. Sure the US could pummel Iran into the stone age, but it wouldn't happen. Too much risk and sl


Azeri440 said:


> are you serious? have you seen the size not even of US air force but US navy ?
> 
> US navy alone has a bigger and more powerful air fleet than all middle eastern countries combined or next powers such as Russia or China.
> 
> 
> 
> what Israel does is map out Syrian Air Defences and simply avoids them to strike its targets inside Syria from time to time.
> US relies on its massive amount of intelligence gathering to do the same , Iran is a big country and a few S-300s won't make a difference. US simply can avoid or operate well outside of its range.
> 
> Yes but what if you put them in range of the nuclear sites? How does one get around that by just jamming or what?
> 
> 
> View attachment 215761

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

BordoEnes said:


> Lol how does the inside of you colon look, because you are pretty far up there


you care for to npays slave, and we are a free nation and no one is afraid of except allah. been discussed with your master


@ you have not understood is that Iran and a large piece. an attack on Iran will not suffirai we should try to destroy the Islamic government, but the Iranian people and to defend his homeland. the American never take the risk of back in uen war that will go Listen to their expensive and will lasted 20 years .... the only military power pas..regardez suffice Coalision how successful has not stopped daesh. ... then iran .. hhhhhhhhhh

the american are low. they are stronger than for nation subject as you. a great alliance between the countries of the Middle East will deter your america to come in the area ... but you favorite pledge allegiance to him ....


----------



## yavar

Iran "BAVAR" long range air defence and ABM projects shown in national Army Day parade 18 April 2015


----------



## scythian500

kollang said:


> Sis, Iran will receive these SAMs as early as 2015.Bavar-373 tests will be done by the end of year and it will probably enter mass production stage in 2016-17.S-300 is a quick answer to our defensive needs until bavar is completed.
> 
> Tomorrow, more information will be released regarding B-373.stay tuned


wrong... Bavar 373 and Talash 1-2-3 variants are already operational and deployed...
معاون آجا: اس 300 ایرانی عملیاتی شد - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir
Air Defense systems for a country like Iran under daily threat to be bombed by US and Israel is not a ballistic to announce it now and deoply it later... a capable air defense system must be deployed before announcements... because if they do it early and invaders think it will limit their attacks then they will attack before it is operational...


----------



## yavar

Iran Khatam Al-Anbia air dance equipment in national Army day parade on 18 April 2015

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> wrong... Bavar 373 and Talash 1-2-3 variants are already operational and deployed...
> معاون آجا: اس 300 ایرانی عملیاتی شد - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir
> Air Defense systems for a country like Iran under daily threat to be bombed by US and Israel is not a ballistic to announce it now and deoply it later... a capable air defense system must be deployed before announcements... because if they do it early and invaders think it will limit their attacks then they will attack before it is operational...



Yes, that makes sense, but not seen ....


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> Yes, that makes sense, but not seen ....


In Iranian situation, Unseen does not mean NOT EXISTING..


----------



## Tomyris

BordoEnes said:


> How old are you?


stop polluting this topical -_-



scythian500 said:


> In Iranian situation, Unseen does not mean NOT EXISTING..


yes but you have to show it


----------



## BordoEnes

scythian500 said:


> In Iranian situation, Unseen does not mean NOT EXISTING..



Right, because *you* say so. Your average Iranian forumer knows all about the secrets of the Iranian higher ups right. Up until now most of your comments have been speculations, which are hardly that credible. Dont get your hopes up on speculations alone, thats straight up delusional.


Tomyris said:


> stop polluting this topical -_-



Well then stop being so funny all the time 

You should be a comedian



IR-TR said:


> B-52 A-10 etc wouldn't be involved in strikes against the nuclear plants. Probably neither of the other 4th gen teen jets. Just the B-2 and F-22. And that isn't enough to strike Iran's sites. Sure the US could pummel Iran into the stone age, but it wouldn't happen. Too much risk and sl



I know i know, just tried to get a point across. However the fact that USAF got some many goodies and gadgets in its inventory as High Precision Cruise Missiles, Anti-Radiation Drones, Stand-off Jamming devices and missiles, High-resolution sattelites, SEAD Tactics and missiles and etc. All of whome posses such huge threath to Iranian air defence Systems that no actual F-22s and B-2 are neccesary. F-16s would be enough. There is a reason why the USAF can overwhelm anyone, not just because of the good looking planes, but because of its firepower.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Where the f... is Talash-3

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> Where the f... is Talash-3


in evening....


----------



## mohsen

BordoEnes said:


> I love how you show 1 picture of an UAV as if your implying this would happen if US would launch its entire fleet of thousands F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, F-22s, F-35s, A-10s, B-2 Bombers, B-52 Bombers, Prowlers and etc. At Iran abd you would be able to hold them off.
> 
> Fvck off lol.


as I said too overwhelming for you and the rest of trolls. just keep denying the reality.
may be you could explain it to us where those thousands aircrafts can park. and who is gonna maintenance them and where they can store their fuels and ammunitions. sorry to interrupt your delusions but all of their junks need an airport to take off from, to land and to park, the difference between Iranian technologies and some regional puppets like turkey which needs Nato forces to defend its airspace even against a weak country like Syria is that our technologies are domestic, our air defense is just a glimpse of Iranian missile and electronic warfare technologies, and those missiles with zero margins of errors can very well destroy all of American's delusions even before they rise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

BordoEnes said:


> Right, because *you* say so. Your average Iranian forumer knows all about the secrets of the Iranian higher ups right. Up until now most of your comments have been speculations, which are hardly that credible. Dont get your hopes up on speculations alone, thats straight up delusional.
> 
> 
> Well then stop being so funny all the time
> 
> You should be a comedian
> 
> 
> 
> I know i know, just tried to get a point across. However the fact that USAF got some many goodies and gadgets in its inventory as High Precision Cruise Missiles, Anti-Radiation Drones, Stand-off Jamming devices and missiles, High-resolution sattelites, SEAD Tactics and missiles and etc. All of whome posses such huge threath to Iranian air defence Systems that no actual F-22s and B-2 are neccesary. F-16s would be enough. There is a reason why the USAF can overwhelm anyone, not just because of the good looking planes, but because of its firepower.


True. I'm just glad it didn't happen, and every passing day means it probably won't happen in the future. I just hope Iran can build/purchase enough of a deterrent to make it completely improbable to attack. Fighter jets are not going to happen in the near future, Iran needs to keep spending on missiles (ballistic to hit enemies as a deterrent) and anti air missiles. Let's reverse engineer the S out of the new s-300s and keep improving.


----------



## BordoEnes

kollang said:


> Someone get this Turkish pollution away from the thread. @Serpentine



Question: You think Iranian air defence systems will hold against the USAF?


----------



## IR-TR

TurAr said:


> No one but the mullahs and their minions to be blamed for that.




AD probably not in the near future. But Iran can make life a living hell in the region, The point is Iran in the last few years have established a very credible, MAD like, deterrent. I can go after many bases in the region and Israel as well. Sure it won't win, but neither would the US. At the very least, the US would have to pay an enormous price if it were to strike Iran from above. And a ground invasion is just never ever going to happen. I've read many analysts say that. Think about some 500.000 combat troops, which the US doesn't have, and about 10 times more casualties than the Iraq war. By the way, war, including air strikes, become less and less an option with the inspection of Iran's nuclear sites. The world fell once for BS WMD in Iraq. The US is a lot weaker now, and can't start another false war. However much Israel and some of our Arab 'friends' would love to. Thank god for that.

Long story short, AD won't stop USAF, but many other things will stop them from even trying to attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kollang

BordoEnes said:


> Question: You think Iranian air defence systems will hold against the USAF?


No

I am just sick of uncivilized manner of @TurAr .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

Now play nice everybody, after my post...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Irfan Baloch

BordoEnes said:


> Question: You think Iranian air defence systems will hold against the USAF?


I doubt if any country can hold against USAF, even the NATO member countries like say Turkey for example. let alone Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia for that matter.

by the way if you don't want to be banned from the section then avoid using potty language.

thanks for your understanding.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

Irfan Baloch said:


> I doubt if any country can hold against USAF, even the NATO member countries like say Turkey for example. let alone Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia for that matter.
> 
> by the way if you don't want to be banned from the section then avoid using potty language.
> 
> thanks for your understanding.



We all surely believe that Russia and China can hold US air power no? Or at least shoot down more than half of whatever they bring to bare? Indeed, no other country can, but those two would.


----------



## Irfan Baloch

IR-TR said:


> We all surely believe that Russia and China can hold US air power no? Or at least shoot down more than half of whatever they bring to bare? Indeed, no other country can, but those two would.



maybe I am not understanding you guys or our view is too black and white. why USAF should be going on all out extermination campaign.
its strike will be tactical and against a simple target and attack will be stealthy, fast and deadly and it has means to penetrate very complex air defence environment. in such scenario no nation has 100% assured defence against USAF


----------



## IR-TR

Irfan Baloch said:


> maybe I am not understanding you guys or our view is too black and white. why USAF should be going on all out extermination campaign.
> its strike will be tactical and against a simple target and attack will be stealthy, fast and deadly and it has means to penetrate very complex air defence environment. in such scenario no nation has 100% assured defence against USAF



Bro, I read a few articles on this written by ex high up US officials and military experts. Believe me, they all said it would take many WEEKS of intensive bombings. See, you can't just bomb the nuclear sites. There is nothing secret about it. It all starts (this is military logic), with taking out Iran's retaliatory capabilities, meaning taking out it's entire fleet, air force and missile sites. That's the biggest problem, those thousands of missiles aimed at Gulf bases and the strait of Hormuz and Saudi Arabia. Only then can you strike the nuclear sites. It takes weeks of intense bombings. Can't look for the articles now, but that was the consensus. It would amount to all out air war, and 'probably' necessistate limited ground action of a couple thousand troops.


----------



## BordoEnes

kollang said:


> No
> 
> I am just sick of uncivilized manner of @TurAr .



That was my entire point, litteraly this. Some random dude made a whole clusterfvck of comments to prove that Iranian can whipe out and defeat the US army while the only point i tried to get acros was that USAF in any case could whipe out Iranian (or any other nations) air defence in mather of hours if truelly commited.



Irfan Baloch said:


> I doubt if any country can hold against USAF, even the NATO member countries like say Turkey for example. let alone Iran or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia for that matter.
> 
> by the way if you don't want to be banned from the section then avoid using potty language.
> 
> thanks for your understanding.



That was my entire point mate. No actuall country can withstand the USAF, neither Turkey, Iran or any other nation for that mather. But some random delusional dude tried to argue otherwise saying that Iran can defeat and withstand any full on US assault.



IR-TR said:


> Bro, I read a few articles on this written by ex high up US officials and military experts. Believe me, they all said it would take many WEEKS of intensive bombings. See, you can't just bomb the nuclear sites. There is nothing secret about it. It all starts (this is military logic), with taking out Iran's retaliatory capabilities, meaning taking out it's entire fleet, air force and missile sites. That's the biggest problem, those thousands of missiles aimed at Gulf bases and the strait of Hormuz and Saudi Arabia. Only then can you strike the nuclear sites. It takes weeks of intense bombings. Can't look for the articles now, but that was the consensus. It would amount to all out air war, and 'probably' necessistate limited ground action of a couple thousand troops.



Oh pls mate, every once a while some random dude supposedly pop-ups claiming to be a "higher up" within the US army and claim stuff like these, litteraly nothing new here. In terms of raw power the USAF can truelly whipe out any army, there is a reason why it remains the sole superpower. 

Usually the thing that takes most time is the tracking of these Air defence systems locations since they are mobile, but US is well known to get their hands on information they need trough all kinds of means (Bribery, Sattelites, Agencies, Drones and etc).


----------



## Uhuhu

İm wonder that why some of iranian members feed trolls here, if you guys believe someone is a low life clown who just is trolling here, in iranian section, the best answer is toignore him(doesnt matter how much he is hater), like he doesnt exist, even if once upon a time he commented a rational post, still ignore him. he doesnt worth your time and your attention.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

scythian500 said:


> wrong... Bavar 373 and Talash 1-2-3 variants are already operational and deployed...
> معاون آجا: اس 300 ایرانی عملیاتی شد - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir
> Air Defense systems for a country like Iran under daily threat to be bombed by US and Israel is not a ballistic to announce it now and deoply it later... a capable air defense system must be deployed before announcements... because if they do it early and invaders think it will limit their attacks then they will attack before it is operational...


باور373 همچنان در مراحل آزمایشی است - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rmi5

Uhuhu said:


> İm


Are you using Azeri or Turkish keyboards?


----------



## SOHEIL

rmi5 said:


> Are you using Azeri or Turkish keyboards?


----------



## IR-TR

BordoEnes said:


> That was my entire point, litteraly this. Some random dude made a whole clusterfvck of comments to prove that Iranian can whipe out and defeat the US army while the only point i tried to get acros was that USAF in any case could whipe out Iranian (or any other nations) air defence in mather of hours if truelly commited.
> 
> 
> 
> That was my entire point mate. No actuall country can withstand the USAF, neither Turkey, Iran or any other nation for that mather. But some random delusional dude tried to argue otherwise saying that Iran can defeat and withstand any full on US assault.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh pls mate, every once a while some random dude supposedly pop-ups claiming to be a "higher up" within the US army and claim stuff like these, litteraly nothing new here. In terms of raw power the USAF can truelly whipe out any army, there is a reason why it remains the sole superpower.
> 
> Usually the thing that takes most time is the tracking of these Air defence systems locations since they are mobile, but US is well known to get their hands on information they need trough all kinds of means (Bribery, Sattelites, Agencies, Drones and etc).


Well this is the real world, not call of duty. I invite you to google it. The reasons against a war with Iran. Weeks of bombings is by all means a real war, not 'some strikes'. And those some people are retired generals and other military analysts. Think about it. How can you just send in a few stealth fighters when Iran will retaliate? So you need to take out those capabilities too. It's not just full US mights against full Iranian might. Not a paper comparison. Things don't work like that in real life.

Think about it, if it was that easy, they would have already done it under Bush.


----------



## Tomyris

stopped in response to the Turkish troll,


or are Talaash 2/3? the fath 1/2, and najm802?


----------



## SOHEIL

Tomyris said:


> stopped in response to the Turkish troll,
> 
> 
> or are Talaash 2/3? the fath 1/2, and najm802?



Wait sister


----------



## IR-TR

SOHEIL said:


> Wait sister



Guys, how long would it take for Iran to fully understand and 'reverse engineer' the S300pmu2? Who knows who has the software and codes.. Iran needs to make their own version. Even if it's just the software, and start mass producing our own version.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


> Wait sister


...................


----------



## Tomyris

SOHEIL said:


> Wait sister


is a long time to wait, I want to see


----------



## Shams313

IR-TR said:


> Guys, how long would it take for Iran to fully understand and 'reverse engineer' the S300pmu2? Who knows who has the software and codes.. Iran needs to make their own version. Even if it's just the software, and start mass producing our own version.


They have their own coder....own software specialist...doubt? 





look at the interface.......software is not the major problem....main problem is mechanical terms....& electronics...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IR-TR

Optimus prime said:


> They have their own coder....own software specialist...doubt?
> View attachment 216110
> 
> look at the interface.......software is not the major problem....main problem is mechanical....& electronics...



Yeah but now that we get the s300 from Russia, how long would it take to take it apart and learn to make it ourselves?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

IR-TR said:


> Yeah but now that we get the s300 from Russia, how long would it take to take it apart and learn to make it ourselves?


i can't ans ur question....ask soheil...
bavar-373 already based on s-300 with a lot of change and improvement...iran will never reverse engineer s-300 pmu2...just ,will add its special features in it which r absent...personally i think there is no extreme features which pmu-2 have comparing b-373...if there then it will be done

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

IR-TR said:


> Guys, how long would it take for Iran to fully understand and 'reverse engineer' the S300pmu2? Who knows who has the software and codes.. Iran needs to make their own version. Even if it's just the software, and start mass producing our own version.



Under final tests ... all of the subsystems are ready ...



Tomyris said:


> is a long time to wait, I want to see










IR-TR said:


> Yeah but now that we get the s300 from Russia, how long would it take to take it apart and learn to make it ourselves?



We got S-300 from ********* long time ago !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IR-TR

SOHEIL said:


> Under final tests ... all of the subsystems are ready ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We got S-300 from ********* long time ago !



Good good. This news pleases me! Thanks for the info.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

IR-TR said:


> Bro, I read a few articles on this written by ex high up US officials and military experts. Believe me, *they all said it would take many WEEKS of intensive bombings.*


Which we can do.



IR-TR said:


> See, you can't just bomb the nuclear sites.


Not yet.



IR-TR said:


> There is nothing secret about it. It all starts *(this is military logic)*,...


Which I doubt you have.



IR-TR said:


> ...with taking out Iran's retaliatory capabilities, meaning taking out it's entire fleet, air force and missile sites.


Wrong, we do not have to do 'entire'. If you want to lecture to others about 'military logic', it would do you well to study warfare in general, then drill down to specific wars.

Anyway...The process is called 'fragmentation', meaning to render the defense from a unified entity into discrete and isolated parts. The classic divide and conquer strategy. We start off with isolating the leadership by severance of communication lines, like how we did so to the Iraqi military. Then once the individual commands no longer have access to each other and to the leadership, coordinated defense is abandoned in favor of survival and this is where it favors the attacker.

When you are in survival mode, you bunker down and fortify your position, hopefully strong enough to withstand attacks, but fortification also means limited mobility, a condition you imposed upon yourself because if you venture out, whether by actually leaving your fort or by wireless communication, you exposed yourself to attacks.

As an Air Force guy, I will give the air power perspective, not only because I am a Desert Storm veteran, but I also studied US air power in Iraq for my own intellectual curiosity.

The saying is: 'Own the air to win the ground'. And owning Iraqi airspace from the start is exactly what happened in Desert Storm. Iranian air power is no match for US, no matter how much bluster from our Iranian forum members. We began the takeover of Iraqi airspace by blinding the Iraqi defense by destroying specific air defense radar stations. Once the sensor gap was in place, other specific air defense targets were destroyed. Testimonies from our pilots had Iraqi air defense sites active and seeking, but their launches were not focused and uncoordinated. That does not mean those launched missiles were not dangerous. Yes, they were. But they would have been much more effective had the air defense stations were in communication with each other.

Fragmentation can take many forms and does not have to be physical or even long term.

Decoys can produce that 'fragmentation' effect because one or more air defense stations redirected their focus to the decoys, of course, the Iraqis did not know they were shooting at decoys. We deployed radar decoys against Iraqi air defense radars and their refocus created gaps (air corridors) through which we exploited. Where the radar looketh, so goeth the missiles. Later on, as in days after the initial assault, just from the threat of American HARM missiles, most Iraqi air defense radars remained mostly quiet. If the air defense radars are silent, then we own the sky. The air assault began on mid-January and by the end of January, we owned Iraqi airspace. We did not destroyed literally all Iraqi air defense stations. We just destroyed enough and scared others into that bunker mentality.

Fragmentation -- it works.



IR-TR said:


> That's the biggest problem, those thousands of missiles aimed at Gulf bases and the strait of Hormuz and Saudi Arabia. Only then can you strike the nuclear sites. It takes weeks of intense bombings. Can't look for the articles now, but that was the consensus. It would amount to all out air war, and 'probably' necessistate limited ground action of a couple thousand troops.


You are probably too young to remember Desert Storm. What you are saying now in defense of the Iranians, I see the same in defense of the Iraqi back then. Iranian air defense of today is barely better than what Iraq had.



IR-TR said:


> B-52 A-10 etc wouldn't be involved in strikes against the nuclear plants. Probably neither of the other 4th gen teen jets. Just the B-2 and F-22. And that isn't enough to strike Iran's sites. Sure the US could pummel Iran into the stone age, but it wouldn't happen. Too much risk and sl


Please do not say silly things like this. This is classic underestimation of your enemy. You have no idea how creative we can be if the situation demands it.



Tomyris said:


> hhhh. S-300 PMU2 can destroy the f-22, F-35 and B2


And from what video game is that ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

IR-TR said:


> Well this is the real world, not call of duty. I invite you to google it. The reasons against a war with Iran. Weeks of bombings is by all means a real war, not 'some strikes'. And those some people are retired generals and other military analysts. Think about it. How can you just send in a few stealth fighters when Iran will retaliate? So you need to take out those capabilities too. It's not just full US mights against full Iranian might. Not a paper comparison. Things don't work like that in real life.
> 
> Think about it, if it was that easy, they would have already done it under Bush.


In the real world, there is study of the skill of weaponeering.

Weaponeering - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice I did not say 'art' but I said 'skill'.

Weaponeering is the study and skills of engineering weapons to targets, meaning you analyze the nature and characteristics of the target and you design and/or employ a weapon specific to that target.

For example, can you use a bomb to kill a fly ? Absolutely. But that would be a massive expenditure of capital, includes human, finance, materiel, and so on. The outlay would be so great that it would compel the opinion of the program being a 'waste' or 'wasteful spending'. But in studying the nature and physical characteristics of the fly, you develop the fly swatter or insect attractants. In effect, you just completed a specific instance of 'weaponeering'.

The anti-radiation missile is a specific instance of weaponeering. The bow and arrow is a specific instance of weaponeering. If the target is a cluster of electrical transformers that service a city, there is no need for precision munitions, or even a single 'smart' bomb, when a few 'dumb' bombs can do just enough damage to deny the city a few hours of electricity. Weaponeering is not restricted to technology but also includes more intelligent usages of current weapons.

The advantages of weaponeering is reduced cost in relation to benefits. Weaponeering reduces the odds of collateral damages and the need for repeated strikes against a target. For example, if intelligence revealed that enemy fighters are secured in enclosed hardened shelters, a couple of 'smart' munitions can be used to damage the shelter doors to prevent them from opening, effectively trapped the enemy fighter inside the shelter. Preventing the enemy fighter from taking off is 99% as good as damaging it.

Troop concentration on land is not the same as troop concentration at sea. On land, troops can be dispersed, even on an individual level, so 'carpet bombing' is pretty much a necessity against troop masses on land. But against a ship carrying troops, a few precision munitions to disable the ship from moving will be enough to trap that mass of troops from contributing to the war effort. This is weaponeering.

US air power have come a long way since Desert Storm. We made a lot of mistakes, from technical to all the way up to policy. But we have not been idle, if anything, we have been very busy in finding ways to improve our weaponeering. If there is a shooting war between US and Iran, it *WILL* be Desert Storm _redux[/]._


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> Please do not say silly things like this. This is classic underestimation of your enemy. You have no idea how creative we can be if the situation demands it.


Exactly!!



gambit said:


> Later on, as in days after the initial assault, just from the threat of American HARM missiles, most Iraqi air defense radars remained mostly quiet. If the air defense radars are silent, then we own the sky.


what if every air defense unit is equipped with systems that are linked to passive radars with no radiation?



gambit said:


> We start off with isolating the leadership by severance of communication lines, like how we did so to the Iraqi military


Do you really think Iranian commanders never heard of your Technics and only you did!!? All Iranian defense and command & control units are linked through both coded links, wireless, optic fibers and hardcore wires... They are also trained and programmed to work independently in case of lose of communications... there are protocol for that... you mistaken Iranian structure with Arab ones who lack independent decision making capability due to their tribal and cultural bullhsit... Why Arabs lose wars?

IR-TR is not expressing his opinion, it is a known fact discussed many times:
U.S. Attack on Iran Would Take Hundreds of Planes, Ships, and Missiles | WIRED
Bombing Iran Is a Terrible Idea — War Is Boring — Medium



gambit said:


> Iranian air defense of today is barely better than what Iraq had.


No COMMENT!!

*Gamboo says: Weaponeering is the study and skills of engineering weapons to targets, meaning you analyze the nature and characteristics of the target and you design and/or employ a weapon specific to that target. *
Exactly!! why do you think you are the only one who have this skill??

Look child, you see your capabilities but under estimate your enemy at the same time... One of the main reason US and ISrael don't risk to start a war with Iran is because Iran has created an environment that even US has no idea what will be expecting them in Iran if attacked... another reason is that US knows for sure that neither Iran is Iraq, nor Iran will leave US to hit and go... They fear the regional and global consequences might arise after they hit Iran... They never can kill all Iranian peoples and if they do this stupidity, then whenever and where ever all US and Israeli citizens going they most be aware that Iranians will hunt them down... They will create a up to the end of times problem for themselves called Iranian revenge... Even today with no war, majority of Iranians are angry with US policies let aside the fact in case of war what they do... Before talking about equipment, you must take into account facts that Iranians are warrior, not fearful people who happily die for their country and their beliefs... this is a problem no power in world can deal with it if triggered...

US and West in general are famous for having a normal procedure of trying to overthrown every country that does not obey that and is independent with its interests... they are known to not hesitate a minute to attack who ever appose them... Have you ever asked yourself.. honestly... have you ever asked yourself,.,. while less dangerous enemies of US so called Interests 10000 miles away from your land were invaded when they started to appose US, why the hell it took them soooooooooooooooo long (more than 36 years now!!) to do it with Iran and get rid it once and for all???
Seriously, somebody give me an answer...please spare us from diplomatic solutions and bull cake...

Thanks God US commanders and leaders are not as dumb in analysis as yours... you are just a pilot that performs what your commanders telling you...more like a worker that obey dictated orders of your masters... that,s it... you are no analyst..

One expert theorist like yourself, that does not yet know that:

1- Wars has changed into modern forms... Modern as a strong classic army can never get what it wants from a small asymmetric rebels let aside, Millions of Iranians and their allies who are ten time more trained and armed...

2- You can not base your plans and mind on battles happened decades ago, as no two enemy are alike and today's capabilities are not the same as yesterday...

3- Whatever you know form your opponent capabilities and possible actions, it is possible that your opponent also knows about your capabilities and possible actions and take care of it...

You talk like you,re planing a hide and seek game for your kids.... War with an unpredictable opponent like Iran is not a top gun game or hollywood star wars movies that US always wins!!!!

so please act like a good veteran of foreign invasion (and not a veteran of defending your land) and go get your pension and retell us your heroic stories so we have some fun....

Please spare us from your heroic Call of Duty, Top Gun game-like plans and bluffs... There is a reason why you,re not a US commander but a veteran pilot... Think about it boy...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> what if every air defense unit is equipped with systems that are linked to passive radars with no radiation?


There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar. And please use the search feature on this forum where I explained why. I see no need to address the rest of your post.


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar. And please use the search feature on this forum where I explained why. I see no need to address the rest of your post.


Because you are so much irrelevant that want to listen to yourself only... look veteran war start warrior, whatever you know about your enemy, give a slight chance that your enemy also knows about you and plan a Weaponeering and counter measures...
and I would be really happy if you as a very skilled theorist enlighten me with your logical answers to my doubts... that would be a very civilized conversation...



gambit said:


> There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar. And please use the search feature on this forum where I explained why. I see no need to address the rest of your post.


Passive radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> Exactly!! why do you think you are the only one who have this skill??


Did I say the US is the only one to have this skill ? 

But here is why your argument failed...

Weaponeering is limited to your available assets and that means the greater the variations of your weapons stock, the greater your flexibility in deployment. Against US, Iran will be forced to take a defensive posture, which mean Iranian air defense assets will *NOT* know the precise time and nature of their attackers, which could be bombs or decoys.

Advantage -- US.



scythian500 said:


> Passive radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And I bet you did not read the details of that wiki source, child.


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> Did I say the US is the only one to have this skill ?
> 
> But here is why your argument failed...
> 
> Weaponeering is limited to your available assets and that means the greater the variations of your weapons stock, the greater your flexibility in deployment. Against US, Iran will be forced to take a defensive posture, which mean Iranian air defense assets will *NOT* know the precise time and nature of their attackers, which could be bombs or decoys.
> 
> Advantage -- US.
> 
> 
> And I bet you did not read the details of that wiki source, child.


You did not say US is the only one who has it.. but you said it like it is only your advantage and others does not think about!!

Iran is using into-depth spy system that every action will be reported immediately... Iran has also developed OTH and ULtra long range radar systems specifically for knowing any stupid moves in advance..and Iranian forces are for alert for long time and ready... Imagine you try to fly your herd of B-2 or whatever... don't you think Iran can see them around 3000 KMs beyond its borders? Do you think Iranians long range radars are focused on ISIS fighters!!? 

US has lost its element of surprise years ago when Iran had not current capabilities... now, imagine even a few minute head on awareness what can do in a defensive war let aside hours of alert time space... 

and tell one thing, why when I bother myself asking you nice questions and express my doubts, you don't act civilized and try to convince me? Don't tell me I'm not the one to be convinced... I,m Iranian and you,re talking about my country

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BordoEnes

gambit said:


> Which we can do.
> 
> 
> Not yet.
> 
> 
> Which I doubt you have.
> 
> 
> Wrong, we do not have to do 'entire'. If you want to lecture to others about 'military logic', it would do you well to study warfare in general, then drill down to specific wars.
> 
> Anyway...The process is called 'fragmentation', meaning to render the defense from a unified entity into discrete and isolated parts. The classic divide and conquer strategy. We start off with isolating the leadership by severance of communication lines, like how we did so to the Iraqi military. Then once the individual commands no longer have access to each other and to the leadership, coordinated defense is abandoned in favor of survival and this is where it favors the attacker.
> 
> When you are in survival mode, you bunker down and fortify your position, hopefully strong enough to withstand attacks, but fortification also means limited mobility, a condition you imposed upon yourself because if you venture out, whether by actually leaving your fort or by wireless communication, you exposed yourself to attacks.
> 
> As an Air Force guy, I will give the air power perspective, not only because I am a Desert Storm veteran, but I also studied US air power in Iraq for my own intellectual curiosity.
> 
> The saying is: 'Own the air to win the ground'. And owning Iraqi airspace from the start is exactly what happened in Desert Storm. Iranian air power is no match for US, no matter how much bluster from our Iranian forum members. We began the takeover of Iraqi airspace by blinding the Iraqi defense by destroying specific air defense radar stations. Once the sensor gap was in place, other specific air defense targets were destroyed. Testimonies from our pilots had Iraqi air defense sites active and seeking, but their launches were not focused and uncoordinated. That does not mean those launched missiles were not dangerous. Yes, they were. But they would have been much more effective had the air defense stations were in communication with each other.
> 
> Fragmentation can take many forms and does not have to be physical or even long term.
> 
> Decoys can produce that 'fragmentation' effect because one or more air defense stations redirected their focus to the decoys, of course, the Iraqis did not know they were shooting at decoys. We deployed radar decoys against Iraqi air defense radars and their refocus created gaps (air corridors) through which we exploited. Where the radar looketh, so goeth the missiles. Later on, as in days after the initial assault, just from the threat of American HARM missiles, most Iraqi air defense radars remained mostly quiet. If the air defense radars are silent, then we own the sky. The air assault began on mid-January and by the end of January, we owned Iraqi airspace. We did not destroyed literally all Iraqi air defense stations. We just destroyed enough and scared others into that bunker mentality.
> 
> Fragmentation -- it works.
> 
> 
> You are probably too young to remember Desert Storm. What you are saying now in defense of the Iranians, I see the same in defense of the Iraqi back then. Iranian air defense of today is barely better than what Iraq had.
> 
> 
> Please do not say silly things like this. This is classic underestimation of your enemy. You have no idea how creative we can be if the situation demands it.
> 
> 
> And from what video game is that ?



Interesting, probably the most short yet extremely detailed explanation on how USAF gained Air superiority in Iraq so fast. You say you were an "Air Force Guy" meaning you where a pilot or mechanic of some sort?



scythian500 said:


> You did not say US is the only one who has it.. but you said it like it is only your advantage and others does not think about!!
> 
> Iran is using into-depth spy system that every action will be reported immediately... Iran has also developed OTH and ULtra long range radar systems specifically for knowing any stupid moves in advance..and Iranian forces are for alert for long time and ready... Imagine you try to fly your herd of B-2 or whatever... don't you think Iran can see them around 3000 KMs beyond its borders? Do you think Iranians long range radars are focused on ISIS fighters!!?
> 
> US has lost its element of surprise years ago when Iran had not current capabilities... now, imagine even a few minute head on awareness what can do in a defensive war let aside hours of alert time space...
> 
> and tell one thing, why when I bother myself asking you nice questions and express my doubts, you don't act civilized and try to convince me? Don't tell me I'm not the one to be convinced... I,m Iranian and you,re talking about my country



Mate, so what if you build some long range radar. Are you basing your whole argument around this? Merely because you build some radars doesnt mean you can render practicly the entire USAF useless, thats truelly laughable. The B-2s and F-22 all in their own rights are build so it could prevent being detected by these radars, meaning your entire argument is based around the delusional idea that Iran would be able to track and find any US aircraft anytime and anywere. (And even if they could do this, how would they even answer to an Armada of USAF fighers) 

We dont need to discuss any tactics and strategies in this discussion, its pointless to argue since the raw US airforce power would be enough to render any Iranian air defence useless.


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> Did I say the US is the only one to have this skill ?
> 
> But here is why your argument failed...
> 
> Weaponeering is limited to your available assets and that means the greater the variations of your weapons stock, the greater your flexibility in deployment.* Against US, Iran will be forced to take a defensive posture*, which mean Iranian air defense assets will *NOT* know the precise time and nature of their attackers, which could be bombs or decoys.
> 
> Advantage -- US.


That's the main problem with your war theories. that you just attack and we just defend, till our forces become ineffective.
you didn't count what we will do, and what capabilities we have acquired to counter your technologies.
that's how you managed to loose your top secret assets (RQ170) to Iran, intact. your own propaganda of superior tech fooled yourself.
the same thing happened to Israelis, they couldn't Imagine their super duper army which was ranked 4th in the world and defeated the whole Arabs in 6 days, would be defeated against Hezbollah, but after 33 days of war they retreated without reaching any of their goals, but lost a lot, their legendary ships and tanks were ruined. they had created a legend about Merkva (due to their delusion of superior tech) yet Hezbollah turned that to their graveyards. their most hope turned into their last hope.

for whatever weapon that you have, we have acquired it's counter, symmetric or asymmetric; yet you haven't done the same, cause firstly you can't (due to technical problems) and secondly your arrogance and pride wont let you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

BordoEnes said:


> Interesting, probably the most short yet extremely detailed explanation on how USAF gained Air superiority in Iraq so fast. You say you were an "Air Force Guy" meaning you where a pilot or mechanic of some sort?
> 
> 
> 
> Mate, so what if you build some long range radar. Are you basing your whole argument around this? Merely because you build some radars doesnt mean you can render practicly the entire USAF useless, thats truelly laughable. The B-2s and F-22 all in their own rights are build so it could prevent being detected by these radars, meaning your entire argument is based around the delusional idea that Iran would be able to track and find any US aircraft anytime and anywere. (And even if they could do this, how would they even answer to an Armada of USAF fighers)
> 
> We dont need to discuss any tactics and strategies in this discussion, its pointless to argue since the raw US airforce power would be enough to render any Iranian air defence useless.



It is operated by No. 1 Radar Surveillance Unit of the Royal Australian Air Force. Jindalee is amultistatic radar (multiple-receiver) system using OTH-B, allowing it to have both long range *as well as anti-stealth capabilities*. It has an official range of 3,000 kilometres (1,900 mi), but in 1997 the prototype was able to detect *missile* launches byChina[11] over *5,500 kilometres *(3,400 mi) away.

an Iranian topic again and here
Turks coming like obsessed hawks!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gau8av

BordoEnes said:


> or mechanic of some sort?


he's a former f-16 and f-111 Aardvark pilot I think. 

------------------------------------------------------

big thread, haven't gone thru all of it but quick question: what's the status of the bavar 373 now that the Russians will be supplying the S300s after all ? 

@SOHEIL @haman10 @yavar @Serpentine

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar and I bet you did not read the details of that wiki source, child.



*Passive Radars:*

*Advantages and disadvantages[edit]*
Advocates of the technology cite the following advantages:


Lower procurement cost
Lower costs of operation and maintenance, due to the lack of transmitter and moving parts
Covert operation, including no need for frequency allocations
Physically small and hence easily deployed in places where conventional radars cannot be
Capabilities against stealth aircraft due to the frequency bands and multistatic geometries employed[3]
Rapid updates, typically once a second
Difficulty of jamming
Resilience to anti-radiation missiles.

*10 Shahrivar Passive Radar:*
جهان نيوز - رونمایی از سامانه راداری پسیو «۱۰شهریور»
رونمایی از چند سامانه همزمان با روز ارتش
رونمایی از سامانه راداری پسیو «۱۰شهریور»
Iran showcases domestically-developed defense systems (PHOTO)
Iran Showcases Domestically-Developed Defense Systems

Alim radar system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*Alim* is the first Iranian passive radar. Passive radars do not transmit waves and instead, detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals.
Alim is cheaper and has less maintenance cost than normal radars because it doesn't have transmitter and movable mechanical parts. Although it needs high processing power because it has to do six levels of processing to track a target. Other advantages include the ability to detect low RCS stealth targets in low altitudes. Also as it doesn't transmit anything, it is not possible to destroy it using anti radiation missiles such as American AGM-88 HARM thus it can be deployed near the enemy lines.

There are many Iranian radars with stealth detection ability and very powerful ECCM capabilities:

For example: I can recall one Iranian Stealth detection radar:

*Matla - ul-fajr 2 Radar:*

State-owned Mashregh News reported that Matla-ul-fajr 2 is a solid state 3D radar operating in VHF band. Due to the nature of its frequency, it can detect low-Radar cross-section targets such as stealth aircraft and cruise missiles. The range of the radar is 480 kilometres (300 mi) and it uses two separate channels for detection and is installed on the back of heavy trucks to enhance mobility. This radar won the first place in Kwarazmi International Festival.[1]

I don't claim Iran will be able to shoot down all B-2 and F-22s when attacking Iran but I,m sure that, first, Iran can detect them soon enough to prepare for it.. second, They can shoot significant numbers of them...

Btw, Block Buster bombs are too heavy to be able to be carried by planes other than B-2... which we have done a lot for this specific bird!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

gau8av said:


> he's a former f-16 and f-111 Aardvark pilot I think.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> big thread, haven't gone thru all of it but quick question: what's the status of the bavar 373 now that the Russians will be supplying the S300s after all ?


It's in the testing phase, probably takes an year to be unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

scythian500 said:


> *Matla - ul-fajr 2 Radar:*
> 
> State-owned Mashregh News reported that Matla-ul-fajr 2 is a solid state 3D radar operating in VHF band. Due to the nature of its frequency, it can detect low-Radar cross-section targets such as stealth aircraft and cruise missiles. The range of the radar is 480 kilometres (300 mi) and it uses two separate channels for detection and is installed on the back of heavy trucks to enhance mobility. This radar won the first place in Kwarazmi International Festival.[1]
> 
> I don't claim Iran will be able to shoot down all B-2 and F-22s when attacking Iran but I,m sure that, first, Iran can detect them soon enough to prepare for it.. second, They can shoot significant numbers of them...
> 
> Btw, Block Buster bombs are too heavy to be able to be carried by planes other than B-2... which we have done a lot for this specific bird!!


dude i'm a fan of that...awesome early warning radar.awesome mobility and design too.






malta ul fazr-1

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

Optimus prime said:


> du
> 
> dude i'm a fan of that...awesome early warning radar.awesome mobility and design too.


Yes, that is very capable radar system... But matla ul fajr 2 is much more sophisticated than the 1 version... ویژگی ها خاص رادار مطلع الفجر 2 - مشرق نیوز | mashreghnews.ir
There are a few photos of system and its coverage area:

There are other stealth detection radars developed by Iran... Let us not forget ER/O systems that can detect B-2 easily and they did it many times in Eastern borders of Iran with other spy planes like U-2s.... did u know not many advanced countries can build such passive radars?? despite its advantages it has very state of the art sensitive electronics and very sophisticated processing computers and algorithms..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

scythian500 said:


> I don't claim Iran will be able to shoot down all B-2 and F-22s when attacking Iran but I,m sure that, first, Iran can detect them soon enough to prepare for it.. second, They can shoot significant numbers of them...


third, there will be no airport for them to take off or land (in case of remaining ones).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

mohsen said:


> third, there will be no airport for them to take off or land (in case of remaining ones).


Yes, indeed... but in case of B-2 bombers they will take off from distant areas, probably Missouri in US... but no matter from where they take off, Iranians developed tailored surprises for this special kind of plane... B-2 can be hit very easily if tracked.. This plane's major defense against AA missiles is their stealth and high alt which means they can evade incoming missiles as they are very lazy planes with limited maneuverability

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

malta-ul-fajr and fateh radar,r they same?


----------



## rmi5

SOHEIL said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> Yes, indeed... but in case of B-2 bombers they will take off from distant areas, probably Missouri in US... but no matter from where they take off, Iranians developed tailored surprises for this special kind of plane... B-2 can be hit very easily if tracked.. This plane's major defense against AA missiles is their stealth and high alt which means they can evade incoming missiles as they are very lazy planes with limited maneuverability


my brother .... scythian500 arete to answer these troll. you must not tell them the country's ability to defend itself. we must hide our defense system. he will sign an agreement. it is lost it's over. leaves fantasized about their capacity.

the more you answer them and it will continue.

I have a question my brother. has risen to emabrgo iran can buy fighter jets?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Tomyris said:


> iran can buy fighter jets?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Uhuhu

rmi5 said:


> Are you using Azeri or Turkish keyboards?





SOHEIL said:


>



its not a big deal.. i just made a mistake

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

SOHEIL said:


>


hummmmmm it will have a command su-30?


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> my brother .... scythian500 arete to answer these troll. you must not tell them the country's ability to defend itself. we must hide our defense system. he will sign an agreement. it is lost it's over. leaves fantasized about their capacity.
> 
> the more you answer them and it will continue.
> 
> I have a question my brother. has risen to emabrgo iran can buy fighter jets?


To my eyes even after sanctions being lifted, it is still a matter of geopolitical situation for both Iran and Russia... Forget China.. they never sell their good fighters to Iran... Russia is the only hope which apparently can only be done when Russia is squeezed by West... Whenever Russia is squeezed by west, they change their way to Iran to sell something (if they ever do it to the point of delivery!!)... If Russian sanctions hit its economy harder then it is possible that Iran can get dozens of Sukhui T-50... But considering their past very unreliable actions toward their friends, it is possible that Iran despite recieving T-50s, insist on its local fighter jet projects in a way to become a good reliable fighter by 2025 or 2030...

I think Iranian desire to build its own fighter jets can be devided into two categories:

1- IRIAF continue its work on current projects and finish what they started in coordination with Defense ministry... to my eye, Iranian leaders are watching these guys closely to see how much talented they are with making jet fighters.. If leaders are satisified with their ability to build serious fighters then they will recieve enough funds to do soomething great...

2- IRCG defense industries are making good efforts to build strategic fighter planes... UCAVs are in the same direction... They have more resources and funds to be able handle such strategic projects... I,m sure soon (in next 5 years) we will witness great projects by IRCG... maybe couple of strategic stealth nombers/ UCAVs... maybe even more sophisticated...

It is years now that I,m convinced that revolutionary guys in IRCG are doing a better job with weaponary and state of the art projects... It has two reasons to my understanding... 1- their independent sources of talent, experts and money...2- their revolutionary approach toward every thing which makes them do extra ordinary stuff...

J'ai remarqué que tu utilise le service de Google traduction .. ai-je raison? tu ferais mieux de commencer à apprendre l'anglais parce que c'est le numéro un langage aujourd'hui et puis après ça tu peux te concentrer sur le français ou d'autres langues etrangé... Mais je dois dire, je comprends toujours votre traduction de google étrange !! bon temp mon frere... Je peux parler les quatre langues du Francais, Persis, Arabe, L'englais et un petite peu Turk et Russe mais J'aime beaucoup Francaise...


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> To my eyes even after sanctions being lifted, it is still a matter of geopolitical situation for both Iran and Russia... Forget China.. they never sell their good fighters to Iran... Russia is the only hope which apparently can only be done when Russia is squeezed by West... Whenever Russia is squeezed by west, they change their way to Iran to sell something (if they ever do it to the point of delivery!!)... If Russian sanctions hit its economy harder then it is possible that Iran can get dozens of Sukhui T-50... But considering their past very unreliable actions toward their friends, it is possible that Iran despite recieving T-50s, insist on its local fighter jet projects in a way to become a good reliable fighter by 2025 or 2030...
> 
> I think Iranian desire to build its own fighter jets can be devided into two categories:
> 
> 1- IRIAF continue its work on current projects and finish what they started in coordination with Defense ministry... to my eye, Iranian leaders are watching these guys closely to see how much talented they are with making jet fighters.. If leaders are satisified with their ability to build serious fighters then they will recieve enough funds to do soomething great...
> 
> 2- IRCG defense industries are making good efforts to build strategic fighter planes... UCAVs are in the same direction... They have more resources and funds to be able handle such strategic projects... I,m sure soon (in next 5 years) we will witness great projects by IRCG... maybe couple of strategic stealth nombers/ UCAVs... maybe even more sophisticated...
> 
> It is years now that I,m convinced that revolutionary guys in IRCG are doing a better job with weaponary and state of the art projects... It has two reasons to my understanding... 1- their independent sources of talent, experts and money...2- their revolutionary approach toward every thing which makes them do extra ordinary stuff...
> 
> J'ai remarqué que tu utilise le service de Google traduction .. ai-je raison? tu ferais mieux de commencer à apprendre l'anglais parce que c'est le numéro un langage aujourd'hui et puis après ça tu peux te concentrer sur le français ou d'autres langues etrangé... Mais je dois dire, je comprends toujours votre traduction de google étrange !! bon temp mon frere... Je peux parler les quatre langues du Francais, Persis, Arabe, L'englais et un petite peu Turk et Russe mais J'aime beaucoup Francaise...


yes i, unwanted google translation. I live in France and I try to learn Persian and Kabyle, it's hard, yes jaimerai learn English well 

if you want my opinion, I think that Iran should promptly ordered emergency aircraft such as the Su-30/35 ... if tomorrow the American vaudrai remetre emabrgo us, we will have already had sophisticated with a good air defense our current fleet and too weak and old .... the best thing and the rempalcer by aircraft such as su-30/35 which is long range and powerful radar and armement.notre defense will be provided. then we can start local project, as for the S-300 will use it now because we need the time that the talash3 and bavar373 am OPERATIONAL.
if iran order 100 su-30/35 it will be quiet for 30 next year .... and we can work on an Iranian fighter for the future. but we must first secured our defense now.


----------



## ptldM3

Tomyris said:


> yes i, unwanted google translation. I live in France and I try to learn Persian and Kabyle, it's hard, yes jaimerai learn English well




While we are on the subject of your backround, is that you in your avatar?


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> yes i, unwanted google translation. I live in France and I try to learn Persian and Kabyle, it's hard, yes jaimerai learn English well
> 
> if you want my opinion, I think that Iran should promptly ordered emergency aircraft such as the Su-30/35 ... if tomorrow the American vaudrai remetre emabrgo us, we will have already had sophisticated with a good air defense our current fleet and too weak and old .... the best thing and the rempalcer by aircraft such as su-30/35 which is long range and powerful radar and armement.notre defense will be provided. then we can start local project, as for the S-300 will use it now because we need the time that the talash3 and bavar373 am OPERATIONAL.
> if iran order 100 su-30/35 it will be quiet for 30 next year .... and we can work on an Iranian fighter for the future. but we must first secured our defense now.


right... but Iranian problem is with US and ISrael that both of them will be equiped by 5th gen fighters soon... so Su-30/35 won't do the job the way Iran wants it... only planes like T-50 can work well for Iran for next 20 years... I think any planes less than 5th gen T-50 level would be a waste of money for Iran as it won,t help us in case of war...

Don't worry Iranian commanders realized soon enough that Iran can not buy any reliable fighters any time soon..this is why Iran decided to concentrer sur aero defense... je suis certain que ce type de air defense will do the job of keeping Iranian sky safe until Iran can either buy 5th gen planes or develop mush better futuristic air defense systems...



Tomyris said:


> Kabyle


Que'est ce que ce mot? Kabyle? you mean Tribal language? we don't have tribes among Persians


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> right... but Iranian problem is with US and ISrael that both of them will be equiped by 5th gen fighters soon... so Su-30/35 won't do the job the way Iran wants it... only planes like T-50 can work well for Iran for next 20 years... I think any planes less than 5th gen T-50 level would be a waste of money for Iran as it won,t help us in case of war...
> 
> Don't worry Iranian commanders realized soon enough that Iran can not buy any reliable fighters any time soon..this is why Iran decided to concentrer sur aero defense... je suis certain que ce type de air defense will do the job of keeping Iranian sky safe until Iran can either buy 5th gen planes or develop mush better futuristic air defense systems...
> 
> 
> Que'est ce que ce mot? Kabyle? you mean Tribal language? we don't have tribes among Persians


no. Kabyle and language in Algeria. 

no it's not a waste of money. veillissante maintain a fleet of F-1 F-4, F-14 and the rest nosu is too expensive, and are obselete .the su-30/35 will defend the Iranian sky in spain Iranian aerial and ... intercepted while the enemy fighter, and topped with air defense, nothing will pass ..

t-50 and not mass produced and will pui russia india the first to receive it ... and if Russia agrees to sell to the iran..on will have to wait 10 years or more. ... and it was not the temps..si the embargo and by the American remi we have no air force capable..alors that if we order su-30 / 35on have a good aerial force. .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IR-TR

gambit said:


> Which we can do.
> 
> 
> Not yet.
> 
> 
> Which I doubt you have.
> 
> 
> Wrong, we do not have to do 'entire'. If you want to lecture to others about 'military logic', it would do you well to study warfare in general, then drill down to specific wars.
> 
> Anyway...The process is called 'fragmentation', meaning to render the defense from a unified entity into discrete and isolated parts. The classic divide and conquer strategy. We start off with isolating the leadership by severance of communication lines, like how we did so to the Iraqi military. Then once the individual commands no longer have access to each other and to the leadership, coordinated defense is abandoned in favor of survival and this is where it favors the attacker.
> 
> When you are in survival mode, you bunker down and fortify your position, hopefully strong enough to withstand attacks, but fortification also means limited mobility, a condition you imposed upon yourself because if you venture out, whether by actually leaving your fort or by wireless communication, you exposed yourself to attacks.
> 
> As an Air Force guy, I will give the air power perspective, not only because I am a Desert Storm veteran, but I also studied US air power in Iraq for my own intellectual curiosity.
> 
> The saying is: 'Own the air to win the ground'. And owning Iraqi airspace from the start is exactly what happened in Desert Storm. Iranian air power is no match for US, no matter how much bluster from our Iranian forum members. We began the takeover of Iraqi airspace by blinding the Iraqi defense by destroying specific air defense radar stations. Once the sensor gap was in place, other specific air defense targets were destroyed. Testimonies from our pilots had Iraqi air defense sites active and seeking, but their launches were not focused and uncoordinated. That does not mean those launched missiles were not dangerous. Yes, they were. But they would have been much more effective had the air defense stations were in communication with each other.
> 
> Fragmentation can take many forms and does not have to be physical or even long term.
> 
> Decoys can produce that 'fragmentation' effect because one or more air defense stations redirected their focus to the decoys, of course, the Iraqis did not know they were shooting at decoys. We deployed radar decoys against Iraqi air defense radars and their refocus created gaps (air corridors) through which we exploited. Where the radar looketh, so goeth the missiles. Later on, as in days after the initial assault, just from the threat of American HARM missiles, most Iraqi air defense radars remained mostly quiet. If the air defense radars are silent, then we own the sky. The air assault began on mid-January and by the end of January, we owned Iraqi airspace. We did not destroyed literally all Iraqi air defense stations. We just destroyed enough and scared others into that bunker mentality.
> 
> Fragmentation -- it works.
> 
> 
> You are probably too young to remember Desert Storm. What you are saying now in defense of the Iranians, I see the same in defense of the Iraqi back then. Iranian air defense of today is barely better than what Iraq had.
> 
> 
> Please do not say silly things like this. This is classic underestimation of your enemy. You have no idea how creative we can be if the situation demands it.
> 
> 
> And from what video game is that ?




You have some points. But if it were that easy, t he US would have gotten it over with a long time ago. Guess what? Those 3000 US trainers in Iraq are dead meat in 1 minute if you attack Iran. Iraqi forces will see to that. And to compare Iran's missile capability to those of Saddam's Iraq is silly at best.


gambit said:


> Did I say the US is the only one to have this skill ?
> 
> But here is why your argument failed...
> 
> Weaponeering is limited to your available assets and that means the greater the variations of your weapons stock, the greater your flexibility in deployment. Against US, Iran will be forced to take a defensive posture, which mean Iranian air defense assets will *NOT* know the precise time and nature of their attackers, which could be bombs or decoys.
> 
> Advantage -- US.
> 
> 
> And I bet you did not read the details of that wiki source, child.




You know, sure the US is superior and it's arsenal is superior. But Iran can inflict too much pain on US and world interests to ever allow the US to attack. Let's see, couple of thousand of soldiers on training mission in Iraq, DEAD. Couple of airbases in the vicinity of the Persian


scythian500 said:


> right... but Iranian problem is with US and ISrael that both of them will be equiped by 5th gen fighters soon... so Su-30/35 won't do the job the way Iran wants it... only planes like T-50 can work well for Iran for next 20 years... I think any planes less than 5th gen T-50 level would be a waste of money for Iran as it won,t help us in case of war...
> 
> Don't worry Iranian commanders realized soon enough that Iran can not buy any reliable fighters any time soon..this is why Iran decided to concentrer sur aero defense... je suis certain que ce type de air defense will do the job of keeping Iranian sky safe until Iran can either buy 5th gen planes or develop mush better futuristic air defense systems...
> 
> 
> Que'est ce que ce mot? Kabyle? you mean Tribal language? we don't have tribes among Persians




Literally nobody thinks the F-35 can outfight the SU27-35, let alone the pak-fa. That's why the us has the f22. So Israel won't be winning any dogfights if Iran can get it's hands on 4th gen ++ fighters. Don't be afraid.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> *Passive Radars:*
> 
> *Advantages and disadvantages[edit]*
> Advocates of the technology cite the following advantages:
> 
> 
> Lower procurement cost
> Lower costs of operation and maintenance, due to the lack of transmitter and moving parts
> Covert operation, including no need for frequency allocations
> Physically small and hence easily deployed in places where conventional radars cannot be
> Capabilities against stealth aircraft due to the frequency bands and multistatic geometries employed[3]
> Rapid updates, typically once a second
> Difficulty of jamming
> Resilience to anti-radiation missiles.
> 
> *10 Shahrivar Passive Radar:*
> جهان نيوز - رونمایی از سامانه راداری پسیو «۱۰شهریور»
> رونمایی از چند سامانه همزمان با روز ارتش
> رونمایی از سامانه راداری پسیو «۱۰شهریور»
> Iran showcases domestically-developed defense systems (PHOTO)
> Iran Showcases Domestically-Developed Defense Systems
> 
> Alim radar system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> *Alim* is the first Iranian passive radar. Passive radars do not transmit waves and instead, detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals.
> Alim is cheaper and has less maintenance cost than normal radars because it doesn't have transmitter and movable mechanical parts. Although it needs high processing power because it has to do six levels of processing to track a target. Other advantages include the ability to detect low RCS stealth targets in low altitudes. Also as it doesn't transmit anything, it is not possible to destroy it using anti radiation missiles such as American AGM-88 HARM thus it can be deployed near the enemy lines.
> 
> There are many Iranian radars with stealth detection ability and very powerful ECCM capabilities:
> 
> For example: I can recall one Iranian Stealth detection radar:
> 
> *Matla - ul-fajr 2 Radar:*
> 
> State-owned Mashregh News reported that Matla-ul-fajr 2 is a solid state 3D radar operating in VHF band. Due to the nature of its frequency, it can detect low-Radar cross-section targets such as stealth aircraft and cruise missiles. The range of the radar is 480 kilometres (300 mi) and it uses two separate channels for detection and is installed on the back of heavy trucks to enhance mobility. This radar won the first place in Kwarazmi International Festival.[1]
> 
> I don't claim Iran will be able to shoot down all B-2 and F-22s when attacking Iran but I,m sure that, first, Iran can detect them soon enough to prepare for it.. second, They can shoot significant numbers of them...
> 
> Btw, Block Buster bombs are too heavy to be able to be carried by planes other than B-2... which we have done a lot for this specific bird!!


Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.

Without either one, there would be no radar detection.

Here is where and why I said you did not read your source and bothered to learn even the basics of radar detection...

_Passive radars do not transmit waves and instead, detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals._

What the above sentence, from your own source, mean is that the 'Transmit' part of the process is *NOT* under the ownership and control of the operator. Or put it another way, the operator is only the 'Receive' part of the process and must rely on someone else to do the 'Transmit' part.

The word 'radar' in 'passive radar' should be understood in this context. If there are no 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' then there will be no reflections, correct ? And if there are no reflections, then there will be detection, correct ? It means the passive receiver will just sit there -- doing nothing.

Those 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' are from TV and radio stations, cell phone towers, basically any signals of any freqs of any amplitude. In an attack, if enough of these sources are degraded or destroyed, there will be gaps. Those gaps could be physical, such as no transmissions from the source(s) at all, or the gaps could be qualitative, meaning the signals are too weak to be of any use. Weakened signals can be absorbed by the atmosphere or even by the aircraft itself, thereby producing no reflections, and if there are no reflections, there will be no detection.

Your Iranian source do not tell you these details because they know they do not have the historical data to back up their claims about efficacy on detecting low observable targets. The Russians and the Chinese do not have those historical data as well. Simply put, no one outside of US have such data. We have it because we have the real 'stealth' aircrafts to conduct live, not computer simulated, tests.

You are treading into an area that I can tell you have no technical backgrounds to stand upon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.
> 
> Without either one, there would be no radar detection.
> 
> Here is where and why I said you did not read your source and bothered to learn even the basics of radar detection...
> 
> _Passive radars do not transmit waves and instead, detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals._
> 
> What the above sentence, from your own source, mean is that the 'Transmit' part of the process is *NOT* under the ownership and control of the operator. Or put it another way, the operator is only the 'Receive' part of the process and must rely on someone else to do the 'Transmit' part.
> 
> The word 'radar' in 'passive radar' should be understood in this context. If there are no 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' then there will be no reflections, correct ? And if there are no reflections, then there will be detection, correct ? It means the passive receiver will just sit there -- doing nothing.
> 
> Those 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' are from TV and radio stations, cell phone towers, basically any signals of any freqs of any amplitude. In an attack, if enough of these sources are degraded or destroyed, there will be gaps. Those gaps could be physical, such as no transmissions from the source(s) at all, or the gaps could be qualitative, meaning the signals are too weak to be of any use. Weakened signals can be absorbed by the atmosphere or even by the aircraft itself, thereby producing no reflections, and if there are no reflections, there will be no detection.
> 
> Your Iranian source do not tell you these details because they know they do not have the historical data to back up their claims about efficacy on detecting low observable targets. The Russians and the Chinese do not have those historical data as well. Simply put, no one outside of US have such data. We have it because we have the real 'stealth' aircrafts to conduct live, not computer simulated, tests.
> 
> You are treading into an area that I can tell you have no technical backgrounds to stand upon.


ok star war hollywood veteran... US will destroy hundreds of not thousands of TV, Radio, Cell phone tramsmitter all around the way to their central Iranian targets in order to deactivate these type of radars...!! If you can do all this mission impossible then tell me what you can do to avoid being seen by Iranian long range EO/ ER detectors... those who captured RQ-170 years ago...? what do you do to not being detected by multiple types of UHF and VHF radars with strong ECCM capabilties? What do you do with OTH multi static radar?
but whatever you say... you sure are the only one who has all the solutions and strategies and Iranians don't!! You should go to pentagon share your wisdom with your commanders... maybe the finish their 36 years postponed job and once and for all get rid of Iran...
whatever you say top Gun movie veteran... If you ever read all I have bothered myself to explain to you, you would not proceed with your comments... but since all other nations are dumb and USAF is smart then I have nothing to add...
USAF can crash Iranian forces before they realize there is an attack... good for you



gambit said:


> Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.
> 
> You are treading into an area that I can tell you have no technical backgrounds to stand upon.



Since you are a veteran air force specialist I have a few questions and I would be happy to know the answers if you are high rank enough to know about it of course:

1- Iran will use EW and ECCM technics and equipment in all its weapon carriers.. from birds , radars up to battle ships... how much you are sure US can beat these systems and with what specific technics or technology it is going to do the job?

2- What counter masses a US battle ship have to defend itself against Iranian Hoot torpedo?

3- what a US aircraft carrier or battle ship can do to counter let,s say 100 missiles coming in order one after another with no pause..?

4- What can be done to not being seen by Iranian electro/optical and night vision long range detectors?

5- What counter measures US can implement to avoid being seen by OTH +3000 km Sepehr radar?

6- what US will do if he loses let,s say 10K soldiers in one day (one aircraft carrier and other stuff) against Iran... I said IF... Will US nuke Iran??

7- ******************************* (it is so secret that I can not even ask a question about it!!)

8- What counter measures can be done against let,s say at least 200 super fast boats (+60 knots) aiming at rocketing you?


gambit said:


> You are treading into an area that I can tell you have no technical backgrounds to stand upon.


No I don't have special info in this field but you who are an expert and star war. top gun style veteran.. why you with all these medals bring up naive reasoning and logic and even more naive analysis and strategies for a war with Iran? I still wait for my first set of question in my first post... I have nothing against you... your Freemason mullah government has brainwashed you Americans in a way that you can distinguish between hollywood movies and reality.... I just need you to explain things to me... enlighten me with my doubts and questions... IF you could convince me then I would happily become an american soon... I will leave my country that is weak and will join you there...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

oh, my dear Lord .
the guy really thinks he can shut down all broadcast transmitters and radars (including their own) in Iran and neighbor countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

ptldM3 said:


> While we are on the subject of your backround, is that you in your avatar?



No ... she is an Iranian model :

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ptldM3

SOHEIL said:


> No ... she is an Iranian model :
> 
> View attachment 216264




Oh i see, but at least your avatar is real right? It's you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

ptldM3 said:


> Oh i see, but at least your avatar is real right? It's you?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## ptldM3

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 216317




I think i met you before. Your face look familiar.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.
> 
> Without either one, there would be no radar detection.
> 
> Here is where and why I said you did not read your source and bothered to learn even the basics of radar detection...
> 
> _Passive radars do not transmit waves and instead, detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals._
> 
> What the above sentence, from your own source, mean is that the 'Transmit' part of the process is *NOT* under the ownership and control of the operator. Or put it another way, the operator is only the 'Receive' part of the process and must rely on someone else to do the 'Transmit' part.
> 
> The word 'radar' in 'passive radar' should be understood in this context. If there are no 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' then there will be no reflections, correct ? And if there are no reflections, then there will be detection, correct ? It means the passive receiver will just sit there -- doing nothing.
> 
> Those 'commercial broadcast and communications signals' are from TV and radio stations, cell phone towers, basically any signals of any freqs of any amplitude. In an attack, if enough of these sources are degraded or destroyed, there will be gaps. Those gaps could be physical, such as no transmissions from the source(s) at all, or the gaps could be qualitative, meaning the signals are too weak to be of any use. Weakened signals can be absorbed by the atmosphere or even by the aircraft itself, thereby producing no reflections, and if there are no reflections, there will be no detection.
> 
> Your Iranian source do not tell you these details because they know they do not have the historical data to back up their claims about efficacy on detecting low observable targets. The Russians and the Chinese do not have those historical data as well. Simply put, no one outside of US have such data. We have it because we have the real 'stealth' aircrafts to conduct live, not computer simulated, tests.
> 
> You are treading into an area that I can tell you have no technical backgrounds to stand upon.


Well ,Do you believe if it's possible to silence all radios in it he region.

What if iran spam the country with several thousands of radio transmitter With different frequency and then turn them on in case of any war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

ptldM3 said:


> I think i met you before. Your face look familiar.



Really ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

gau8av said:


> now that the Russians will be supplying the S300s after all ?
> 
> @SOHEIL @haman10 @yavar @Serpentine



Russians will never supply Iran with S300 system so your question is not valid .

Israeli leadership; they have the right to do what they consider appropriate. I think it is counterproductive, if it concerns lethal weapons, because it will only lead to yet another swirl of confrontation, to more human casualties, but the result will be the same,” Putin said in an interview on Rossiya 1 TV on Saturday.
Israel has been upset by Russia’s decision last week to lift its five-year ban on the sale of the S-300 anti-missile system to Iran and to deliver those weapons by the end of 2015.


Putin warns Israel against selling arms to Ukraine - Middle East - Jerusalem Post


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> Russians will never supply Iran with S300 system so your question is not valid .
> 
> Israeli leadership; they have the right to do what they consider appropriate. I think it is counterproductive, if it concerns lethal weapons, because it will only lead to yet another swirl of confrontation, to more human casualties, but the result will be the same,” Putin said in an interview on Rossiya 1 TV on Saturday.
> Israel has been upset by Russia’s decision last week to lift its five-year ban on the sale of the S-300 anti-missile system to Iran and to deliver those weapons by the end of 2015.
> 
> 
> Putin warns Israel against selling arms to Ukraine - Middle East - Jerusalem Post








For what reason kalle kiriz didn't unveil Talash-3 !?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> i can read this part write in Farsi .



کله کیری

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> For what reason kalle kiriz didn't unveil Talash-3 !?



all i can add is look these two missile and tell me does these missiles are same or even same shape or same aerodynamic ??












and this one





















and this one compare them


----------



## yavar




----------



## Shams313

yavar said:


> all i can add is look these two missile and tell me does these missiles are same or even same shape or same aerodynamic ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this one compare them


Sayyad...3?


----------



## SOHEIL

Similar ... Sayyad-4 for sure ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## New

SOHEIL said:


> For what reason kalle kiriz didn't unveil Talash-3 !?


It takes them some time to repaint the S300's and represent them as indigenous Bavar bla bla, dude.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

New said:


> It takes them some time to repaint the S300's and represent them as indigenous Bavar bla bla, dude.


Brother dont present urself as a troll..............i hope u r wish enough.......... 
they will show it.....under political war they can't unveil it.....
and talash-3 and bavar-373 r different.......

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Yavar my friend, those two missiles, the Sayyad-4 are the same, its just the different aspec ratio that makes them look different.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

SOHEIL said:


> Similar ... Sayyad-4 for sure ...


The missile Sayyad 4 project is called ? Sayyad 4 is not Talash 3 so it could be Talash 4 or Bavar*********** ( not Bavar 373 )

listen to it care fully when the missile goes pass they call it Bavar project Not Bavar 373 + can you tell me why the middle of missile is been covered up where the it been written on been covered up with sheet you can see the sheet clearly on body of missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> ok star war hollywood veteran... *US will destroy hundreds of not thousands of TV, Radio, Cell phone tramsmitter* all around the way to their central Iranian targets in order to deactivate these type of radars...!!


Not at all.

Gulf War air campaign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> 11 of Iraq's 20 major power stations and 119 substations were totally destroyed, while a further six major power stations were damaged.


We just have to destroy enough Iranian electrical power stations to render most -- not all -- those transmitters either useless or too weak to be of any tactical value. This is going on the very generous assumption that Iran have made full deployment of the passive receiver system.



scythian500 said:


> If you can do all this mission impossible then tell me what you can do to avoid being seen by Iranian long range EO/ ER detectors...


Just in case you did not know, there are weaknesses to those passive sensor types as well. Look them up.



scythian500 said:


> those who captured RQ-170 years ago...?


Only gullible fools believe that thing have any value today.



scythian500 said:


> what do you do to not being detected by multiple types of UHF and VHF radars with strong ECCM capabilties? What do you do with OTH multi static radar?


Please...Take a review of Desert Shield, the build up prior to Desert Storm. Did Iraq need OTH radar to know of the massive arms and personnel gathering the US led in the region ? Look at the news today where practically the whole world know the US sent an aircraft carrier to intercept Iranian ships going to Yemen. What need is there of OTH when there is CNN ? If there is going to be a shooting war between US and Iran, rest assured Iran will know of US coming.



scythian500 said:


> Since you are a veteran air force specialist I have a few questions and I would be happy to know the answers *if you are high rank enough to know about it of course:*


By the same token, why should we listen to you ? Do *YOU* have any military experience to declare definitively that Iranian radars can detect our 'stealth' jets ? I can tell from your posts that you do not have even the technical basics of the things you boast of Iran, let alone how to use them tactically. You brought on 'passive radars' when there are publicly available information on why there is no such thing and even your own source -- you did not understand. You said the US would destroy individual transmitter stations but did not think of the city's main electrical power stations.

You cheer for Iran. I get that and do *NOT* fault you for that. But time to face reality, kid, the Iranian military have not fought anyone any different than Iraq, and look what happened to Iraq. The Iranian military announce one fantastic weapon system after another and only people like you believe it. If there is a shooting war, Iran *WILL* lose.


----------



## Tomyris

gambit said:


> Not at all.
> 
> Gulf War air campaign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> We just have to destroy enough Iranian electrical power stations to render most -- not all -- those transmitters either useless or too weak to be of any tactical value. This is going on the very generous assumption that Iran have made full deployment of the passive receiver system.
> 
> 
> Just in case you did not know, there are weaknesses to those passive sensor types as well. Look them up.
> 
> 
> Only gullible fools believe that thing have any value today.
> 
> 
> Please...Take a review of Desert Shield, the build up prior to Desert Storm. Did Iraq need OTH radar to know of the massive arms and personnel gathering the US led in the region ? Look at the news today where practically the whole world know the US sent an aircraft carrier to intercept Iranian ships going to Yemen. What need is there of OTH when there is CNN ? If there is going to be a shooting war between US and Iran, rest assured Iran will know of US coming.
> 
> 
> By the same token, why should we listen to you ? Do *YOU* have any military experience to declare definitively that Iranian radars can detect our 'stealth' jets ? I can tell from your posts that you do not have even the technical basics of the things you boast of Iran, let alone how to use them tactically. You brought on 'passive radars' when there are publicly available information on why there is no such thing and even your own source -- you did not understand. You said the US would destroy individual transmitter stations but did not think of the city's main electrical power stations.
> 
> You cheer for Iran. I get that and do *NOT* fault you for that. But time to face reality, kid, the Iranian military have not fought anyone any different than Iraq, and look what happened to Iraq. The Iranian military announce one fantastic weapon system after another and only people like you believe it. If there is a shooting war, Iran *WILL* lose.


bla bla bla bla bla.. attack you waiting for? we too one shot missile can make you disappear from the region

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> We just have to destroy enough Iranian electrical power stations to render most -- not all -- those transmitters either useless or too weak to be of any tactical value. This is going on the very generous assumption that Iran have made full deployment of the passive receiver system.


what if FM or other transmission sources are powered specifically by independent mobile power sources? What If Iranian commanders know what you are able to do with their NOT EXISTING passive radar and start to do deception operations plus independent power sources for their radars and transmitters?



gambit said:


> Just in case you did not know, there are weaknesses to those passive sensor types as well. Look them up.


I looked it up... could not find what can you do to avoid being seen by optical/EO/thrmal long range detectors... would you please enlighten me?



gambit said:


> Only gullible fools believe that thing have any value today.


reallly? No COMMENT!!! no actually I have a comment... I understand you.. *you have no choice but to say this in case your enemy got that tech!!*



gambit said:


> Please...Take a review of Desert Shield, the build up prior to Desert Storm. Did Iraq need OTH radar to know of the massive arms and personnel gathering the US led in the region ? Look at the news today where practically the whole world know the US sent an aircraft carrier to intercept Iranian ships going to Yemen. What need is there of OTH when there is CNN ? If there is going to be a shooting war between US and Iran, rest assured Iran will know of US coming.


All these passive and OTH radars and EO.Thermal and in -depth spy units were mentioned only to respond to your claim that those are stealth and we can not see them coming!! I understand you...* you have no choice but to say this in case your enemy got that tech!!
*


gambit said:


> By the same token, why should we listen to you ? Do *YOU* have any military experience to declare definitively that Iranian radars can detect our 'stealth' jets ? I can tell from your posts that you do not have even the technical basics of the things you boast of Iran, let alone how to use them tactically. You brought on 'passive radars' when there are publicly available information on why there is no such thing and even your own source -- you did not understand. You said the US would destroy individual transmitter stations but did not think of the city's main electrical power stations.



Reallllllly? how old are you? your reasoning and discussion basis is so confusing and paradox!! Look... I am a total illiterate person when it comes to weaponry and war... but you lost the robe!! You FIRST claimed that you do this and that and its easy to crush Iranian forces and In response I brought you some doubts and questions... then you don't have to listen to me..but only to enlighten me with my doubts and questions...



gambit said:


> You cheer for Iran. I get that and do *NOT* fault you for that. But time to face reality, kid, the Iranian military have not fought anyone any different than Iraq, and look what happened to Iraq. The Iranian military announce one fantastic weapon system after another and only people like you believe it. If there is a shooting war, Iran *WILL* lose.


I believe my commanders about what they can do and can not do... If you don,t agree with them you should provide proof that you,re right... for the last time: you claimed US can do this and that and In response I asked a few questions... but instead of enlightening me with your professional answers you call me "someone who does not know anything"!! Ok, I admit it... I know nothing.. please provide fair and technical answers to my doubts and questions:

*1- Iran will use EW and ECCM technics and equipment in all its weapon carriers.. from birds , radars up to battle ships... how much you are sure US can beat these systems and with what specific technics or technology it is going to do the job? Please name systems and technics that can bypass Iranian EW and ECCM measures..*

*2- What is your base argument to stay firm on your repeated claim that Iraq when you invaded them decades ago, were and are much more sophisticated and powerful than Iran 2015?

3- What counter masses a US battle ship have to defend itself against Iranian Hoot torpedo with +360 km/h under water speed?

4- what a US aircraft carrier or battle ship can do to counter let,s say 100 missiles (both cruise and ballistics) coming in order one after another with no pause..?

5- What can be done to not being seen by Iranian electro/optical and night vision long range detectors? Please name the technics as I could not find any..

6- What counter measures US can implement to avoid being seen by OTH +3000 km Sepehr radar? Let,s suppose you want to avoid being seen when your planes want to take off for bombing...

7- what US will do if he loses let,s say 10K soldiers in one day (one aircraft carrier and other stuff) against Iran... I said IF... Will US nuke Iran?? How many dead American soldiers would be enough for your commanders to stop the aggression? Don,t tell me you won,t be in that position... I said IF...

8- ******************************* (it is so secret that I can not even ask a question about it!!)

9- What counter measures can be done against let,s say at least 200 super fast boats (+60 knots) aiming at bombing your battleships and Persian gulf coastal bases?

10- Why since it is normal operational procedure for US and their allies to overthrow opponent countries and just invade them or at least make them submit to their agenda... why despite the fact that Iran is 1000 times more aggressive toward US and its agenda, it took you more than 36 years now to act? What took you sooo long and still nothing??
Don,t tell me US is diplomatic solution fan when it comes to its weaker enemies!!

11- What if Iran disable all GPS communications over Iranian soil and neighboring areas? How you weapons work/?? What if Iran blinded your satellites like it did once or twice already to warn?? http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=2283
Â Report: Iran 'Blinded' CIA Spy SatelliteÂ :Â Information 
Clearing House

12- and the most important question: Whatever your weapons and technics are, Why do you think Iranians had not give a thought about it already? Why you think Iranians can not come up with counter measures for your measures? Whatever technic you are aware of, Iranian military think tanks know many times more... Why don't you gave it a slight chance that Iranians have developed something against your technics??

13- How US can disable Iranian communications in battlefield in case they use Encrypted radio wireless communication + Fiber optics + hardcore wires in many cases? bring up practical technics that Iranians are not aware of please...

I have more questions..but since you,re a busy retired veteran I would be happy with these simple questions

PS: I repeat.. I,m an illiterate person regarding war and weapons... enlighten me...*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## warfareknow

Talash ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

scythian500 said:


> reallly? No COMMENT!!! no actually I have a comment... I understand you.. *you have no choice but to say this in case your enemy got that tech!!*



Sometimes in debates, it is best to let the deluded be happy.

You are correct. The Iranian military will handily defeat the US.


----------



## Daneshmand

gambit said:


> Sometimes in debates, it is best to let the deluded be happy.
> 
> You are correct. The Iranian military will handily defeat the US.



Pray tell us why US can not win a single war?

In Afghanistan after 14 years, fighting with barefooted 39th BC century cavemen, you still have not won. Irony is you have started to negotiate with those filthy zombies.

In Iraq, after 8 years, you handed the keys of Baghdad to Iran and left.

In Somalia, you left without achieving anything..

In Lebanon US left without achieving anything.

In Libya, you lost even an ambassador. 

In Vietnam, well we all know the truth now. The commies won.

I guess, you have only Grenada and Panama to claim as "undisputed" victories.

When US will learn to fight some one other than lilliputian states with no means to defend themselves, then come here and brag. Because when it comes to real fights, US gets it handed to her and runs away. Example: Ukraine. 

Maybe you should next time take it up with Russia and China when they gobble abit more of European territory or abit more of your jobs. 

So much so for your muscle. Good for nothing.

Maybe US should stick with what it does best and earns its influence by giving aid, technical cooperation, scientific transfer etc etc. Rather than using its rather useless military that fails to achieve any strategic objective (none whatsoever). At least I do not see a single long term strategic objective that US military particularly its air force having been able to achieve for America post World War II. 

Not even one.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tomyris

gambit said:


> Sometimes in debates, it is best to let the deluded be happy.
> 
> You are correct. The Iranian military will handily defeat the US.


@Daneshmand 

cuba you to forget it is also lost, yet it's just at their door)

an American general told him that even america can not attack iran. his will be even worse than Iraq and azfghanistan met. and the agreement that are signed triune proves their defeat .... its is pointless to talk lui.si are army was invincible as he will tackle a long time. but it is favorite signed an agreement which proves their defeat and are not military capacity, it must be remembered that most of their war he was there to help with nato, he is unable to make war alone. and even with nato it happen to lose hhhhhhhhhhh

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

Tomyris said:


> @Daneshmand
> 
> cuba you to forget it is also lost, yet it's just at their door)
> 
> an American general told him that even america can not attack iran. his will be even worse than Iraq and azfghanistan met. and the agreement that are signed triune proves their defeat .... its is pointless to talk lui.si are army was invincible as he will tackle a long time. but it is favorite signed an agreement which proves their defeat and are not military capacity, it must be remembered that most of their war he was there to help with nato, he is unable to make war alone. and even with nato it happen to lose hhhhhhhhhhh


You Iranians are correct. The US military is 3rd rate. None comparable to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

gambit said:


> You Iranians are correct. The US military is 3rd rate. None comparable to Iran.


a war can not be won only by a more powerful armament. and you know very well

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Daneshmand said:


> Pray tell us why US can not win a single war?
> 
> In Afghanistan after 14 years, fighting with barefooted 39th BC century cavemen, you still have not won. Irony is you have started to negotiate with those filthy zombies.
> 
> In Iraq, after 8 years, you handed the keys of Baghdad to Iran and left.
> 
> In Somalia, you left without achieving anything..
> 
> In Lebanon US left without achieving anything.
> 
> In Libya, you lost even an ambassador.
> 
> In Vietnam, well we all know the truth now. The commies won.
> 
> I guess, you have only Grenada and Panama to claim as "undisputed" victories.
> 
> When US will learn to fight some one other than lilliputian states with no means to defend themselves, then come here and brag. Because when it comes to real fights, US gets it handed to her and runs away. Example: Ukraine.
> 
> Maybe you should next time take it up with Russia and China when they gobble abit more of European territory or abit more of your jobs.
> 
> So much so for your muscle. Good for nothing.
> 
> Maybe US should stick with what it does best and earns its influence by giving aid, technical cooperation, scientific transfer etc etc. Rather than using its rather useless military that fails to achieve any strategic objective (none whatsoever). At least I do not see a single long term strategic objective that US military particularly its air force having been able to achieve for America post World War II.
> 
> Not even one.


Correct. The US is pretty stupid.

We lost WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Despite that in every of those conflicts, the other side lost more men, more equipment, and more land. The US still lost. I bet it is Iranian education that even though the Soviet Union collapsed, it was the US who lost the Cold War.

I fear for my beloved USAF, to who I devoted 10 yrs of military life, and nearly 9 more yrs in civilian life. Our F-22s will be easily detected by Iranian twin tailed modified F-5s with wonder weapons unknown to the world. Iranian subs will sink ours. And the Iranian Navy will smartly outmaneuver the USN. Any conflict with Iran will be another 'lost' war for US.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## بلندر

gambit said:


> You Iranians are correct. The US military is 3rd rate. None comparable to Iran.



USA is nothing without his strong economy , maybe we can't destroy USA army but we can stall war enough to destroy your economy ... 
if your economy become weak , all those talk about "American freedom " , "American democracy" and ... will lose their value .... 
your politicians see these things but some of Americans can't see it ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

gambit said:


> Correct. The US is pretty stupid.
> 
> We lost WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Despite that in every of those conflicts, the other side lost more men, more equipment, and more land. The US still lost. I bet it is Iranian education that even though the Soviet Union collapsed, it was the US who lost the Cold War.
> 
> I fear for my beloved USAF, to who I devoted 10 yrs of military life, and nearly 9 more yrs in civilian life. Our F-22s will be easily detected by Iranian twin tailed modified F-5s with wonder weapons unknown to the world. Iranian subs will sink ours. And the Iranian Navy will smartly outmaneuver the USN. Any conflict with Iran will be another 'lost' war for US.


just wait 20 year.....u gonna see a new released action movie in real.... Olympus has fallen 2....it gonna be really happened near in future...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

بلندر said:


> USA is nothing without his strong economy , maybe we can't destroy USA army but we can stall war enough to destroy your economy ...
> if your economy become weak , all those talk about "American freedom " , "American democracy" and ... will lose their value ....
> your politicians see these things but some of Americans can't see it ....


Absolutely...The US will fall before Iranian might. Allahu Akbar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

gambit said:


> You Iranians are correct. The US military is 3rd rate. None comparable to Iran.


instead of turning over the poker table, enlighten me with my questions listed in my last post... be civilized and enlighten me...



gambit said:


> Correct. The US is pretty stupid.
> 
> We lost WW II, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Despite that in every of those conflicts, the other side lost more men, more equipment, and more land. The US still lost. I bet it is Iranian education that even though the Soviet Union collapsed, it was the US who lost the Cold War.
> 
> I fear for my beloved USAF, to who I devoted 10 yrs of military life, and nearly 9 more yrs in civilian life. Our F-22s will be easily detected by Iranian twin tailed modified F-5s with wonder weapons unknown to the world. Iranian subs will sink ours. And the Iranian Navy will smartly outmaneuver the USN. Any conflict with Iran will be another 'lost' war for US.


after all discussion we had u still think F-22s will be countered by F-5s??? and your subs with our subs? realllllly? 
I admitted I am illiterate militarily but as an illiterate had 13 questions and doubts that I would like to know what US will do against them... with what system...what is those systems advantages?? please stop this childish responses and act like a specialist of US and Iran weaponry capabilities... merci my child


----------



## mohsen

gambit said:


> Absolutely...The US will fall before Iranian might. Allahu Akbar.


yeah, of course. even your simulations says the same:
Millennium Challenge 2002 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

no problem if some people like to live in their (American) dreams.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

the good stop off-topic. I and a headache to hear about these delicate American, it is the posibility of them attacked it is not. it signed an agreement with Iran which proves their inability attacked and therefore their defeat in this folder.

thank you now return to the Iranian military subject, I think his would be more interesting to talk about the scroll military and our progress again, I still waiting najm802 and talash3

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## applesauce

mohsen said:


> yeah, of course. even your simulations says the same:
> Millennium Challenge 2002 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> no problem if some people like to live in their (American) dreams.



even if that exercise was 100% accurate as to how a real scenario would have worked out( its not btw). it took place in 2002 and you're assuming the US learned nothing from its own exercises and did not do anything to fix the problem in the last 13 years.


----------



## scythian500

applesauce said:


> even if that exercise was 100% accurate as to how a real scenario would have worked out( its not btw). it took place in 2002 and you're assuming the US learned nothing from its own exercises and did not do anything to fix the problem in the last 13 years.


and Iran stopped during last 13 years?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## applesauce

scythian500 said:


> and Iran stopped during last 13 years?



quote me where i said anything about iran stopping. you cant because i never said such a thing.


----------



## scythian500

applesauce said:


> it took place in 2002 and you're assuming the US learned nothing from its own exercises and did not do anything to fix the problem in the last 13 years.


you said... he assume the US leanrned nothing in later 13 years.... I,m saying: exactly as US learned from its 13 years of exercises, Iran also learned from its 13 years.... and in fact if you take the growth rate of Iranian military with US growth rate you see clearly that Iran is in a better proportion that it was back in 2003....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## haman10

gambit said:


> You Iranians are correct. The US military is 3rd rate. None comparable to Iran.


hmm . not exactly .

US has the world's most powerful army . all we're saying is that even 1st army in the world should think a million times before attacking Iran .

cause we'll open the gates of hell

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kollang

New said:


> And how exactly? by crying a flooding river?


Last time I checked, you had no military knowledge.what makes you open your mouth, this time?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haman10

New said:


> And how exactly? by crying a flooding river?


crying a flooding river ? hmm thats an interesting choice of words .

Neologism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No by bombing their entire existence out in the region



kollang said:


> knowledge


last time i checked he had none .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## New

kollang said:


> Last time I checked, you had no military knowledge.what makes you open your mouth, this time?


 What's with the anger dear bro? the knowledgeable guy was talking about opening the gates of hell, and I was curious to know how, if that's not by crying out, so maybe he is talking about cursing them to death, or condemning them very hard from behind the microphones.


haman10 said:


> last time i checked he had none .


During your long days of rehabilitation, surely you've had enough time to check everything dude. 
I did miss you bro.



haman10 said:


> crying a flooding river ? hmm thats an interesting choice of words .
> 
> Neologism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



 Erin McKean: Go ahead, make up new words! | Talk Video | TED.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran to develop its own version of the S-300 missile air defence system*
Iran designed and developed its own version of the* S-300 missile* shield after the Russians shrugged off delivery of their advanced missile defense system to Iran on the pretext of the UN Security Council sanctions. The Iranian version has superior features over the original Russian model as it enjoys increased mobility, agility and reduced launch-preparation time, according Fars news agency.
Iranian commanders had earlier said that Bavar 373, that similar to its original Russian model traces and intercepts high-altitude targets, would come into operation this Iranian year (that started on March 21, 2015).

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday removed the ban on the delivery of the missile shield to Iran.

Following the announcement, Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said "the decree came as an interpretation of the will of the two countries' political leaders to develop and promote cooperation in all fields".

Putin's decision was announced hours after relevant reports said the Kremlin also plans to supply China with the advanced *S-400 air defense system air defense system*.

On Wednesday April 15, Iranian Ground Force Commander Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Pourdastan underlined the country's air defense capabilities, and said the indigenously-made Bavar (Belief) 373 air missile shield enjoys the same features of its Russian peer, the *S-300*.

Speaking on the sidelines of the unveiling ceremony of the ground force's achievements, Pourdastan said that supplying Iran with the Russian S-300 missiles will boost the country's air defense power and it can hit the targets at higher altitudes.

"But of course, Iran's Air Defense Base has carried out great task in recent years, including the designing and manufacturing of Bavar 373 air defense missile system, which has the same capabilities as the Russian S-300," the Iranian commander further stressed.

In November 2011, Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli told reporters that the designing phase of the Iranian version of S-300 system had ended and the system would be developed and delivered to the country's integrated air defense network in a matter of few years.

He further said that the missile system, dubbed as Bavar (Belief) 373, is even more powerful and more advanced than the Russian S-300.

"Bavar 373 system is an important and completely indigenous achievement that can be a powerful rival for S-300," the commander reiterated.

Then in August 2013, Esmayeeli elaborated on the latest developments in the production of Bavar 373, and said "the system and its subsystems will go under technical tests this (Iranian) year (2013-2014)".


Iran to develop its own version of the S-300 missile air defence system | April 2015 Global Defense Security news UK | Defense Security global news industry army 2015

Reactions: Like Like:
 2


----------



## applesauce

scythian500 said:


> you said... he assume the US leanrned nothing in later 13 years.... I,m saying: exactly as US learned from its 13 years of exercises, Iran also learned from its 13 years.... and in fact if you take the growth rate of Iranian military with US growth rate you see clearly that Iran is in a better proportion that it was back in 2003....



your not understanding me. it is far easier to learn to defend against smaller boats than defend against the most powerful fleet on earth. for example, the US in any theoretical war, could simply park big expensive ships a little further out and thus beyond the range of small boats, or they can arm themselves with many smaller guns specifically for smaller boats. the reason the boats in the exercise succeed was because they didn't expect that type of attack and were not ready for it, and they also assume the ships and boats to be within the range of each other. in an actual war, its see first, shoot first, guess who has better recon capability? 

and iran surely has improved its navy with the addition of new ships and weapons, but those new ships are playing the american game, if you try to match the USN using destroyers and frigates, you are not going to win, not unless you plan to match america at some point. furthermore nothing iran has come up with thus far is revolutionary or in unheard of numbers, small boats? the US has faced that threat for decades and the publicly known exercises prove they are actively training for it. missiles? the aegis system was specifically design to handle soviet saturation attacks. submarines? the US, in addition to operating one of the most advanced and lethal submarine forces in the world, also regularly trains with other countries that makes some of the best subs in the world, the US along with britain, and japan are known to be the most effective ASW forces in the world, given the massive threat of soviet subs back in the cold war. fact is, when it comes to naval combat, even using A2/AD tactics, you need china's size to even remotely stand a chance. you iran want to make america flinched/bleed?, draw them into a costly land war, more ballistic/land based cruise missiles, trying to fight them on the seas will only bleed your own resources quicker, they'll simply stay back and let the planes clear the ports out(small boats tend to need resupply frequently) before sending big ticket vessels anywhere close


----------



## Tomyris

yavar said:


> *Iran to develop its own version of the S-300 missile air defence system*
> Iran designed and developed its own version of the* S-300 missile* shield after the Russians shrugged off delivery of their advanced missile defense system to Iran on the pretext of the UN Security Council sanctions. The Iranian version has superior features over the original Russian model as it enjoys increased mobility, agility and reduced launch-preparation time, according Fars news agency.
> Iranian commanders had earlier said that Bavar 373, that similar to its original Russian model traces and intercepts high-altitude targets, would come into operation this Iranian year (that started on March 21, 2015).
> 
> Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday removed the ban on the delivery of the missile shield to Iran.
> 
> Following the announcement, Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said "the decree came as an interpretation of the will of the two countries' political leaders to develop and promote cooperation in all fields".
> 
> Putin's decision was announced hours after relevant reports said the Kremlin also plans to supply China with the advanced *S-400 air defense system air defense system*.
> 
> On Wednesday April 15, Iranian Ground Force Commander Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Pourdastan underlined the country's air defense capabilities, and said the indigenously-made Bavar (Belief) 373 air missile shield enjoys the same features of its Russian peer, the *S-300*.
> 
> Speaking on the sidelines of the unveiling ceremony of the ground force's achievements, Pourdastan said that supplying Iran with the Russian S-300 missiles will boost the country's air defense power and it can hit the targets at higher altitudes.
> 
> "But of course, Iran's Air Defense Base has carried out great task in recent years, including the designing and manufacturing of Bavar 373 air defense missile system, which has the same capabilities as the Russian S-300," the Iranian commander further stressed.
> 
> In November 2011, Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli told reporters that the designing phase of the Iranian version of S-300 system had ended and the system would be developed and delivered to the country's integrated air defense network in a matter of few years.
> 
> He further said that the missile system, dubbed as Bavar (Belief) 373, is even more powerful and more advanced than the Russian S-300.
> 
> "Bavar 373 system is an important and completely indigenous achievement that can be a powerful rival for S-300," the commander reiterated.
> 
> Then in August 2013, Esmayeeli elaborated on the latest developments in the production of Bavar 373, and said "the system and its subsystems will go under technical tests this (Iranian) year (2013-2014)".
> 
> 
> Iran to develop its own version of the S-300 missile air defence system | April 2015 Global Defense Security news UK | Defense Security global news industry army 2015


yes he declared, but I want proof that j and superior S-300. like the saying bavar373 head to keep F-22 ... we always attent ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

TEHRAN (FNA)- A senior Iranian legislator announced that the country will unveil and test the home-made version of the sophisticated Russian S-300 missile defense system in military drills in the near future.
"The Iran-made S-300 (missile defense) system will be unveiled by the defense ministry and armed forces' engineers soon and will be tested before the eyes of everyone," Chairman of the parliament's Security Committee Mohammad Reza Mohseni Sani told FNA on Tuesday.

Farsnews

//these newes always suck...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shams313

SOHEIL said:


>


...........It's an IRGC project,isn't it?......Improved raad missile series for khordad system


----------



## kollang

Optimus prime said:


> ...........It's an IRGC project,isn't it?......Improved raad missile series for khordad system


The long range missile of Bavar-373 system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Optimus prime said:


> ...........It's an IRGC project,isn't it?......Improved raad missile series for khordad system













.
.
.

Difference :






.
.
.

SADID 630 super hunter 








kollang said:


> The long range missile of Bavar-373 system.



No ... Taer-2 series

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

A lot of western online news say russia will provide S300 to Iran very soon, so what the f... is the truth

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

Draco.IMF said:


> A lot of western online news say russia will provide S300 to Iran very soon, so what the f... is the truth


he quickly we need the S-300, its permetra us to have a powerful deterrent and air defense .now we must also renew our aviation.

you been on her will be the S-300PMU2 ???

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

Follow the link the video:

فیلم/ رادار 1100 کیلومتری قدیر - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir

Is the same ghadir or new one? The first one was in Gharmsar but this one is in southern Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

The Last of us said:


> Follow the link the video:
> 
> فیلم/ رادار 1100 کیلومتری قدیر - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir
> 
> Is the same ghadir or new one? The first one was in Gharmsar but this one is in southern Iran?



No it's a new one. Another one is already stationed in Garmsar, Semnan province. A third radar will be operational in few months.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The Last of us

Serpentine said:


> No it's a new one. Another one is already stationed in Garmsar, Semnan province. A third radar will be operational in few months.




Thanks, this is great news

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

Serpentine said:


> No it's a new one. Another one is already stationed in Garmsar, Semnan province. A third radar will be operational in few months.



Do you know how many of them are gonna be opertaional? I mean in total?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

raptor22 said:


> Do you know how many of them are gonna be opertaional? I mean in total?



There are two operation and one more will come online soon, it is currently undergoing tests. Thus 3 ghadirs in total.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

raptor22 said:


> Do you know how many of them are gonna be opertaional? I mean in total?



3 is confirmed for now, although these 3 are enough to cover all of Iran's airspace alone and surrounding countries, they may want to build few more to increase detection range to nearly 1000 km out of Iran's borders (if they are stationed 100km from borders)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## [Bregs]

Pleased to see all round development in Iran , Great country with Resilient people

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## scythian500

Did you know what was comments of some UAE and Omani citizens in one Arabic forum about this radar (the first Ghadir radar If I,m not wrong)?
Things likes these:
see with whom we are dealing with!!
1- God bless Islamic Republic... It is the pride of Islamic Ummah!!
2- What is this toy... We had the same antennas for our TV on our roof!!
3- It is all BS... Only Israel can have such advanced military systems (see the slavery mindset!!)
4- Our F-16s will see and destroy Iranian radars before they turn it on!!
5- It is a Safavi Rafidi weapon to use it to revive Persian Empire and occupy Arab lands...
6- This is stupid... A radar can not be like this... a radar form is known... It is not a radar!!
7- This is like those big ocean liner Iranian built while there was a room size hole in front of its hull!! he probably mistaken that whole with anchor hole!!

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## The Last of us

I am surprised you'd waste your time to even look at those forums. Bro, did you expect them to know anything technical? Did you expect them to write about how digital beam forming works etc ? 
Alot of these people have slave mentality and are clueless. UAE lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

scythian500 said:


> 2- What is this toy... We had the same antennas for our TV on our roof!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Daneshmand

scythian500 said:


> Did you know what was comments of some UAE and Omani citizens in one Arabic forum about this radar (the first Ghadir radar If I,m not wrong)?
> Things likes these:
> see with whom we are dealing with!!
> 1- God bless Islamic Republic... It is the pride of Islamic Ummah!!
> 2- What is this toy... We had the same antennas for our TV on our roof!!
> 3- It is all BS... Only Israel can have such advanced military systems (see the slavery mindset!!)
> 4- Our F-16s will see and destroy Iranian radars before they turn it on!!
> 5- It is a Safavi Rafidi weapon to use it to revive Persian Empire and occupy Arab lands...
> 6- This is stupid... A radar can not be like this... a radar form is known... It is not a radar!!
> 7- This is like those big ocean liner Iranian built while there was a room size hole in front of its hull!!



Must have been some low life from UAE. Omani people are cool (Oman has a very old history almost like Iran. It is an old civilization). Few people know this but Omani people are cool towards Iran and they are not even fully Sunni, they follow a school of religion which is different from both Sunni and Shia tradition (Ibadi).

And that observation about the antennas is actually correct. These types of radar work in low freq. zone so their antennas are shaped similarly. It is good to see they have enough brain to see the similarity. Usually this bunch can not see beyond its nose and Takfir any animate thing in front of its poor eyesight.

Anyways other countries have already done these things long before. The most powerful of which was the Russian Woodpecker Radar: Duga-3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iran seems to be interested to develop longer range one: More long-range Iranian early-warning radars revealed

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> I am surprised you'd waste your time to even look at those forums. Bro, did you expect them to know anything technical? Did you expect them to write about how digital beam forming works etc ?
> Alot of these people have slave mentality and are clueless. UAE lol.


man ta hamin avakher ba nar dalayeli miraftam feedback arab ha va russa ro check mikardam... napors chera... alan dige vaghtamo talaf nemikonam.... I know today what kind of people they are... and yes, I gave you examples to see what is their different mentality... If you understand the depth of these comments you clearly understand why their leaders and political system and foreign policy is a perfect match for them! We should never expect anything different from them...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran second "Ghadir" 3D phased array radar with range of 1100 and altitude of 100 km*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran second "Ghadir" 3D phased array 360 degree radar with range of 1100 and altitude of 100 km *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

Just imagine in a few months when Sepehr is shown as well

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

Daneshmand said:


> Must have been some low life from UAE. Omani people are cool (Oman has a very old history almost like Iran. It is an old civilization). Few people know this but Omani people are cool towards Iran and they are not even fully Sunni, they follow a school of religion which is different from both Sunni and Shia tradition (Ibadi).
> 
> And that observation about the antennas is actually correct. These types of radar work in low freq. zone so their antennas are shaped similarly. It is good to see they have enough brain to see the similarity. Usually this bunch can not see beyond its nose and Takfir any animate thing in front of its poor eyesight.
> 
> Anyways other countries have already done these things long before. The most powerful of which was the Russian Woodpecker Radar: Duga-3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Iran seems to be interested to develop longer range one: More long-range Iranian early-warning radars revealed


You are correct, most of omanis were proud of Iran and a fan of Iran against mainstream Arab system. They are cool people...

Regarding that antenna on the roof... the guy was mentioning a UHF radar and the top of Ghadir radar not as being similar but saying : It is nothing... It is a toy Islamic Republic is showing to fool iliterate people... It is nothing... we had one of these on our roof for our TV!! The poor guy never new that their UHF antenna on their roof is just a simple 2 penny reciever...nothing more... but UHF radars have both sender and reciever units and more importantly, it has a very sophisticated processing computer to porcess recieving data... through almost 3 years of monitoring these fox I can brief them like this:

- Saudis knew how sophisticated Iranian systems are... Mostly when the project was a very advanced or big ship or radar or missile or submarine... they knew it but redirecting the discuss into Rafidhi, Safavi Shia hate... that whatever Iranians do we should not praise them as they are shia... so, saudis = Jealousy
- UAE, Qatari and Sunni Bahraini = few kids with takfiri yet absolute illiterate people... they have no idea about science and tech...
- Omani= the majority were fair and promoting
- Shia kuwaiti, Bahraini, Iraqis, etc... = Act like they are Iranians and defend Iran strongly
- Eqyptins: Half jealous, half fair with good tech info
- Tunisian, Lybian= Takfiris in one word!!
- Algeria and most of Moroccan= Majority fair and curious about the technical aspect of Iranian products.
- Lebanon and Syria = Christians and Shia are Iranian fans and you can guess what other sectors would do against anything Iranian!
Russians = majority encouraging but with some minority very jealous and in denial
Belarussia = pro Iran in majority
Ukrainains= fair and technical

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

Iran to Unveil New Missile Defense Shields in September

TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli announced that the country will unveil new missile defense systems early in September.
"Missile systems with the capability to stand against electronic warfare and mid-range and long-range radars will join the integrated air defense system on September 1," Esmayeeli said in the Northeastern city of Semnan on Thursday.

"The radar and missile defense systems will cover an important part of the country in the South and Southeast," he added.

Esmayeeli underlined that defensive depth is one of the main important feature of these systems, specially the long-range radar defense systems.

Esmayeeli announced in June that the country is able to meet all its needs in manufacturing air defense systems.

"We have been able to build all our needed (air defense) systems domestically," the senior commander told reporters in the Central province of Isfahan.

Noting that defending the Iranian airspace is a priority in the country's defensive doctrine, he said that increasing the number of air defense systems has always had a message of peace and friendship.

Also in April, Esmayeeli announced that Iran plans to add two new powerful missile defense systems into its integrated air defense network this year, including its own version of the Russian S-300 named Bavar 373.

"The long-range air defense missile system, Bavar (Belief) 373, will be built by the end of this (Iranian) year (which started on March 21) and will be deployed in specified regions," Esmayeeli told reporters in Tehran, referring to the Iranian version of the sophisticated Russian S-300 missile defense shield.

He also announced the country's plan to test mid and long-range Talash (Endeavor) missile system, and said, "The system will be brought into operation by the end of this year."

Warning that the most important threats posed to Iran are from the sky, Esmayeeli said if Yemen had enjoyed a powerful air defense, it would have been able to defend itself against the Saudi airstrikes and end the war on the very first day.
Farsnews

@rahi2357 @ResurgentIran @haman10 @scythian500 @2800 @mohsen @rmi5 

You guys think we will see Talash-3 officially unveiled?:






I am already excised as fkc

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> Iran to Unveil New Missile Defense Shields in September
> 
> TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli announced that the country will unveil new missile defense systems early in September.
> "Missile systems with the capability to stand against electronic warfare and mid-range and long-range radars will join the integrated air defense system on September 1," Esmayeeli said in the Northeastern city of Semnan on Thursday.
> 
> "The radar and missile defense systems will cover an important part of the country in the South and Southeast," he added.
> 
> Esmayeeli underlined that defensive depth is one of the main important feature of these systems, specially the long-range radar defense systems.
> 
> Esmayeeli announced in June that the country is able to meet all its needs in manufacturing air defense systems.
> 
> "We have been able to build all our needed (air defense) systems domestically," the senior commander told reporters in the Central province of Isfahan.
> 
> Noting that defending the Iranian airspace is a priority in the country's defensive doctrine, he said that increasing the number of air defense systems has always had a message of peace and friendship.
> 
> Also in April, Esmayeeli announced that Iran plans to add two new powerful missile defense systems into its integrated air defense network this year, including its own version of the Russian S-300 named Bavar 373.
> 
> "The long-range air defense missile system, Bavar (Belief) 373, will be built by the end of this (Iranian) year (which started on March 21) and will be deployed in specified regions," Esmayeeli told reporters in Tehran, referring to the Iranian version of the sophisticated Russian S-300 missile defense shield.
> 
> He also announced the country's plan to test mid and long-range Talash (Endeavor) missile system, and said, "The system will be brought into operation by the end of this year."
> 
> Warning that the most important threats posed to Iran are from the sky, Esmayeeli said if Yemen had enjoyed a powerful air defense, it would have been able to defend itself against the Saudi airstrikes and end the war on the very first day.
> Farsnews
> 
> @rahi2357 @ResurgentIran @haman10 @scythian500 @2800 @mohsen @rmi5
> 
> You guys think we will see Talash-3 officially unveiled?:


wow... I have new info about this...I was about to share it with you yesterday but seems Ismaeili announced a part of it sooner! or maybe he is talking about something else!

Guys, there are two revolutionary updatess with regard to the new long range systems. Remember when I told you about a system IRCG and Khatam al Anbyah are working together on? That system has entered mass production and it has something you surprise about. I can not share everything I have heard about these systems but give you a hint.

You know one of tricks to detect the operation characteristics of an air defense system (its detection and guidance radar beams) is to fly a target close to them and then transfer receiving beams to computers to identify the air defense's A to Z.

New defense systems will have the capability to fight this trick and deceive those information-gatherer targets... 

Previous Iranian missiles were capable of changing its route toward the jamming unit when attacked by a jamming unit whether it is on the fighter plane itself or a ground jamming unit. Now, a new system will be added to the missiles. This new system when attacked by a jammer, can deceive the jammer too and keep the missile on intended course.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Last of us

scythian500 said:


> wow... I have new info about this...I was about to share it with you yesterday but seems Ismaeili announced a part of it sooner! or maybe he is talking about something else!
> 
> Guys, there are two revolutionary updatess with regard to the new long range systems. Remember when I told you about a system IRCG and Khatam al Anbyah are working together on? That system has entered mass production and it has something you surprise about. I can not share everything I have heard about these systems but give you a hint.
> 
> You know one of tricks to detect the operation characteristics of an air defense system (its detection and guidance radar beams) is to fly a target close to them and then transfer receiving beams to computers to identify the air defense's A to Z.
> 
> New defense systems will have the capability to fight this trick and deceive those information-gatherer targets...
> 
> Previous Iranian missiles were capable of changing its route toward the jamming unit when attacked by a jamming unit whether it is on the fighter plane itself or a ground jamming unit. Now, a new system will be added to the missiles. This new system when attacked by a jammer, can deceive the jammer too and keep the missile on intended course.



Dadash, you are a star 
Please promise you will not leave this forum or if you do you'll join IMF because you have no idea how much I like reading your informative posts

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> Dadash, you are a star
> Please promise you will not leave this forum or if you do you'll join IMF because you have no idea how much I like reading your informative posts


ghorboonet dadash... Iran needs a year or two in order to become an impenetrable wall against modern threats. Although, the enemies systems are on progress every day too but Iran is also working hard to lower the gap.

Sanctions was a bless for Iran. I wish the leader keep doing what he is doing with regard to military and science. He is becoming a science and tech obsessed and I like it. These progress will stay for Iran, not matter who rule the country. 

I have a friend in one of science and tech parks. He is an inventor and researcher in IT sector. He says things that if you knew, you could n't sleep for a week!! Just give you this assurance, that in couple of years, Iran will jump in military science and tech by times. I guess one of the reasons the leader accepted the deal was to give the young scientists of Iran more time and money to finish what they started. By 10 years from now, Iran will have more stakes to bring on the table and then can ask for more share in world. 

They have very hawkish projects and with enough funds and time, Iran can become a real tech holder in military very soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Last of us

scythian500 said:


> ghorboonet dadash... Iran needs a year or two in order to become an impenetrable wall against modern threats. Although, the enemies systems are on progress every day too but Iran is also working hard to lower the gap.
> 
> Sanctions was a bless for Iran. I wish the leader keep doing what he is doing with regard to military and science. He is becoming a science and tech obsessed and I like it. These progress will stay for Iran, not matter who rule the country.
> 
> I have a friend in one of science and tech parks. He is an inventor and researcher in IT sector. He says things that if you knew, you could n't sleep for a week!! Just give you this assurance, that in couple of years, Iran will jump in military science and tech by times. I guess one of the reasons the leader accepted the deal was to give the young scientists of Iran more time and money to finish what they started. By 10 years from now, Iran will have more stakes to bring on the table and then can ask for more share in world.
> 
> They have very hawkish projects and with enough funds and time, Iran can become a real tech holder in military very soon.



You're welcome dadash.

I hope you are right and this great momentum Iran has gained in our science, technology and indigenous capability will not stop and speed up. I am really looking forward to seeing these new radar systems, what you said is a very important capability for those radars. It seems the radars they will unveil are the radar you talked about! This is because they seemed to emphasis on the electronic warfare capability!


----------



## Draco.IMF

Well they also promised to show B373 some months ago, all they show was a missile...


----------



## scythian500

Draco.IMF said:


> Well they also promised to show B373 some months ago, all they show was a missile...


They only promised the missiles and they showed it... The whole system to be put in operation in 7 to 9 month from now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

scythian500 said:


> They only promised the missiles and they showed it... The whole system to be put in operation in 7 to 9 month from now.



Will it be on same level as S300 PMU2?


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> You're welcome dadash.
> 
> I hope you are right and this great momentum Iran has gained in our science, technology and indigenous capability will not stop and speed up. I am really looking forward to seeing these new radar systems, what you said is a very important capability for those radars. It seems the radars they will unveil are the radar you talked about! This is because they seemed to emphasis on the electronic warfare capability!



I somehow have my own links to the new science and tech parks. The main source of civilian and sometime military progress is more than 10000 private high tech companies who nearly 3000 of them are hosted by tech parks and others are active outside parks. There is a new wave of talented young scientists applying for the loans and government support to start their own high tech companies. These parks has strict orders from the leader. Even some of Ayatullah al Ozma's now promoting to direct religious founds directly to these parks. This is very promising. This is the movement should have started 2 decades ago. Late is better than never.

My friend who is an IT scientist gave me one example on how things are going. There was a guy (chemical engineer), he received private loans from banks to work on one of his inventions. He spent 100 million and later that he has the product he could n't pay his dept to the banks. A group of his friends started to share his invention with start-up investors in Europe. There were few offers to buy the whole product for $5 millions (best offer). Non of those investors were ready to do the production job in Iran. They wanted the whole package for a price. He is very hisbullahi so rejected those offers after a long thought.

He then went to the science and tech park council. They gave him a loan of $10m (in IRRs of course) to start his own factory with almost ZERO interest (%3). He finished the job last month. The council connected him to defense ministry. He now is on the verge of signing a contract with them to supply them with that glue that he invented.

The glue is thousands of time stronger, is in form of spray so can be applied to any surface. The glue also acts as one of the strongest sound/heat/cold and moisture isolation layer too.

He said, there is a new wave among inventors and researches to start their own high tech factories. This is the right way and it must be continuing forever. This is the key to success.

btw, when I talk to my friend about how far they are from the latest IT systems and software and so on, he claims that it is not that difficult and they can do whatever they are asked.

If I were in Rouhani's shoes, I would create a fix or increasing amount of like $5 billions to support existing and new high tech enterprises. There was a saying by an authority in tech parks, saying every dollar invested in these parks can return 200 times more...

I know possibly only one in ten graduates are high quality inventors or researchers but let's be honest, Iran has millions of graduates and hundreds of thousands join them every year. Even %10 of them are a huge number and can make a very big difference.



Draco.IMF said:


> Will it be on same level as S300 PMU2?


based on latest news, it is equal to S-300 (not known which version but since Iran was after PMU-1 in 2007 it won't be lower than PMU-1) in some aspects and even stronger and smarter in other aspects. Let us wait another 7-9 month to see them in operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

scythian500 said:


> I somehow have my own links to the new science and tech parks. The main source of civilian and sometime military progress is more than 10000 private high tech companies who nearly 3000 of them are hosted by tech parks and others are active outside parks. There is a new wave of talented young scientists applying for the loans and government support to start their own high tech companies. These parks has strict orders from the leader. Even some of Ayatullah al Ozma's now promoting to direct religious founds directly to these parks. This is very promising. This is the movement should have started 2 decades ago. Late is better than never.
> 
> My friend who is an IT scientist gave me one example on how things are going. There was a guy (chemical engineer), he received private loans from banks to work on one of his inventions. He spent 100 million and later that he has the product he could n't pay his dept to the banks. A group of his friends started to share his invention with start-up investors in Europe. There were few offers to buy the whole product for $5 millions. Non of those investors were ready to do the production job in Iran. They wanted the whole package for a price. He is very hisbullahi so rejected those offers after a long thought.
> 
> He then went to the science and tech park council. They gave him a loan of $10m to start his own factory with almost ZERO interest (%3). He finished the job last month. The council connected him to defence minsitry. He know is on the verge of signing a contract with them to supply them with that glue that he invented.
> 
> The glue is thousands of time stronger, is in form of spray so can be applied to any surface. The glue also acts as one of the strongest sound/heat/cold and moisture isolation layer too.
> 
> He said, there is a new wave among inventors and researches to start their own high tech factories. This is the right way and it must be continuing forever. This is the key to success.
> 
> btw, when I talk to my friend about how far they are from the latest IT systems and software and so on, he claims that it is not that difficult and they can do whatever they are asked.
> 
> If I were in Rouhani's shoes, I would create a fix or increasing amount of like $5 billions to support existing and new high tech enterprises. There was a saying by an authority in tech parks, saying every dollar invested in these parks can return 200 times more...
> 
> I know one in ten graduates are high quality inventors or researchers but let's be honest, Iran has millions of graduates and hundreds of thousands join them every year. Even %10 of them are a huge number and can make a very big difference.



Thank you for writing this dadash. Very nice stories, makes me happy to hear such things.
Do you know anything about the state of micro processor in Iran? I understand this sector requires much funding, but we have very talented electrical engineers. I really want to see Iran make a semi conductor fab. This is a very strategic sector and if a country like Taiwan can be a hub for such a thing, I think there is no reason why Iran cannot at least reach a stage where we can design and produce our own chips. Electronic, computing and material science are sector I would invest heavily. We already know MAPNA is a good company and makes good turbines, so we're good in material science, so next stage needs to be materials for use in jet engines. Engine development is another sector which is extremely strategic both for military and non military. The recent engine company created by the Rahbar was a good sign. But sadly it seemed, it will not work on rocket engines for space launch vehicles. We need efficient liquid rocket engines. As I can see, engine sector is such an important sector that we need to invest heavily in it. I know there are many fields which need investment, but for me, engine and electronic need great attention as well. It feels to me, I could be wrong, but it feels that Iran did not give these fields much attention. Maybe it could have just been we did not have the money.


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> Thank you for writing this dadash. Very nice stories, makes me happy to hear such things.
> Do you know anything about the state of micro processor in Iran? I understand this sector requires much funding, but we have very talented electrical engineers. I really want to see Iran make a semi conductor fab. This is a very strategic sector and if a country like Taiwan can be a hub for such a thing, I think there is no reason why Iran cannot at least reach a stage where we can design and produce our own chips. Electronic, computing and material science are sector I would invest heavily. We already know MAPNA is a good company and makes good turbines, so we're good in material science, so next stage needs to be materials for use in jet engines. Engine development is another sector which is extremely strategic both for military and non military. The recent engine company created by the Rahbar was a good sign. But sadly it seemed, it will not work on rocket engines for space launch vehicles. We need efficient liquid rocket engines. As I can see, engine sector is such a important sector that we need to invest heavily in it.


I don't know anything about Iranian activities on micro processors in general. I can ask my IT friend and come back to you. I think the importance of having local engines is long acclaimed by IRCG and Defense Ministry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

scythian500 said:


> based on latest news, it is equal to S-300 (not known which version but since Iran was after PMU-1 in 2007 it won't be lower than PMU-1) in some aspects and even stronger and smarter in other aspects. Let us wait another 7-9 month to see them in operation.



ok i aksed you because i thought you have better informations due contacts to IRGC or whatever
thanks anyway

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

my friend, develop motor and quality Nanotechnology is not an easy thing it takes time and means, and I know that Iran is able and will succeed but the question is how long?

we must understand one thing is that we do not reinvent the wheel allon, we must not start from 0, the Chinese like Indian I start by already existing database, a Russian cooperation China and Iran will bring us much, if we develop a fighter and missing engine we could ask russia or china, it is not a problem but I do not pebnse we developper.donc a hunter you have to order and then continue search .

for if taiwan processor successful iran has all the luck in some Decenie we can easily exceed and become the world leader.

to return to the subject I am still waiting to see the bavar373 to the action, the S-300PMU1 obselete and would require minimum performance PMU2, but I think that Iran can negotiate the S-400 now because the embargo lifted and russia a mi S-400 on the walk, and my other country Algeria will receive the S-400, so a strategic cooperation between Russia and Iran can offer us advanced technology and Ultra weapon sophistication as the Su-t50 T-14Armata, submersibl lada, S-400 radar and NEBO.

I think if iran to a lot of expertise in the field, it could change the bavar373 to increase the capacity at the S-300 that Russia sold us, otherwise it will request the assistance of the Russian and Chinese to help us increase the capacity, it is not a shame to ask the person who owns the technology, because one day we will be powerful, if China will not have ask for help from russia to the engine and all Otherwise, China would never become powerful, beacoup him have his time, China uses Russian aircraft and engine biento it will use that Chinese engine, the Chinese HQ-9 and copied on the S-300, and iran can do the same to progress quickly.

I have no confidence on the US, it takes advantage of the end of emabrgo to arm themselves with high-tech weapons from Russia, I think especially the S-400, SU-35 and helicopter tours mid- 28 to fight daesh, helicopter tours as a mid-28 night fighter and paramount to have an advantage over the enemy.


----------



## The Last of us

رادار جدید پدافند هوایی 1000 کیلومتر بُرد خواهد داشت
Khatam Al-anbia air defense new radar will be with 
range 1,000 km 




فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی برد رادار جدید این قرارگاه را حدود هزار کیلومتر عنوان کرد و افزود: این یک رادار راهبردی است که در یکی از نقاط راهبردی کشور نصب و راه اندازی می شود.
خبرگزاری فارس: رادار جدید پدافند هوایی 1000 کیلومتر بُرد خواهد داشت

به گزارش گروه دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا(ص) طی روزهای اخیر از رونمایی جدیدترین رادار پدافندی در دهم شهریور ماه خبر داده بود.

وی امروز صبح نیز در حاشیه نماز عید سعید فطر، برد این رادار را حدود هزار کیلومتر عنوان کرد و افزود: این یک رادار راهبردی است که در یکی از نقاط راهبردی کشور نصب و راه اندازی می شود.

اسماعیلی خاطرنشان کرد: تعداد پروازهای عبوری از کشور از 900 فروند در دو سه ماه گذشته امروز به 1300 فروند در طول 24 ساعت شبانه روز رسیده که این نتیجه امنیت پایدار جمهوری اسلامی ایران است

امیر اسماعیلی: رادار جدید پدافند هوایی 1000 کیلومتر بُرد خواهد داشت

@scythian500 

It seems this a new 1000km ranged radar. I am assuming it will be static and not mobile? It's range seems too big to be mobile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> I somehow have my own links to the new science and tech parks. The main source of civilian and sometime military progress is more than 10000 private high tech companies who nearly 3000 of them are hosted by tech parks and others are active outside parks. There is a new wave of talented young scientists applying for the loans and government support to start their own high tech companies. These parks has strict orders from the leader. Even some of Ayatullah al Ozma's now promoting to direct religious founds directly to these parks. This is very promising. This is the movement should have started 2 decades ago. Late is better than never.
> 
> My friend who is an IT scientist gave me one example on how things are going. There was a guy (chemical engineer), he received private loans from banks to work on one of his inventions. He spent 100 million and later that he has the product he could n't pay his dept to the banks. A group of his friends started to share his invention with start-up investors in Europe. There were few offers to buy the whole product for $5 millions (best offer). Non of those investors were ready to do the production job in Iran. They wanted the whole package for a price. He is very hisbullahi so rejected those offers after a long thought.
> 
> He then went to the science and tech park council. They gave him a loan of $10m (in IRRs of course) to start his own factory with almost ZERO interest (%3). He finished the job last month. The council connected him to defense ministry. He now is on the verge of signing a contract with them to supply them with that glue that he invented.
> 
> The glue is thousands of time stronger, is in form of spray so can be applied to any surface. The glue also acts as one of the strongest sound/heat/cold and moisture isolation layer too.
> 
> He said, there is a new wave among inventors and researches to start their own high tech factories. This is the right way and it must be continuing forever. This is the key to success.
> 
> btw, when I talk to my friend about how far they are from the latest IT systems and software and so on, he claims that it is not that difficult and they can do whatever they are asked.
> 
> If I were in Rouhani's shoes, I would create a fix or increasing amount of like $5 billions to support existing and new high tech enterprises. There was a saying by an authority in tech parks, saying every dollar invested in these parks can return 200 times more...
> 
> I know possibly only one in ten graduates are high quality inventors or researchers but let's be honest, Iran has millions of graduates and hundreds of thousands join them every year. Even %10 of them are a huge number and can make a very big difference.
> 
> 
> based on latest news, it is equal to S-300 (not known which version but since Iran was after PMU-1 in 2007 it won't be lower than PMU-1) in some aspects and even stronger and smarter in other aspects. Let us wait another 7-9 month to see them in operation.


Very nice post, I enjoy reading your posts. How can someone get in touch with these science parks. I like to be able to go back and do research or keep in touch with them from here. May be next time I visit Iran I can go to one of these parks and see their infrastructure.


----------



## Tomyris

This is good news, my friends, but I have to do a little off topic, excuse me.

I think that the agreement signed and a scam .... we must refused.


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> This is good news, my friends, but I have to do a little off topic, excuse me.
> 
> I think that the agreement signed and a scam .... we must refused.



It's very easy for you say "refuse the deal". You don't live in Iran and don't experience the hardships, please don't make such comments. There deal is NOT perfect, but it is good enough.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> It's very easy for you say "refuse the deal". You don't live in Iran and don't experience the hardships, please don't make such comments. There deal is NOT perfect, but it is good enough.


no it's not easy for me, my brother, we reject the Western up of the arms embargo, and if all its was a plan to reduce Iranian nuclear capacity to attack it better now?

thoughtful, with this agreement the oil will decline sharply, its going to tremendously help the West when iran are going to reduce the stock of uranium, and the only central to produce uranium will be that of bousherh, Western will attack iran ... and destroy the central one which produces uranium and have nothing to fear from eventual Iranian bomb.

I think that Iran will negotiate the severely lifted the embargo on conventional weapons, our army has obselete materials ... we must recognize the ..

.I know that life and hard but you have to drink the water of satan, iran will have to average wholesale in military Prejet and bought everything that can bought .

.this agreement can be a trap to reduce the capacity of iran to know better now and what the progression of iranet then destroy us.

why wait 5 years for the embargo lifted while the weapon circulates in Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region? we have the embargo lifted negotiate a 2-year moin

.in the words of Ayatollah Khamenei, should never trust them, remember when khadafi a halt are atomique..il programe is destroyed ..it should not do the same mistake even if it is powerful, it are strong too any mistakes we may Listen to expensive.

I think that Iran should quickly negotiate the S-400 and increase its offensive capability

the agreement would have been perfect if the embargo was lifted weapon would, as a powerful conventional army, Asymmetrical, missile and have ruled out any military threat from israel and other countries ...

think about it


----------



## The Great One

Tomyris said:


> Western will attack iran


Why would West attack Iran?


----------



## Tomyris

The Great One said:


> Why would West attack Iran?


because Iran has sharply reduced its nuclear capacity, the entire stock of enriched uranium will be destroyed unless 300k ..... 10 000t and a central one will produce uranium when bombing is easy destroy the main and iran can not build a bomb it will take time and all the other central remetre to date and enrich uranium, while Western sanctions could hand them easily, while the capacity of militaire iran remain InChanger.

it's not fair the American can easily say in 1 or 2 years that Iran has not complied with these commitments and remeterons sanction whereas Iran has already destroyed the uranium stock and half off plusieurs Central ...

will the agreement was just lifted from embargo with the gun because you'll have to order weapons to deter enemy to attack, even if the embargo will be handed the weapon already progressivement Iranian and rebuild everything that was destroyed The Western are deceitful never leave us alone.

I'm suspicious in nature and I reflechie has all the eventuality as possible over the long term occidentaux are losing because Iran will become a great military power and global econimique but the term court iran and losing because if Westerners do not respect their commitment, we could lose everything.


----------



## The Great One

Tomyris said:


> because Iran has sharply reduced its nuclear capacity, the entire stock of enriched uranium will be destroyed unless 300k ..... 10 000t and a central one will produce uranium when bombing is easy destroy the main and iran can not build a bomb it will take time and all the other central remetre to date and enrich uranium, while Western sanctions could hand them easily, while the capacity of militaire iran remain InChanger.
> 
> it's not fair the American can easily say in 1 or 2 years that Iran has not complied with these commitments and remeterons sanction whereas Iran has already destroyed the uranium stock and half off plusieurs Central ...
> 
> will the agreement was just lifted from embargo with the gun because you'll have to order weapons to deter enemy to attack, even if the embargo will be handed the weapon already progressivement Iranian and rebuild everything that was destroyed The Western are deceitful never leave us alone.
> 
> I'm suspicious in nature and I reflechie has all the eventuality as possible over the long term occidentaux are losing because Iran will become a great military power and global econimique but the term court iran and losing because if Westerners do not respect their commitment, we could lose everything.


Its very difficult to understand what you are writing with those spellings, grammar and syntax but I'll try (correct me if I'm wrong) - 
Basically speaking, Iran will be attacked to negate its ability to produce nukes, after the West reached an agreement with Iran*- that will negate Iran's ability to produce nukes, so that it doesn't have to attack Iran to negate its ability to produce nukes

* to remove sanctions that were placed to inhibit Iran's ability to produce nukes


----------



## Tomyris

The Great One said:


> Its very difficult to understand what you are writing with those spellings, grammar and syntax but I'll try (correct me if I'm wrong) -
> Basically speaking, Iran will be attacked to negate its ability to produce nukes, after the West reached an agreement with Iran*- that will negate Iran's ability to produce nukes, so that it doesn't have to attack Iran to negate its ability to produce nukes
> 
> * to remove sanctions that were placed to inhibit Iran's ability to produce nukes


I'm sorry I use google translation.

not the American will never accept that Iran will be a power that will infleuncer their intreret in the region and in the world because iran and a free nation, and the agreement shows that the 15 next year iran are able to resume nuclear programe is 100% free emabrgo.

its mean that Iran can produce nuclear weapons but the more his emabrgo will be lifted, military iran will be overkill and you think the American will accept her? it does not have the choice to act as his but it will do everything to break iran.

if there are more likely to destroy iran now is because in 10 years it will be too late. why it is not accepted up to the arms embargo? why lasted 5 years?

for 5 years iran has already destroyed all stocks of uranium and are crumbs off most of central and militarily iran remain the same ultra weapon without purchasing capacity sophisticate, so it is ideal to start attack and destroy forever the Iranian Atomic has programe.

I not trust them, he also want to use against iran daesh has run it for first-line exhausting, turn their weapons factory in monarchy traitor and help Western with a drop of oil has consistently out of the crisis, it is all ay earned an agreement with Iran, but if Iran can not arm the agreement void.
there is no reason that the embargo be lifted if not for the easily remetre emabrgo economic and militarily threaten Iran it makes sense not you find?


----------



## The Last of us

@Tomyris

We are taking the thread off topic so this is my last comment in the matter.
I will say this again, it is not up to you and I what happens in Iran. The Iranian people needed sanctions relief, oil prices may reduce in the beginning but overtime they will go up again. Sanction removal will not just help the oil sector but will seriously cause a boom in Iranian economy if the correct management is applied.

Also, I told you this before many times. You keep saying Iran "needs" weapons for deterrence. Deterrence against who? *Nobody* will attack Iran, Iran already has deterrence due to it own indigenous military. Iran will in time buy/invest in technology for airforce. Airforce is the only sector Iran needs help in. 5 years is nothing. If Iran orders fighter planes, by the time they're ready to be delivered, the 5 years is over.

You have the right to be suspicious. But understand the reason the US had to make concessions is because they have *no choice. *The sanctions could not have been kept in place for ever because countries (Japan, China, Korea,India etc) were being hurt by them and at some point, the sanctions regime would have fallen apart and at the same time, Iranian nuclear program kept on growing. Thus, the Americans had no choice but to negotiate and make these concessions. It is important to understand, the reason why the arms embargo had to be lifted is because they are part of the nuclear sanctions! Therefore, the American had no choice but to lift them, the best they could do is delay their lifting by 5 years, which they did. China and Russia wanted them lifted immediately.

Anyway, this thread is about airdefence so we should not take it offtopic.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> @Tomyris
> 
> We are taking the thread off topic so this is my last comment in the matter.
> I will say this again, it is not up to you and I what happens in Iran. The Iranian people needed sanctions relief, oil prices may reduce in the beginning but overtime they will go up again. Sanction removal will not just help the oil sector but will seriously cause a boom in Iranian economy if the correct management is applied.
> 
> Also, I told you this before many times. You keep saying Iran "needs" weapons for deterrence. Deterrence against who? *Nobody* will attack Iran, Iran already has deterrence due to it own indigenous military. Iran will in time buy/invest in technology for airforce. Airforce is the only sector Iran needs help in. 5 years is nothing. If Iran orders fighter planes, by the time they're ready to be delivered, the 5 years is over.
> 
> You have the right to be suspicious. But understand the reason the US had to make concessions is because they have *no choice. *The sanctions could not have been kept in place for ever because countries (Japan, China, Korea,India etc) were being hurt by them and at some point, the sanctions regime would have fallen apart and at the same time, Iranian nuclear program kept on growing. Thus, the Americans had no choice but to negotiate and make these concessions. It is important to understand, the reason why the arms embargo had to be lifted is because they are part of the nuclear sanctions! Therefore, the American had no choice but to lift them, the best they could do is delay their lifting by 5 years, which they did. China and Russia wanted them lifted immediately.
> 
> Anyway, this thread is about airdefence so we should not take it offtopic.


I understand what you mean, but what I try to explain to you is that it will be easy to remetre the penalty but it will be difficult for us to resume our nuclear programe .....

.I am up for the sanction to help my people but do not fall into a trap.

you think anyone will attack us possible yes but the thing we change our ally in the region are in big trouble, and ruin syria and hezbollah and engage in a tough fight

.for the air force, five years is a lot, I'll be loving his moin, I reminds you that this is not as airplanes, even the battle tank; the submarine and helicopter.I agree with you that it would take to iran is to order them now, and in 5 years we will receive them, but I did trust the American pa

,if the Russian and Chinese wanted the embargo lifted it immediatly because he had some great project lead with iran or the big order.

I read an article that highlights the importance of the air force and our air force us is low

all I want to tell you is that it will have tried to reduce the emabrgo was 2 or 3 years time to make the order. is 5 years anything can happen.


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> I understand what you mean, but what I try to explain to you is that it will be easy to remetre the penalty but it will be difficult for us to resume our nuclear programe .....
> 
> .I am up for the sanction to help my people but do not fall into a trap.
> 
> you think anyone will attack us possible yes but the thing we change our ally in the region are in big trouble, and ruin syria and hezbollah and engage in a tough fight
> 
> .for the air force, five years is a lot, I'll be loving his moin, I reminds you that this is not as airplanes, even the battle tank; the submarine and helicopter.I agree with you that it would take to iran is to order them now, and in 5 years we will receive them, but I did trust the American pa
> 
> ,if the Russian and Chinese wanted the embargo lifted it immediatly because he had some great project lead with iran or the big order.
> 
> I read an article that highlights the importance of the air force and our air force us is low
> 
> all I want to tell you is that it will have tried to reduce the emabrgo was 2 or 3 years time to make the order. is 5 years anything can happen.




My sister, You are worrying for no reason. Believe me, Iran is in a very good position. What trap?
Nuclear program is not going anywhere, all they have done is taken some centrifuges and put them somewhere else. We are still researching on more advance centrifuges. Even under this deal, Iran is still one year away from a bomb.

Iran does not need to buy tanks, submarines, helicopters, it can make all these things itself, the industry and technology is there but they need money. As for fighter planes, they are not everything. 5 years will go very fast. Airforce is important, but for Iran it is not everything. Now that Iran is going to get rich, we can also invest in our own indigenous development  Just have patience. Good things are coming.

If you want to continue this discussion, please don't do it here. This is not a thread for that. Iranian chill thread is a better place. Tag me there if you want.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> My sister, You are worrying for no reason. Believe me, Iran is in a very good position. What trap?
> Nuclear program is not going anywhere, all they have done is taken some centrifuges and put them somewhere else. We are still researching on more advance centrifuges. Even under this deal, Iran is still one year away from a bomb.
> 
> Iran does not need to buy tanks, submarines, helicopters, it can make all these things itself, the industry and technology is there but they need money. As for fighter planes, they are not everything. 5 years will go very fast. Airforce is important, but for Iran it is not everything. Now that Iran is going to get rich, we can also invest in our own indigenous development  Just have patience. Good things are coming.
> 
> If you want to continue this discussion, please don't do it here. This is not a thread for that. Iranian chill thread is a better place. Tag me there if you want.


I know and topical or you can link the pliz and co tinue the discution


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran’s IRGC launches 2nd Qadir radar system*






The photo shows Iran's first Qadir radar system, which was unveiled in the central city of Garmsar in June 2014. (Fars new agency photo)
*
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has launched a long-rangeradar system in the southwest of the country to enhance its air defense capabilities.*

The second Qadir radar system was put into service in Iran’s southwestern city of Ahwaz on Saturday.

The first Qadir system was unveiled in the city of Garmsar in the central province of Semnan in June 2014. The third system is also scheduled to be unveiled in the near future.

The domestically-manufactured Qadir radar system, designed by IRGC’s Aerospace Division, is capable of detecting targets with a very small cross section from a long distance.

The system enjoys a direct range of 1,100 kilometers (more than 680 miles) and can be used to detect different types of aircraft as well as ballistic missiles.

Qadir falls in the category of long-range three-dimensional radar systems.

In recent years, Iran has made major breakthroughs in its defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in producing important military equipment and systems.





Iran's Kayhan radar (Tasnim Photo)

The country has manufactured different types of state-of-the-art radar systems, including Arash-2 and Kayhan.

The Islamic Republic has repeatedly assured other nations, particularly its neighbors, that its military might poses no threat to other countries, insisting that its defense doctrine is merely based on deterrence.


----------



## Siavash

The Last of us said:


> My sister, You are worrying for no reason. Believe me, Iran is in a very good position. What trap?
> Nuclear program is not going anywhere, all they have done is taken some centrifuges and put them somewhere else. We are still researching on more advance centrifuges. Even under this deal, Iran is still one year away from a bomb.
> 
> Iran does not need to buy tanks, submarines, helicopters, it can make all these things itself, the industry and technology is there but they need money. As for fighter planes, they are not everything. 5 years will go very fast. Airforce is important, but for Iran it is not everything. Now that Iran is going to get rich, we can also invest in our own indigenous development  Just have patience. Good things are coming.
> 
> If you want to continue this discussion, please don't do it here. This is not a thread for that. Iranian chill thread is a better place. Tag me there if you want.



I think Last of Us is right. This deal stops any aggression to Iran for the next 15 years. That doesn't mean Iran will stop R & D and developing Arms at its will but it gives time to redefine the priorities and approach the problems with less stress. Unlike what IRGC commander says it doesn't ban missiles all together. Iran can still R & D higher precision tactical missiles and navigation for what it has in stock. Better CEP and cheaper ones or more sophisticated ones. There had been no better era in Iran' s past than this to focus on developing the country economically and militarily. Having the stockpile was not securing anything as we didn't have weaponizing plan and if we had ever would match the world. Ithink it is better now and safer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> I think Last of Us is right. This deal stops any aggression to Iran for the next 15 years. That doesn't mean Iran will stop R & D and developing Arms at its will but it gives time to redefine the priorities and approach the problems with less stress. Unlike what IRGC commander says it doesn't ban missiles all together. Iran can still R & D higher precision tactical missiles and navigation for what it has in stock. Better CEP and cheaper ones or more sophisticated ones. There had been no better era in Iran' s past than this to focus on developing the country economically and militarily. Having the stockpile was not securing anything as we didn't have weaponizing plan and if we had ever would match the world. Ithink it is better now and safer.


we will see.


----------



## scythian500

Iranian Defense Engineers in IRGF finished their work on Air Defense Robotic systems that can manage and 2 or 4 round robot missile launchers. General Heidari, announced today, that they have performed 3 tests so far and most of them were successful. He promised to showcase these new robots in coming drills.

تست موفق «اتوماسیون ربات پدافندی» نزاجا - مشرق نیوز | آخرین اخبار ایران و جهان | mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> Iranian Defense Engineers in IRGF finished their work on Air Defense Robotic systems that can manage and 2 or 4 round robot missile launchers. General Heidari, announced today, that they have performed 3 tests so far and most of them were successful. He promised to showcase these new robots in coming drills.


As far as I understood, it is basically a remote control rocket or AA launcher with a range of 500 meters from the remote control!


----------



## scythian500

Siavash said:


> As far as I understood, it is basically a remote control rocket or AA launcher with a range of 500 meters from the remote control!


Being a robotic system it does not mean to be fully independent. It is like robots in IKCO car company. Those robots receive initial command from controllers from a distance and then perform the orders by their own... So, it is a robotic launcher... Launchers will do all the job after receiving commands with no human interference....


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> Being a robotic system it does not mean to be fully independent. It is like robots in IKCO car company. Those robots receive initial command from controllers from a distance and then perform the orders by their own... So, it is a robotic launcher... Launchers will do all the job after receiving commands with no human interference....


yes it's not the suffisant.et worn too short.

iran has to partnership with countries to develop ratrapper its delay, otherwise we will lose time.

iran has primarily develop air defense and aviation, if Russia can give us the technology to develop missile like the S-300/400 and modern fighter aircraft like the MIG-35 and su-35, our country will become large, we will be 100% independent and could sell our product.

if bavar373 is a good system, a copperation with Russia would be perfect for IMPROVED develop one that will be similar, kind noveau S-400.

we can we are a great nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> yes it's not the suffisant.et worn too short.
> 
> iran has to partnership with countries to develop ratrapper its delay, otherwise we will lose time.
> 
> iran has primarily develop air defense and aviation, if Russia can give us the technology to develop missile like the S-300/400 and modern fighter aircraft like the MIG-35 and su-35, our country will become large, we will be 100% independent and could sell our product.
> 
> if bavar373 is a good system, a copperation with Russia would be perfect for IMPROVED develop one that will be similar, kind noveau S-400.
> 
> we can we are a great nation.


Why do you think we should always look for other industrialized nations to grow more progressed? It is good to have cooperation and share knowledge but not like we won't be top in science and tech if we don't have others' support.

To your surprise Iran is more advanced than Russia in some aspects of science and tech although overall still Russia is a head. Yet, in military equipment technology Russia is still much more advanced than Iran.

Missile, Space and Airplanes are some of weapons Iran can use Russian expertise with.


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> Why do you think we should always look for other industrialized nations to grow more progressed? It is good to have cooperation and share knowledge but not like we won't be top in science and tech if we don't have others' support.
> 
> To your surprise Iran is more advanced than Russia in some aspects of science and tech although overall still Russia is a head. Yet, in military equipment technology Russia is still much more advanced than Iran.
> 
> Missile, Space and Airplanes are some of weapons Iran can use Russian expertise with.


your not really understand what I mean, if we start a project we will put 0 too many teps and will lag, whereas if you work with more countries develop, we can have faster results and high technology in a time reccord.

work with develop a nation is to have the technology, but a technology faith in our possession we will need to russia or other countries develop but in the meantime we need to develop our nation these countries.

I speak not from any domain but only lesdomaine or another country are superior to us, and militarily russia and well above iran, we need military technology


----------



## scythian500

اسپوتنیک مدعی شد: ممکن است ایران تا پایان 2015 سامانه‌ای پیشرفته‌تر از اس-300 از روسیه دریافت کند

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

scythian500 said:


> اسپوتنیک مدعی شد: ممکن است ایران تا پایان 2015 سامانه‌ای پیشرفته‌تر از اس-300 از روسیه دریافت کند


I think that with this agreement, iran and russia could negotiate the S-400, I'm sure it's a possibility, it is all about negotiation, should be offered a big contract for the purchase of Russian S -400 is not sosu sanction and will protect our country.

if we want technology it will negotiate the bailout MIG, in exchange we will have the technology has advanced what will permetre us to develop our fighters quickly.

then it will study the S-400 has improved our system of defense mad in iran 
we will have the independendance and quality product for export.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

Iran to install latest air defense radar system in Sep. - Mehr News Agency




News ID: 2867376 - Sun 26 July 2015 - 12:57

TEHRAN, Jul. 26 (MNA) – A senior Iranian commander said on Sunday that the country will install its latest radar detection system with 1,000 kilometers range on Sep. 1.
Commander of Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili announced on Sunday the air defense base affiliated with the Islamic Republic of Iran Army (IRIA) will install a new strategic radar system on September 1 at one of strategic points of the country.

“This air defense radar system has a range of 1,000 kilometers and can identify a wide range of targets from micro air vehicles (MAV) to ballistic missiles and wide-body aircrafts,” said the Iranian commander.

Noting that Iran’s air defense monitors threats 24/7 and will make the airspace 'a living hell' for the enemies before they could reach the country’s borders, the Brig. Gen. dismissed the threat of the ISIL terrorist group in the face of Iran’s mighty army, adding that the courageous people in Syria and Iraq will win the fight against the ISIL militants.

Esmaili had also said in March that the country’s airspace was the most secure in the Middle East.

“The number of flights per 24 hours over the Iranian sky has increased from 900 flights in the past 2-3 months to 1300 flights, currently. This shows sustainable security of the Islamic Republic air space,” he said.

Tehran has repeatedly assured other nations, especially regional neighbors, that its military might serves its detterence defense doctrine and poses no threat to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

I still awaiting information on the radar Najm 802

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

*Russia to upgrade S-300 to the latest techs before exporting it to Iran says Putins' deputy. He said, our contract with Iran is old and because of this we upgrade systems before exporting it.*

مشاور پوتین: اس ۳۰۰ را پیش از تحویل به ایران ارتقا می‌دهیم

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

*Top Commander: Iran's Air Defense System On Alert*







TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli underlined that the country's integrated missile and radar systems are always monitoring moves and ready to fire and intercept hostile flying objects at any moment.
"If the enemy wants to make an aggression against our territory, it will receive a strong slap across the face by the Iranian Armed Forces," Esmayeeli said on Wednesday.

"Iran's air defense system is always ready to act upon the Supreme Leader's order and its finger is always on the trigger and today, thanks to this air defense system, the Islamic Republic of Iran's airspace is one of the most secure skies in the world," he added.

Esmayeeli also said that the air defense system's radars have stretched across the country, adding the missile defense shields have been deployed at 3,700 points to cover every inch of Iranian sky.

In relevant remarks last week, Esmayeeli underlined that Iran's radar, electronic and missile systems are always awake to monitor and show reaction to the slightest hostile moves of the enemies.

"The air defense is always ready for mission and its radar, electronic, missile and monitoring systems are not turned off under any conditions and they are always under operation," Esmayeeli said, visiting the existing defense systems in the Southwestern parts of Iran.

He said that the air defense system is constantly monitoring and providing coverage for every inch of the country's airspace.

Also in July, Esmayeeli announced that Iran would unveil its new strategic radar system in September which would cover a range of over 1,000 kilometers.

"This is a strategic radar system with a range of about 1,000 kilometers and it will be unveiled on September 1," Brigadier General Esmayeeli told reporters.

He noted that Khatam ol-Anbia's new radar system will be deployed in a strategic region of the country.

Brigadier General Esmayeeli reiterated that Iran has the safest airspace in the Middle East, and said, "Today the number of passing flights has increased to 1,300 in every 24 hours as compared with 900 flights three months ago."

Also in July, Brigadier General Esmayeeli announced that the country will unveil new missile defense systems early in September.

"Missile systems with the capability to stand against electronic warfare and mid-range and long-range radars will join the integrated air defense system on September 1," Esmayeeli said in the Northeastern city of Semnan.

"The radar and missile defense systems will cover an important part of the country in the South and Southeast," he added.

Esmayeeli underlined that defensive depth is one of the main important feature of these systems, specially the long-range radar defense systems.

Esmayeeli announced in June that the country is able to meet all its needs in manufacturing air defense systems.

"We have been able to build all our needed (air defense) systems domestically," the senior commander told reporters in the Central province of Isfahan.

Noting that defending the Iranian airspace is a priority in the country's defensive doctrine, he said that increasing the number of air defense systems has always had a message of peace and friendship.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> *Top Commander: Iran's Air Defense System On Alert*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli underlined that the country's integrated missile and radar systems are always monitoring moves and ready to fire and intercept hostile flying objects at any moment.
> "If the enemy wants to make an aggression against our territory, it will receive a strong slap across the face by the Iranian Armed Forces," Esmayeeli said on Wednesday.
> 
> "Iran's air defense system is always ready to act upon the Supreme Leader's order and its finger is always on the trigger and today, thanks to this air defense system, the Islamic Republic of Iran's airspace is one of the most secure skies in the world," he added.
> 
> Esmayeeli also said that the air defense system's radars have stretched across the country, adding the missile defense shields have been deployed at 3,700 points to cover every inch of Iranian sky.
> 
> In relevant remarks last week, Esmayeeli underlined that Iran's radar, electronic and missile systems are always awake to monitor and show reaction to the slightest hostile moves of the enemies.
> 
> "The air defense is always ready for mission and its radar, electronic, missile and monitoring systems are not turned off under any conditions and they are always under operation," Esmayeeli said, visiting the existing defense systems in the Southwestern parts of Iran.
> 
> He said that the air defense system is constantly monitoring and providing coverage for every inch of the country's airspace.
> 
> Also in July, Esmayeeli announced that Iran would unveil its new strategic radar system in September which would cover a range of over 1,000 kilometers.
> 
> "This is a strategic radar system with a range of about 1,000 kilometers and it will be unveiled on September 1," Brigadier General Esmayeeli told reporters.
> 
> He noted that Khatam ol-Anbia's new radar system will be deployed in a strategic region of the country.
> 
> Brigadier General Esmayeeli reiterated that Iran has the safest airspace in the Middle East, and said, "Today the number of passing flights has increased to 1,300 in every 24 hours as compared with 900 flights three months ago."
> 
> Also in July, Brigadier General Esmayeeli announced that the country will unveil new missile defense systems early in September.
> 
> "Missile systems with the capability to stand against electronic warfare and mid-range and long-range radars will join the integrated air defense system on September 1," Esmayeeli said in the Northeastern city of Semnan.
> 
> "The radar and missile defense systems will cover an important part of the country in the South and Southeast," he added.
> 
> Esmayeeli underlined that defensive depth is one of the main important feature of these systems, specially the long-range radar defense systems.
> 
> Esmayeeli announced in June that the country is able to meet all its needs in manufacturing air defense systems.
> 
> "We have been able to build all our needed (air defense) systems domestically," the senior commander told reporters in the Central province of Isfahan.
> 
> Noting that defending the Iranian airspace is a priority in the country's defensive doctrine, he said that increasing the number of air defense systems has always had a message of peace and friendship.


This is good news, air defense with the help of a good aviation safety ganratira us.

iran Devera purchased the S-400 Russian. and develop a project with coinjoitement countries is technology.

iran glory.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## The Last of us

SOHEIL said:


>




New pic or is the same one from few years ago?


----------



## SOHEIL

The Last of us said:


> New pic or is the same one from few years ago?



I just found it ...


----------



## Tomyris

SOHEIL said:


>


nice pic. but it proves nothing

gives us detailed of this system, the reach of the missile, radar, electronic system are.

it has a form of Patriot missile but its not show us e efficiency this system, I maintain what I said, iran does not have sufficient technology to concurencer the patriot missile and S-300

I still awaiting evidence for qaher-313 and bavar373


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> nice pic. but it proves nothing
> 
> gives us detailed of this system, the reach of the missile, radar, electronic system are.
> 
> it has a form of Patriot missile but its not show us e efficiency this system, I maintain what I said, iran does not have sufficient technology to concurencer the patriot missile and S-300
> 
> I still awaiting evidence for qaher-313 and bavar373




What do you want them to do? Send you the blue prints of the system?

The missile in pic is obviously the Sayyad-2. They told you enough information about it already. Iran is not stupid to come out to talk about the seeker, electronic of this system because that would be foolish. Those details must remain a secret as the enemy must remain in doubt in how to defeat these systems. 

Also, every week you come asking for evidence, confirmation et cetera of bavar-373 and qaher and every-time I explain, you forget it the next day it seems. These projects are not high school projects. They take years to complete. They said Bavar will be ready by 2016. Coming here asking for evidence everyday will not speed that process up, will it?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Tomyris said:


> nice pic. but it proves nothing
> 
> gives us detailed of this system, the reach of the missile, radar, electronic system are.
> 
> it has a form of Patriot missile but its not show us e efficiency this system, I maintain what I said, iran does not have sufficient technology to concurencer the patriot missile and S-300
> 
> I still awaiting evidence for qaher-313 and bavar373

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> What do you want them to do? Send you the blue prints of the system?
> 
> The missile in pic is obviously the Sayyad-2. They told you enough information about it already. Iran is not stupid to come out to talk about the seeker, electronic of this system because that would be foolish. Those details must remain a secret as the enemy must remain in doubt in how to defeat these systems.
> 
> Also, every week you come asking for evidence, confirmation et cetera of bavar-373 and qaher and every-time I explain, you forget it the next day it seems. These projects are not high school projects. They take years to complete. They said Bavar will be ready by 2016. Coming here asking for evidence everyday will not speed that process up, will it?


not what I'm asking these are military exercise and engage air defense, the evidence showed that Iran possesses the means to defend themselves and are shown the effectiveness of weapon.
in every army there are exercise and proof that the weapons and OPERATIONAL we know nothing sayyed2.
showed why ballistic missile and air defense not show? all that she showed Iran mastery, but that Iran does not master it does not show.

the Qaher and a fake. the need to be ready bavar373 3 years ago already. it will be seen in 2016

the Sayyed 2 system has not made the proof. demonstrated the effectiveness of weapons are not saying reveals the secret of his defense. on the contrary does not show the reliability of weapons are is to let confidence move in with the enemy ..


SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 247477



frankly stops every faith I ask you the evidence you show me stupid -_- picture.

what is it who said that Iran and triune to develop a heavy fighter, and the Qaher and almost ready? After the government and he already stole thousand fortune if it was a real fighter we see it every day ....... it is a fake ... so if you are proof thank you of showed. otherwise arete with your picture.

Thank you -_-

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL




----------



## Siavash

The Last of us said:


> What do you want them to do? Send you the blue prints of the system?
> 
> The missile in pic is obviously the Sayyad-2. They told you enough information about it already. Iran is not stupid to come out to talk about the seeker, electronic of this system because that would be foolish. Those details must remain a secret as the enemy must remain in doubt in how to defeat these systems.
> 
> Also, every week you come asking for evidence, confirmation et cetera of bavar-373 and qaher and every-time I explain, you forget it the next day it seems. These projects are not high school projects. They take years to complete. They said Bavar will be ready by 2016. Coming here asking for evidence everyday will not speed that process up, will it?


@Last of Us like this you wont last! Are you not married? We always have the last word against ladies but that is saying yes ma'am and postpone the answer! If they say where is it? You just say it's coming ... There is no point arguing further!


----------



## mohsen

Tomyris said:


> what is it who said that Iran and triune to develop a heavy fighter, and the Qaher and almost ready? After the government and he already stole thousand fortune if it was a real fighter we see it every day ....... it is a fake ... so if you are proof thank you of showed. otherwise arete with your picture.
> 
> Thank you -_-


have you seen the interview with the project chief at the days of unveiling? when he was asked for a due date, he refused and said F-35 first flight was 5 years after its unveiling! in the aviation industry projects takes decade or decades to complete, in such an environment the word "soon" has a different meaning than when your friend says I will be there soon.
not to mention a new president whose first action was reducing the budget of defense ministry and the rest of scientific project's, no wonder his spokesman wanted to import the Mirage!(from his a$$ of course)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

mohsen said:


> have you seen the interview with the project chief at the days of unveiling? when he was asked for a due date, he refused and said F-35 first flight was 5 years after its unveiling! in the aviation industry projects takes decade or decades to complete, in such an environment the word "soon" has a different meaning than when your friend says I will be there soon.
> not to mention a new president whose first action was reducing the budget of defense ministry and the rest of scientific project's, no wonder his spokesman wanted to import the Mirage!(from his a$$ of course)


has not the age he had declared that the plane flew thousand fortune, know that the pilot flying
we even saw a stolen aircraft that had the shape of qaher313, but it was a reduced model, we were made to believe that the aircraft was already ready. LIE.

to remain in the subject of air defense, I have some doubt about the Iranian system, the American and Russian that are advancing on the right system, iran can not have a system as sophisticated as the Russian and American, many countries can not develop further in designing this kind of system.

it's nice to have a system that has the shape of an S-300, it's nice to have a system that has the form of a Patriot missile ... but are there really effective? .

we will wait and see, but I would be more reassured to see that the S-300 and bavar373 sayyad2 because it is not proven, it is not even sure if it's the largest system


SOHEIL said:


>


loool stop 

if you is fun, I just wonder where are the project

I ask the characteristic of sayyad2 system but nobody want to run, I ask the military exercise but y 'has not ...

I'm too inteligente for me, you said that its takes time, but I what I see is that Iran develops a lot of time on project reccord but not see their effectiveness, for avoids the another mocking us what it will be credible, but you actuelement was not credible there is too much blur in your post, it shows the picture and name of a new weapon but we do know it, many in the world speaks of model, and when I see the qaher313 I said he is right.

thank you to share detailed on sayyad2 one is in topical air defense system, and I ask you a question so thank you to elevate the level

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran DM Gen Dehqan to sign contract with Russia for supply Iran with four S300 missile batteries *


----------



## raazh

yavar said:


> *Iran DM Gen Dehqan to sign contract with Russia for supply Iran with four S300 missile batteries *



He also mentions to discuss purchase of New Russian Fighters ?? I think this is a significant statement and deserves a separate thread. Any idea on what type and quantity will be under discussion .. Will it be the Su35 or Mig35 ??


----------



## Siavash

raazh said:


> He also mentions to discuss purchase of New Russian Fighters ?? I think this is a significant statement and deserves a separate thread. Any idea on what type and quantity will be under discussion .. Will it be the Su35 or Mig35 ??


Specially that he said no other country has been talked to and that rules out China J-10B ... which is great. What does this say about Bavar 373 project? Has it failed? What is going on with that one?


----------



## The Last of us

Siavash said:


> Specially that he said no other country has been talked to and that rules out China J-10B ... which is great. What does this say about Bavar 373 project? Has it failed? What is going on with that one?



Bavar-373 will be ready in a year or two and then it will start its production. This modernised s-300 will obviously give a great boost to Iranian airdefences until Bavar-373 has been produced in needed numbers. At the same time, Iran can compare its own airdefences to this modernised system. Also, this s-300 had become a more political agreement than a military one.

Anyway, there are multiple long range airdefence systems being developed in Iran:

1- Bavar 373
2- Talash-3
3- 100km and 200km ranged missiles to be used in future ra'ad systems. One them is the sadid-630 missile probably.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Siavash

The Last of us said:


> Bavar-373 will be ready in a year or two and then it will start its production. This modernised s-300 will obviously give a great boost to Iranian airdefences until Bavar-373 has been produced in needed numbers. At the same time, Iran can compare its own airdefences to this modernised system. Also, this s-300 had become a more political agreement than a military one.
> 
> Anyway, there are multiple long range airdefence systems being developed in Iran:
> 
> 1- Bavar 373
> 2- Talash-3
> 3- 100km and 200km ranged missiles to be used in future ra'ad systems. One them is the sadid-630 missile probably.


Great. Thanks for reply. Indeed it will give a serious platform to compare to and a great boost to R & D in Iran.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Bavar-373 will be ready in a year or two and then it will start its production. This modernised s-300 will obviously give a great boost to Iranian airdefences until Bavar-373 has been produced in needed numbers. At the same time, Iran can compare its own airdefences to this modernised system. Also, this s-300 had become a more political agreement than a military one.
> 
> Anyway, there are multiple long range airdefence systems being developed in Iran:
> 
> 1- Bavar 373
> 2- Talash-3
> 3- 100km and 200km ranged missiles to be used in future ra'ad systems. One them is the sadid-630 missile probably.


lol 1 or 2 years? you did not say that the system will be ready in 2016? (in some months) 

dahgan the general speaks Russian planes, you said I has barely lifted emabrgo is already talk of combat aircraft purchase because it's logic, the HESA SAEQEH is void and our aerial fleet and veillisante replace it

on the S-300 I do not know what this version upgrade but it will surely be near the S-400. any benefits for us


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> lol 1 or 2 years? you did not say that the system will be ready in 2016? (in some months)
> 
> dahgan the general speaks Russian planes, you said I has barely lifted emabrgo is already talk of combat aircraft purchase because it's logic, the HESA SAEQEH is void and our aerial fleet and veillisante replace it
> 
> on the S-300 I do not know what this version upgrade but it will surely be near the S-400. any benefits for us



Pour Bavar -373 nous devons attendre , même si elle est en difficulté de la livraison de S- 300 va rendre les choses plus facile dans son développement et il va réussir . Je ne pense pas que cela signifie que , déclaration Dehghan a été plus dire Saegheh a réussi et nous sommes la production de masse et fournir à la Force aérienne et tout marché russe est de remplir les rôles que Saegheh ne peut jouer comme un rôle multiple lourde ou avancé intercepteur ...

For Bavar-373 we have to wait, even if it is in trouble the S-300 delivery will make things easier in its development and it will succeed. I don't think it means that, Dehghan statement was more saying Saegheh was successful and we are mass producing it and providing it to Air Force and any Russian procurement is to fulfill the roles that Saegheh can not play like a heavy multi role or advanced interceptor ...

sorry my French... its all googooli ... Googley!

Saegheh to Iran is like Tejas to India

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> Pour Bavar -373 nous devons attendre , même si elle est en difficulté de la livraison de S- 300 va rendre les choses plus facile dans son développement et il va réussir . Je ne pense pas que cela signifie que , déclaration Dehghan a été plus dire Saegheh a réussi et nous sommes la production de masse et fournir à la Force aérienne et tout marché russe est de remplir les rôles que Saegheh ne peut jouer comme un rôle multiple lourde ou avancé intercepteur ...
> 
> For Bavar-373 we have to wait, even if it is in trouble the S-300 delivery will make things easier in its development and it will succeed. I don't think it means that, Dehghan statement was more saying Saegheh was successful and we are mass producing it and providing it to Air Force and any Russian procurement is to fulfill the roles that Saegheh can not play like a heavy multi role or advanced interceptor ...
> 
> sorry my French... its all googooli ... Googley!
> 
> Saegheh to Iran is like Tejas to India


thank you for your message in French  
The HESA SAEQEH should be equipped as su-25 and specialize in the bombing.

to defend the Iranian sky requires a heavy multirole fighter as su-30/35.

but integrated technology I'm on is certain that Iran can have great cooperation with MIG.

the best way to back technology and offer a juicy contract to save MIG, you have a big order of mig-35, iran can rempalcer India in cooperation with mig. iran and thus take part in the 5th fighter MIG generation and will have a high-powered technology 

I hope that our dirrigent think of this idea, we can also make a cooperation with the Chinese on their CF-31, but I prefer Russian there are far more advanced, it is even the AESA radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tomyris said:


> thank you for your message in French
> The HESA SAEQEH should be equipped as su-25 and specialize in the bombing.
> 
> to defend the Iranian sky requires a heavy multirole fighter as su-30/35.
> 
> but integrated technology I'm on is certain that Iran can have great cooperation with MIG.
> 
> the best way to back technology and offer a juicy contract to save MIG, you have a big order of mig-35, iran can rempalcer India in cooperation with mig. iran and thus take part in the 5th fighter MIG generation and will have a high-powered technology
> 
> I hope that our dirrigent think of this idea, we can also make a cooperation with the Chinese on their CF-31, but I prefer Russian there are far more advanced, it is even the AESA radar.


Well I wont think saeqeh can be used at a role like su25 .
It wont have enough armor and the engine configuration is a little different. Also I believe it wont have the power to carry as much ammunition as su25.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> lol 1 or 2 years? you did not say that the system will be ready in 2016? (in some months)
> 
> dahgan the general speaks Russian planes, you said I has barely lifted emabrgo is already talk of combat aircraft purchase because it's logic, the HESA SAEQEH is void and our aerial fleet and veillisante replace it
> 
> on the S-300 I do not know what this version upgrade but it will surely be near the S-400. any benefits for us



No, they said Bavar-373 will be ready by the end of 2016. Thus one year, however, delays are not unexpected in such projects so that's why I said 1-2 years. These are not high school projects. They take a long time to complete. People need to remember making long range air defence system is not something that many nations can do. And the fact Iran has cracked this technology is something to be very proud of. And we not only have one such projects, but multiple. It is very easy for us to sit here and ask for projects to be finished fast, but reality is, these projects are very difficult, much more so than we know. 

The s-300 deal is okay but not as important as people think. The numbers Iran is getting is nowhere near enough to think of it as a deterrent against potential US strike (will not happen anyway). I say US because no other nation has the capability to bypass even current Iranian airdefence capability with Talash-2, Ra'ad-1,2 etc. S-300 will be useful for comparing our own systems to it. In the end, it will be the mas production of our own indigenous long range airdefence systems which will be the real game changers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> No, they said Bavar-373 will be ready by the end of 2016. Thus one year, however, delays are not unexpected in such projects so that's why I said 1-2 years. These are not high school projects. They take a long time to complete. People need to remember making long range air defence system is not something that many nations can do. And the fact Iran has cracked this technology is something to be very proud of. And we not only have one such projects, but multiple. It is very easy for us to sit here and ask for projects to be finished fast, but reality is, these projects are very difficult, much more so than we know.
> 
> The s-300 deal is okay but not as important as people think. The numbers Iran is getting is nowhere near enough to think of it as a deterrent against potential US strike (will not happen anyway). I say US because no other nation has the capability to bypass even current Iranian airdefence capability with Talash-2, Ra'ad-1,2 etc. S-300 will be useful for comparing our own systems to it. In the end, it will be the mas production of our own indigenous long range airdefence systems which will be the real game changers.


I will like you croire..mais nothing proves that we break through this technology, the mensnge on qaher313 my cool, I do not know what the project is real or not .j'attendrai to see what will give the bavar373, but I have a hard time believing that their system will be better than the S-300, even the Chinese themselves are struggling to build a similar system.



JEskandari said:


> Well I wont think saeqeh can be used at a role like su25 .
> It wont have enough armor and the engine configuration is a little different. Also I believe it wont have the power to carry as much ammunition as su25.



it is the most logical, iran has the ability to change the HESA SAEQEH into a slight bomabrder and mass produce. but tell me who will be an air defense fighter that can beat the F-16/15/18/22 is a big lie.

the best that can happen to HESA SAEQEH is to be as effective as the bomber Su-25, iran can copy component of su-25 equipment at the HESA SAEQEH.


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> I will like you croire..mais nothing proves that we break through this technology, the mensnge on qaher313 my cool, I do not know what the project is real or not .j'attendrai to see what will give the bavar373, but I have a hard time believing that their system will be better than the S-300, even the Chinese themselves are struggling to build a similar system.
> 
> 
> 
> it is the most logical, iran has the ability to change the HESA SAEQEH into a slight bomabrder and mass produce. but tell me who will be an air defense fighter that can beat the F-16/15/18/22 is a big lie.
> 
> the best that can happen to HESA SAEQEH is to be as effective as the bomber Su-25, iran can copy component of su-25 equipment at the HESA SAEQEH.


I don't think F-5's were ever in class of F-16 and Saegheh is not either. The hierarchy I think goes as follows:
F5/Saegheh, Mirage F1/Mig 29, F-4/Su-24 and finally F-14 countering the similar planes in its class such as:
JF-17/Tejas, F-16, Tornado, ...the rest

Su-25, A-10 ... are in its own class which makes it 5 class airplanes

Basically in my opinion there is minimum 5 class of fighters both in Iran and Indian and I suppose in most last generation air forces. F16's are in class of J-10B, Mig 29's ... not the light ones like JF-17, Tejas or F5/Saegheh ...

I think the air force needs all the classes to choose between for different threats. Like India would send its Mirages to fight Pakistan F-16 not its Tejas and would send Tejas (when ready) to fight JF-17 ... Its Sukhois to go against Rafael ... and so on so forth.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Tomyris said:


> I will like you croire..mais nothing proves that we break through this technology, the mensnge on qaher313 my cool, I do not know what the project is real or not .j'attendrai to see what will give the bavar373, but I have a hard time believing that their system will be better than the S-300, even the Chinese themselves are struggling to build a similar system.
> 
> 
> 
> it is the most logical, iran has the ability to change the HESA SAEQEH into a slight bomabrder and mass produce. but tell me who will be an air defense fighter that can beat the F-16/15/18/22 is a big lie.
> 
> the best that can happen to HESA SAEQEH is to be as effective as the bomber Su-25, iran can copy component of su-25 equipment at the HESA SAEQEH.


Saeqeh cant work like su25 . For example saeqeh cant stand a manpad hit at the engine but su25 can do that and saeqeh even cant carry half as much weapon as su25 . Saeqeh is a light fighter with limited bombing capabilities .


----------



## Tomyris

JEskandari said:


> Saeqeh cant work like su25 . For example saeqeh cant stand a manpad hit at the engine but su25 can do that and saeqeh even cant carry half as much weapon as su25 . Saeqeh is a light fighter with limited bombing capabilities .


precisely what makes him a weak planes, what I try to tell you is that Iran is working on the HESA SAEQEH to make a similar su-25 bomber, increase its protection and capacity bomabrdement, but never HESA SAEQEH can become a fighter / interceptor, it is too small it can not washed away long range missile, radar and nose and is too small .as I already told you the HESA SAEQEH is good for training or can be for the bombing, but no more can not be a good hunter.



Siavash said:


> I don't think F-5's were ever in class of F-16 and Saegheh is not either. The hierarchy I think goes as follows:
> F5/Saegheh, Mirage F1/Mig 29, F-4/Su-24 and finally F-14 countering the similar planes in its class such as:
> JF-17/Tejas, F-16, Tornado, ...the rest
> 
> Su-25, A-10 ... are in its own class which makes it 5 class airplanes
> 
> Basically in my opinion there is minimum 5 class of fighters both in Iran and Indian and I suppose in most last generation air forces. F16's are in class of J-10B, Mig 29's ... not the light ones like JF-17, Tejas or F5/Saegheh ...
> 
> I think the air force needs all the classes to choose between for different threats. Like India would send its Mirages to fight Pakistan F-16 not its Tejas and would send Tejas (when ready) to fight JF-17 ... Its Sukhois to go against Rafael ... and so on so forth.


not the F-5 and HESA SAEQEH is nothing to do with the f-16/29 is j-mig-10. there are much lower class


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> precisely what makes him a weak planes, what I try to tell you is that Iran is working on the HESA SAEQEH to make a similar su-25 bomber, increase its protection and capacity bomabrdement, but never HESA SAEQEH can become a fighter / interceptor, it is too small it can not washed away long range missile, radar and nose and is too small .as I already told you the HESA SAEQEH is good for training or can be for the bombing, but no more can not be a good hunter.
> 
> 
> not the F-5 and HESA SAEQEH is nothing to do with the f-16/29 is j-mig-10. there are much lower class


My dear you keep misunderstanding my posts.
where in the post does it say F-5 is in class of F-16?. It is actually saying contrary to that see: 
"I don't think F-5's were ever in class of F-16 and Saegheh is not either." ==> it says F-5 is NOT in class of F-16  I think we agree. Anyway, good effort translating and reading the forum, keep it up. I try to correct it if it was mistranslated.


----------



## The Last of us

@Tomyris 

You keep making the same comment over and over again. I keep replying to your posts but not long after you make the same post again. How many times have I explained the situation with Bavar? Who said China does not have S-300 technology? Yes they do. They have the HQ-9 system whose missiles use TVC technology. 

I have replied to these exact same comments of yours many times. They have said Bavar is more advanced than s-300 (probably the PMU2). why would that be hard to believe? That system was made decades ago and it is obvious today, the computing, electronic, software available to Iran is much more advanced than what the soviets had then. The only question was the missile range which Iran has today. Sayyad-3 has a range of *more* than 200km. So Iran even has the technology for long range surface to air missile. 

As for Qaher, I don't know what that has to do with Bavar? That is a completely different project in a different sector.Iranian capability in airdefence design and manufacture is more higher than its capability in the airforce.


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> My dear you keep misunderstanding my posts.
> where in the post does it say F-5 is in class of F-16?. It is actually saying contrary to that see:
> "I don't think F-5's were ever in class of F-16 and Saegheh is not either." ==> it says F-5 is NOT in class of F-16  I think we agree. Anyway, good effort translating and reading the forum, keep it up. I try to correct it if it was mistranslated.


thank you to you I understood, the F-5 is a bombarider lege nothing more, it is less than the F-4, the f16 and upper class, you can imagine the delay iran.

one is in topical AirDefense system I want to do off topic. I have not much to say apart that Iran Devera prove to the world that its aerial and effective anti capacity, so you have to launch military exercise and shown our latest weapons. waiting to see the bavar373 .. I think the bavar373 can be changed later and increase the capacity like that of s-300. but made me believe that he is not better than the S-300, it has all proved facing this one



The Last of us said:


> @Tomyris
> 
> You keep making the same comment over and over again. I keep replying to your posts but not long after you make the same post again. How many times have I explained the situation with Bavar? Who said China does not have S-300 technology? Yes they do. They have the HQ-9 system whose missiles use TVC technology.
> 
> I have replied to these exact same comments of yours many times. They have said Bavar is more advanced than s-300 (probably the PMU2). why would that be hard to believe? That system was made decades ago and it is obvious today, the computing, electronic, software available to Iran is much more advanced than what the soviets had then. The only question was the missile range which Iran has today. Sayyad-3 has a range of *more* than 200km. So Iran even has the technology for long range surface to air missile.
> 
> As for Qaher, I don't know what that has to do with Bavar? That is a completely different project in a different sector.Iranian capability in airdefence design and manufacture is more higher than its capability in the airforce.


thank you I know that Chinese is the HQ-9 but much like the judge a copy and not greater than the s-300, why not China developed a system such as the S-400 ?? because it lacks the capacity is too complex a system ...
she'd rather have and copy .....yes I repeat the same message because you still give me the same answer if I repeat is that your answer my not satisfied.

the Qaher has nothing to do with the bavar373? of course if .all to have. because the fact of lying his faith undermines everything else.

S-300PMU2 not old technology you cheating on you it is one of the best system actuelement, iran will have a similar system can be improved as the Russian was declared.
yes it's hard to believe that Iran will have a superior system, the Russian are much more we advance electronic level.

sayyad3 you said has a range of 200KM. ok but proves me why there is no exercise with this system ?? why it is not mass produced? . there is no evidence that this system reaches of such performance.

I still do not understand the lie about the Qaher, even if our faith dirrigent was capable of such a great lie etonerai its not me who have lied to everything else.


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> t
> thank you I know that Chinese is the HQ-9 but much like the judge a copy and not greater than the s-300, why not China developed a system such as the S-400 ?? because it lacks the capacity is too complex a system ...
> she'd rather have and copy .....yes I repeat the same message because you still give me the same answer if I repeat is that your answer my not satisfied.
> 
> the Qaher has nothing to do with the bavar373? of course if .all to have. because the fact of lying his faith undermines everything else.
> 
> S-300PMU2 not old technology you cheating on you it is one of the best system actuelement, iran will have a similar system can be improved as the Russian was declared.
> yes it's hard to believe that Iran will have a superior system, the Russian are much more we advance electronic level.
> 
> sayyad3 you said has a range of 200KM. ok but proves me why there is no exercise with this system ?? why it is not mass produced? . there is no evidence that this system reaches of such performance.
> 
> I still do not understand the lie about the Qaher, even if our faith dirrigent was capable of such a great lie etonerai its not me who have lied to everything else.



Sorry, but you're just obviously going to waste my time. The fact that you don't even understand something basic like how fast electronics, computing system etc have developed since last few decades shows you need to spend more time researching these issues.
The reason why you're not "satifised" is because you're asking me to prove to you sayyad-3 has a range of 200km. How on earth do you want me to do that? Do you want me to sit on it whilst it flies and measure the distance travelled? They have said it's range is more than 200km and I have no reason to not believe them. Gen Farzad Esmaili is a very reliable person.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Sorry, but you're just obviously going to waste my time. The fact that you don't even understand something basic like how fast electronics, computing system etc have developed since last few decades shows you need to spend more time researching these issues.
> The reason why you're not "satifised" is because you're asking me to prove to you sayyad-3 has a range of 200km. How on earth do you want me to do that? Do you want me to sit on it whilst it flies and measure the distance travelled? They have said it's range is more than 200km and I have no reason to not believe them. Gen Farzad Esmaili is a very reliable person.


it is you who made me waste my time .. our leaders we say many things, why not believe? and the answer is simple ... they dare lie about qaher313 he is humble iran in the whole world so why should I believe them when PLUSIEUR nation can not develop further develop a similar system for? .

prove it's easy, detailing a military exercise and see the effectiveness of the device .... what the government has declared and reality are diferent ... proof that our soldiers be operation it makes sense which should be formed on the arms in question in order to properly control it ... and did not sayyad3 such proof ....

while his is a lie until proven contraire..j'attend always evidence for qaher313. I do not stop then swallow your diskette



The Last of us said:


> Sorry, but you're just obviously going to waste my time. The fact that you don't even understand something basic like how fast electronics, computing system etc have developed since last few decades shows you need to spend more time researching these issues.
> The reason why you're not "satifised" is because you're asking me to prove to you sayyad-3 has a range of 200km. How on earth do you want me to do that? Do you want me to sit on it whilst it flies and measure the distance travelled? They have said it's range is more than 200km and I have no reason to not believe them. Gen Farzad Esmaili is a very reliable person.


frankly you believe all that you say? hahaha. just for the case of qaher313 you should ask yourself many questions, talking about the security of our nation, we speak of concrete and thou swallow everything that you say and you condone something stupid like qaher313? .
we love the photoshop but the day we will be at war not photoshop will save us .... then sir I ask you to be serious and elevate the level of the concrete and can not what other say that without proof.

a true patriot Iran never close my eyes on the case of Qaher, we want some explanation.


----------



## The Last of us

Half of your post does not even make any sense. What are you even saying?
You're like a little child with no patients who constantly asks things like " Are we there yet, are we there yet".
You need to grow up. I am doing you a favour by giving you my time but it seems you just don't understand. Either it is your very bad English or the fact you're just not interested in reality.

I am talking about bavar 373 and you talk about Qaher. What does Qaher have to do with Bavar-373?
You bring some absurd requirement for your basis of "evidence". They have already said they've tested Talash-3 and Bavar successfully and once they're officially unveiled you will see a video test. You have a very childish view on these things. You expect them to come out and give every little details just to satisfy you. That's not how the real world works.

Your obsession with qaher is effecting your rationality. All I have said about Qaher is that such projects take a long time to complete. Assuming they were/are working on it, it will take a long time for it to come to fruition. Why are you trying to put word in my mouth by insinuating I have said anything about the validity of the project? You come here every few days and ask for "evidence" for qaher development. You call this patriotism?


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Half of your post does not even make any sense. What are you even saying?
> You're like a little child with no patients who constantly asks things like " Are we there yet, are we there yet".
> You need to grow up. I am doing you a favour by giving you my time but it seems you just don't understand. Either it is your very bad English or the fact you're just not interested in reality.
> 
> I am talking about bavar 373 and you talk about Qaher. What does Qaher have to do with Bavar-373?
> You bring some absurd requirement for your basis of "evidence". They have already said they've tested Talash-3 and Bavar successfully and once they're officially unveiled you will see a video test. You have a very childish view on these things. You expect them to come out and give every little details just to satisfy you. That's not how the real world works.
> 
> Your obsession with qaher is effecting your rationality. All I have said about Qaher is that such projects take a long time to complete. Assuming they were/are working on it, it will take a long time for it to come to fruition. Why are you trying to put word in my mouth by insinuating I have said anything about the validity of the project? You come here every few days and as for evidence of qaher dveelopment. You call this patriotism?


ohhh, so now you insult me because I use google translators? you know that I speak no English, and uses the translator, but I see that my sentence his hurt you then you atatque you to my person, it's you I think you have a childish behavior, thank you not you attack my person was talking about the Iranian defense this is not a game.

arete of repeating the same thing, the Qaher is an example for shows that our government does not always tell the truth
.it was you who said that it was bavar373 and talash3 testé..mais still a faith there is no proof.
no I am not asking to meet me but to frighten our enemy and meet the people, any country that develops a watch and weapons testing, and we are shown nothing and says these are higher capacity ....

stp non arete, you can defend all you want .. but the project Qaher Iranian dirrigent is declared finished and the hunter, and the driver of irnaien thousand are stolen from happiness we even showed us a video in the Qaher the sky but it was a miniature model, how can you still defend this kind of lie ?? there is nothing to defend. and there is no project Qaher,

I remember when the HESA SAEQEH has unveiled it was one Delare that is greater than the F-18, but the reality is a simple F-5 ..... and you not ask yourself a question why such a lie ?? ??

yes it is the patriotism requested account and proof because it is the security of our nation, if you did not answer but then does not respond to avoids invented excuse me his walk not lie with me .

there are many unanswered questions, why I should blindly believe our dirrigent so that we are assured that the HESA SAEQEH and better than the F-18 and the qaher313 and finished hunter concurence the F-22 ??? ... ..

any idiot noticed the Qaher was unr model, any amateur shows you the HESA SAEQEH is not a fighter better than the F-18 because nothing that the nose of the apparaille it can not import more powerful radar.

you still find much to say After her ?? if you love your country you ask the right question and demands results. I hate me handle


----------



## Siavash

@Tomyris You need to write a little formal when using google translator and avoid shortening sentences if you want it to clearly translate your text. Punctuation and the use of short sentences also helps to get a better translation. Still you are doing a good job. 

I agree with "The Last of us" sometimes you ask the same thing many times. The reason may be that his answer, was not translated properly. He is "The last of us" we need ultimate care with the last ones! Repetitive questions damage one person fast. The last ones do not necessary have spare parts! Cheers


I went back and forth between English -->French and then French --> English to tune the english text. One sentence was badly translated. 

*French:*
Tomyris Vous devez écrire un peu formelle lors de l'utilisation de Google Translator et éviter de raccourcir phrases si vous voulez qu'il traduit clairement votre texte . La ponctuation et l'utilisation de phrases courtes permet également d'obtenir une meilleure traduction . Pourtant, vous faites un bon travail .

Je suis d'accord avec "The Last Of Us " parfois vous demander la même chose à plusieurs reprises . La raison peut être que sa réponse , n'a pas été traduit correctement. Il est " Le dernier d'entre nous " nous avons besoin de soins ultime avec les derniers ! Questions répétitives endommagent une personne rapide. Les derniers ne ont pas forcément des pièces de rechange ! Vive

Je suis allé dans les deux sens entre l'anglais - > français et français - > anglais pour régler le texte anglais . Une phrase a été mal traduit .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> ohhh, so now you insult me because I use google translators? you know that I speak no English, and uses the translator, but I see that my sentence his hurt you then you atatque you to my person, it's you I think you have a childish behavior, thank you not you attack my person was talking about the Iranian defense this is not a game.
> 
> arete of repeating the same thing, the Qaher is an example for shows that our government does not always tell the truth
> .it was you who said that it was bavar373 and talash3 testé..mais still a faith there is no proof.
> no I am not asking to meet me but to frighten our enemy and meet the people, any country that develops a watch and weapons testing, and we are shown nothing and says these are higher capacity ....
> 
> stp non arete, you can defend all you want .. but the project Qaher Iranian dirrigent is declared finished and the hunter, and the driver of irnaien thousand are stolen from happiness we even showed us a video in the Qaher the sky but it was a miniature model, how can you still defend this kind of lie ?? there is nothing to defend. and there is no project Qaher,
> 
> I remember when the HESA SAEQEH has unveiled it was one Delare that is greater than the F-18, but the reality is a simple F-5 ..... and you not ask yourself a question why such a lie ?? ??
> 
> yes it is the patriotism requested account and proof because it is the security of our nation, if you did not answer but then does not respond to avoids invented excuse me his walk not lie with me .
> 
> there are many unanswered questions, why I should blindly believe our dirrigent so that we are assured that the HESA SAEQEH and better than the F-18 and the qaher313 and finished hunter concurence the F-22 ??? ... ..
> 
> any idiot noticed the Qaher was unr model, any amateur shows you the HESA SAEQEH is not a fighter better than the F-18 because nothing that the nose of the apparaille it can not import more powerful radar.
> 
> you still find much to say After her ?? if you love your country you ask the right question and demands results. I hate me handle




Look, I think I have done enough here. No point me continuing this discussion. I say one thing and you say another thing. I will tell you what I told you many times before. Have patients and just wait and see what happens. Coming here on a daily basis and asking the same thing over and over will not change reality.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Look, I think I have done enough here. No point me continuing this discussion. I say one thing and you say another thing. I will tell you what I told you many times before. Have patients and just wait and see what happens. Coming here on a daily basis and asking the same thing over and over will not change reality.


I'll be short and brief. you speak of patience I demand explanation why having declared that this fighter flew Milier of happiness he can hold the head f-22 and why then we saw the stolen Qaher that it was a miniature version? ?? there is no patience he was shown a nearly finished project, but this project was a fake, you can not talk about patience.

why having declared that the HESA SAEQEH and better than the F-18 that then anyone know that this aircraft is an F-5. answers to these questions and I promise not to ask the same question.

I would reassure the day I see the S-300 and su-30/35 in the Iranian army because I know it's reliable and efficient equipment, the lie of our dirrigent on saqeh and not me Qaher gives not want to trust them on another project



Siavash said:


> @Tomyris You need to write a little formal when using google translator and avoid shortening sentences if you want it to clearly translate your text. Punctuation and the use of short sentences also helps to get a better translation. Still you are doing a good job.
> 
> I agree with "The Last of us" sometimes you ask the same thing many times. The reason may be that his answer, was not translated properly. He is "The last of us" we need ultimate care with the last ones! Repetitive questions damage one person fast. The last ones do not necessary have spare parts! Cheers
> 
> 
> I went back and forth between English -->French and then French --> English to tune the english text. One sentence was badly translated.
> 
> *French:*
> Tomyris Vous devez écrire un peu formelle lors de l'utilisation de Google Translator et éviter de raccourcir phrases si vous voulez qu'il traduit clairement votre texte . La ponctuation et l'utilisation de phrases courtes permet également d'obtenir une meilleure traduction . Pourtant, vous faites un bon travail .
> 
> Je suis d'accord avec "The Last Of Us " parfois vous demander la même chose à plusieurs reprises . La raison peut être que sa réponse , n'a pas été traduit correctement. Il est " Le dernier d'entre nous " nous avons besoin de soins ultime avec les derniers ! Questions répétitives endommagent une personne rapide. Les derniers ne ont pas forcément des pièces de rechange ! Vive
> 
> Je suis allé dans les deux sens entre l'anglais - > français et français - > anglais pour régler le texte anglais . Une phrase a été mal traduit .


SEVERAL faith if I ask the same thing it is because nobody give me a coorecte answer. I am not satisfied with the quality of the response, so I based the same question. we are in a forum is not just in the application service secret.je clear answer, and not lie or suposer


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> I'll be short and brief. you speak of patience I demand explanation why having declared that this fighter flew Milier of happiness he can hold the head f-22 and why then we saw the stolen Qaher that it was a miniature version? ?? there is no patience he was shown a nearly finished project, but this project was a fake, you can not talk about patience.
> 
> why having declared that the HESA SAEQEH and better than the F-18 that then anyone know that this aircraft is an F-5. answers to these questions and I promise not to ask the same question.
> 
> I would reassure the day I see the S-300 and su-30/35 in the Iranian army because I know it's reliable and efficient equipment, the lie of our dirrigent on saqeh and not me Qaher gives not want to trust them on another project



Who told you Qaher could go head to head with F-22? whoever said that was dreaming. Qaher-313 was not a "fighter" jet. It was designed to fly at low altitude, perhaps for attacking ships in the Persian gulf and ground targets. It was *not* designed as a fighter jet for air to air combat. This was obvious by its design. Thick wings, top intake, one small engine, smallish radome. They even said it will be used to defence the Persian gulf. That was another big hint, no?

And no, they never said Saegheh was better than F-18. All Iran said was that it uses dual stabiliser tails like F-18. They had *never* made any other comparison to the F-18.

The problem you have is that you mix up Iranian airdefence capability with our airforce. Just because you are suspicious of Qaher, it does not mean you should be so of Bavar! Iranian airdefence capability is very advanced. Once you see Talash-3 and Bavar tested, your faith will be revived.

The airforce does need serious modernisation. I agree with you that if Iran gets Su-35, Pak-FA etc then we can be very happy. But I am not worried even 1% about Iranian airdefence capability.


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> I'll be short and brief. you speak of patience I demand explanation why having declared that this fighter flew Milier of happiness he can hold the head f-22 and why then we saw the stolen Qaher that it was a miniature version? ?? there is no patience he was shown a nearly finished project, but this project was a fake, you can not talk about patience.
> 
> why having declared that the HESA SAEQEH and better than the F-18 that then anyone know that this aircraft is an F-5. answers to these questions and I promise not to ask the same question.
> 
> I would reassure the day I see the S-300 and su-30/35 in the Iranian army because I know it's reliable and efficient equipment, the lie of our dirrigent on saqeh and not me Qaher gives not want to trust them on another project
> 
> 
> SEVERAL faith if I ask the same thing it is because nobody give me a coorecte answer. I am not satisfied with the quality of the response, so I based the same question. we are in a forum is not just in the application service secret.je clear answer, and not lie or suposer


Everybody speculates the best they can and those who know would not spill secrets you know. At the end, we can only debate and speculate here not demand answers I guess. You ought to buy a ticket, add a little more charm and go to General Dehghan himself!


----------



## Aramagedon

The Last of us said:


> Who told you Qaher could go head to head with F-22? whoever said that was dreaming. Qaher-313 was not a "fighter" jet. It was designed to fly at low altitude, perhaps for attacking ships in the Persian gulf and ground targets. It was *not* designed as a fighter jet for air to air combat. This was obvious by its design. Thick wings, top intake, one small engine, smallish radome. They even said it will be used to defence the Persian gulf. That was another big hint, no?
> 
> And no, they never said Saegheh was better than F-18. All Iran said was that it uses dual stabiliser tails like F-18. They had *never* made any other comparison to the F-18.
> 
> The problem you have is that you mix up Iranian airdefence capability with our airforce. Just because you are suspicious of Qaher, it does not mean you should be so of Bavar! Iranian airdefence capability is very advanced. Once you see Talash-3 and Bavar tested, your faith will be revived.
> 
> The airforce does need serious modernisation. I agree with you that if Iran gets Su-35, Pak-FA etc then we can be very happy. But I am not worried even 1% about Iranian airdefence capability.


You are right but do not be pessimistic. When Qaher is mass produced we'll see how effective it is.

The most advanced and modern technologies are used in Qaher. Hundreds Iranians and none Iranian engineers have worked on it... Thousands hours is worked on it... I hope asap Qaher being mass produced.


----------



## Tomyris

Siavash said:


> Everybody speculates the best they can and those who know would not spill secrets you know. At the end, we can only debate and speculate here not demand answers I guess. You ought to buy a ticket, add a little more charm and go to General Dehghan himself!



I am ready to hold a debate on television with the general dahgan if I have the opportunity n as Iranian citizen I have the right to request some response on national defense project.



The Last of us said:


> Who told you Qaher could go head to head with F-22? whoever said that was dreaming. Qaher-313 was not a "fighter" jet. It was designed to fly at low altitude, perhaps for attacking ships in the Persian gulf and ground targets. It was *not* designed as a fighter jet for air to air combat. This was obvious by its design. Thick wings, top intake, one small engine, smallish radome. They even said it will be used to defence the Persian gulf. That was another big hint, no?
> 
> And no, they never said Saegheh was better than F-18. All Iran said was that it uses dual stabiliser tails like F-18. They had *never* made any other comparison to the F-18.
> 
> The problem you have is that you mix up Iranian airdefence capability with our airforce. Just because you are suspicious of Qaher, it does not mean you should be so of Bavar! Iranian airdefence capability is very advanced. Once you see Talash-3 and Bavar tested, your faith will be revived.
> 
> The airforce does need serious modernisation. I agree with you that if Iran gets Su-35, Pak-FA etc then we can be very happy. But I am not worried even 1% about Iranian airdefence capability.


the leader had declared that it was a sort of copy of the f-22 cheap, the aircraft would be stealthy, but what you described is a model, the aircraft does not exist, what is the Qaher we saw stolen? why it is declared that the Iranian pilot was made thousand happiness ?? This is propaganda and nothing more.

ohh if we say that the HESA SAEQEH and similar to the F-18 but the capacity is higher than that one, yet faith propaganda.

you know I will like that talash3 and bavar373 be high technology and superior S-300, its really would make me happy, but I can not believe he is often compared to that of our other equipment, and where I see the HESA SAEQEH Qaher and I told myself that all is that his bluff.

I hope that you is right, but I can not believe as long as I have not seen ... the only way to iran with a credible and powerful defense and control of Russian weapons.

remember when I was new to the forum and I talk about su-30/35 and S-300. everyone said that Iran does not need and aujordhuit everyone and agree with me. I may be a girl but I'm not stupid I study the military and all my family are military that silk in Algeria or Iran, I know what I mean and I know stayed logic



2800 said:


> You are right but do not be pessimistic. When Qaher is mass produced we'll see how effective it is.
> 
> The most advanced and modern technologies are used in Qaher. Hundreds Iranians and even none Iranian engineers have worked on it... Inshalah we'll see...


you still believe that will be mass produced? 

it is a fake


----------



## Aramagedon

Tomyris said:


> I am ready to hold a debate on television with the general dahgan if I have the opportunity n as Iranian citizen I have the right to request some response on national defense project.
> 
> 
> the leader had declared that it was a sort of copy of the f-22 cheap, the aircraft would be stealthy, but what you described is a model, the aircraft does not exist, what is the Qaher we saw stolen? why it is declared that the Iranian pilot was made thousand happiness ?? This is propaganda and nothing more.
> 
> ohh if we say that the HESA SAEQEH and similar to the F-18 but the capacity is higher than that one, yet faith propaganda.
> 
> you know I will like that talash3 and bavar373 be high technology and superior S-300, its really would make me happy, but I can not believe he is often compared to that of our other equipment, and where I see the HESA SAEQEH Qaher and I told myself that all is that his bluff.
> 
> I hope that you is right, but I can not believe as long as I have not seen ... the only way to iran with a credible and powerful defense and control of Russian weapons.
> 
> remember when I was new to the forum and I talk about su-30/35 and S-300. everyone said that Iran does not need and aujordhuit everyone and agree with me. I may be a girl but I'm not stupid I study the military and all my family are military that silk in Algeria or Iran, I know what I mean and I know stayed logic
> 
> 
> you still believe that will be mass produced?
> 
> it is a fake


Of course. Why not!
Iran is producing the most advanced UAEs. Iranians have worked on Qaher for thousands hours. I think the only problem is engine.

Do not be pessimistic. When you have technology everything is possible.

Before Iran-Iraq war Iran couli produce simple missiles but now Iran can produce the most advanced missiles and send them to space.


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> Of course. Why not!
> Iran is producing the most advanced UAEs. Iranians have worked on Qaher for thousands hours. I think the only problem is engine.
> 
> Do not be pessimistic. When you have technology everything is possible.
> 
> Before Iran-Iraq war Iran couli produce simple missiles but now Iran can produce the most advanced missiles and send them to space.


of hunting and had a much more difficult, yes I am pssimiste, in 2012 it was declared that the aircraft was ready and he stole, and 2015 was no new biento16 .... this project is a fake.until proven otherwise


----------



## Aramagedon

Tomyris said:


> of hunting and had a much more difficult, yes I am pssimiste, in 2012 it was declared that the aircraft was ready and he stole, and 2015 was no new biento16 .... this project is a fake.until proven otherwise


It's not fake. You'll see it in future.


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> It's not fake. You'll see it in future.


in the future? in 10 years? it would be easier to develop a fighter and now that the embargo lifted, a cooperation with russia or china and we can have an aircraft. me what I ask is to see the current project, in 2012 we were told that it was terminer.bref I was talking about the arete Qaher'll see in the future but I believe more


----------



## Aramagedon

Tomyris said:


> in the future? in 10 years? it would be easier to develop a fighter and now that the embargo lifted, a cooperation with russia or china and we can have an aircraft. me what I ask is to see the current project, in 2012 we were told that it was terminer.bref I was talking about the arete Qaher'll see in the future but I believe more


It was a hurry from Iranians to introduce it sooner than the proper time. But I'm sure we'll have a beautiful effective Qaher in future and certainly not in 10 years.


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> I am ready to hold a debate on television with the general dahgan if I have the opportunity n as Iranian citizen I have the right to request some response on national defense project.
> 
> 
> the leader had declared that it was a sort of copy of the f-22 cheap, the aircraft would be stealthy, but what you described is a model, the aircraft does not exist, what is the Qaher we saw stolen? why it is declared that the Iranian pilot was made thousand happiness ?? This is propaganda and nothing more.
> 
> ohh if we say that the HESA SAEQEH and similar to the F-18 but the capacity is higher than that one, yet faith propaganda.



Look, once again you are repeating your own tune over and over. Why do you not pay attention to reality? What part about the "Iran never compared the capabilities of saeghe to F-18" do you not understand? How do you expect to have a discussion when you're not interested in facts? You are coming up with your ideas which have little reality on the ground and what's worst, regardless of what people say, you continue to believe some baseless theories.

1- The leader Never compared the qaher to F-22. Where are you getting these random theories from?
2- Iran never compared the capabilities of saegheh to F-18.
3- They Never said the pilots made thousands of pilots in Qaher. This is something only people who don't speak Persian have come up with. Ahmidinejad said, "pilots which have flown thousands of hours in planes (NOT qaher) have shown satisfaction with qaher". He never claimed they flew qaher for thousands of hours. The pilots just gave their first impression of the mockup and nothing more.

The problem here is your mind is riddled with misconceptions, misunderstandings and false ideas. Then you claim Iran is the one coming up with propaganda? The problem here is *your* lack of understanding in these topics.


----------



## scythian500

Tomyris said:


> in the future? in 10 years? it would be easier to develop a fighter and now that the embargo lifted, a cooperation with russia or china and we can have an aircraft. me what I ask is to see the current project, in 2012 we were told that it was terminer.bref I was talking about the arete Qaher'll see in the future but I believe more


Chill down... I apologize on behalf of air force, Qaher 313 team and air defense....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> Chill down... I apologize on behalf of air force, Qaher 313 team and air defense....


Me too! Couldn't let Scythian500 take all the responsibility! We also invite @Tomyris to lead the project!


I changed my mind! Come and get your money with interest, we are not selling to you any more!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Look, once again you are repeating your own tune over and over. Why do you not pay attention to reality? What part about the "Iran never compared the capabilities of saeghe to F-18" do you not understand? How do you expect to have a discussion when you're not interested in facts? You are coming up with your ideas which have little reality on the ground and what's worst, regardless of what people say, you continue to believe some baseless theories.
> 
> 1- The leader Never compared the qaher to F-22. Where are you getting these random theories from?
> 2- Iran never compared the capabilities of saegheh to F-18.
> 3- They Never said the pilots made thousands of pilots in Qaher. This is something only people who don't speak Persian have come up with. Ahmidinejad said, "pilots which have flown thousands of hours in planes (NOT qaher) have shown satisfaction with qaher". He never claimed they flew qaher for thousands of hours. The pilots just gave their first impression of the mockup and nothing more.
> 
> The problem here is your mind is riddled with misconceptions, misunderstandings and false ideas. Then you claim Iran is the one coming up with propaganda? The problem here is *your* lack of understanding in these topics.


lol sorry it's not what that is disconnected from reality, I know what it dirrigent declared on the f-18 and the qaher-313.

I explained how the driver can be satisfied with a machine that does not fly? pI said what's the Qaher we saw was stolen Official TV? it was a reduced model and made us believe that it was the true Qaher.

I'm sorry but I'm not mistaken when I see the want propagande..tu went further ?? ok explains me why a corvette 1400 and considered one ton destroyer ??


on the contrary I think to be the more realistic here.

Finally I think that Iran can develop the Qaher but will take ally like Russia ... with the financial means and an ally we can develop a powerful hunter, the qaher313 could be the basis of the cooperation project with the hunter 5th generation of MIG.


that's what I call being realistic



scythian500 said:


> Chill down... I apologize on behalf of air force, Qaher 313 team and air defense....


do not apologize my brothers. I love my country and I find illogical I have the right to criticism.

what our dirrigent we make no sense.

we are in a forum and more no information about the Iranian military except declaration on the right and left, and the level too low


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Look, once again you are repeating your own tune over and over. Why do you not pay attention to reality? What part about the "Iran never compared the capabilities of saeghe to F-18" do you not understand? How do you expect to have a discussion when you're not interested in facts? You are coming up with your ideas which have little reality on the ground and what's worst, regardless of what people say, you continue to believe some baseless theories.
> 
> 1- The leader Never compared the qaher to F-22. Where are you getting these random theories from?
> 2- Iran never compared the capabilities of saegheh to F-18.
> 3- They Never said the pilots made thousands of pilots in Qaher. This is something only people who don't speak Persian have come up with. Ahmidinejad said, "pilots which have flown thousands of hours in planes (NOT qaher) have shown satisfaction with qaher". He never claimed they flew qaher for thousands of hours. The pilots just gave their first impression of the mockup and nothing more.
> 
> The problem here is your mind is riddled with misconceptions, misunderstandings and false ideas. Then you claim Iran is the one coming up with propaganda? The problem here is *your* lack of understanding in these topics.



told me you be able to explain this to me?








this is what the Iranian president declared

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unveiled a new fighter, the Qaher-313, introduced as "one of the most advanced in the world", on the occasion of the ceremonies marking the 34th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unveiled Saturday a new fighter aircraft touted as "one of the most advanced in the world", on the occasion of the ceremonies marking the 34th anniversary of the Islamic revolution of 1979. This device with futuristic shapes, called "Qaher-313" ("Conqueror 313") was "designed and built by Iranian engineers" and "face the world's most advanced among the fighters," said Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quoted by Iranian media during this inauguration. He added that the aircraft had already flown "thousands of hours" and that its pilots were "very satisfied with its performance."


in this video we hear of an existing aircraft and not a project or a model ... I have a strong argument must be stopped the propaganda and lies with me.


----------



## soldier of Putin

S-300VM promo

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

soldier of Putin said:


> S-300VM promo


hummm I have a question, what is the difference between the PMU2 and antey-2500? which is best? iran is which version will equip?

the chain of S-300 are not closed? is it possible that Russia is selling the S-400 has iran?
or it modernizes S-300 at the S-400?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## soldier of Putin

Tomyris said:


> hummm I have a question, what is the difference between the PMU2 and antey-2500? which is best? iran is which version will equip?
> 
> the chain of S-300 are not closed? is it possible that Russia is selling the S-400 has iran?
> or it modernizes S-300 at the S-400?




S-300VM is newer and better. S-300VM entered service in 2013.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## haman10

soldier of Putin said:


> S-300VM is newer and better. S-300VM entered service in 2013.


Iranian deal with russia is apparently based on :

PMU-1 missiles and missile launchers (48N6 missiles)

PMU-2 radars : 

1- 30N6E2 Tomb Stone : engagement radar

2- LEMZ 96L6E : primary acquisition radar & early warning 

3- NIIIP 64N6E2 : acquisition radar system

5- clam shell low alt. radar 

Favorit's new command post has the capability to control SA-5 Gammon batteries as well , meaning that Iran will be able to create a very high quality AD network that is able to coordinate incoming data from all Iranian radars in the area and control all the launchers at once .

@rahi2357 @Serpentine @kollang @Arminkh @Daneshmand

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tomyris

haman10 said:


> Iranian deal with russia is apparently based on :
> 
> PMU-1 missiles and missile launchers (48N6 missiles)
> 
> PMU-2 radars :
> 
> 1- 30N6E2 Tomb Stone : engagement radar
> 
> 2- LEMZ 96L6E : primary acquisition radar & early warning
> 
> 3- NIIIP 64N6E2 : acquisition radar system
> 
> 5- clam shell low alt. radar
> 
> Favorit's new command post has the capability to control SA-5 Gammon batteries as well , meaning that Iran will be able to create a very high quality AD network that is able to coordinate incoming data from all Iranian radars in the area and control all the launchers at once .
> 
> @rahi2357 @Serpentine @kollang @Arminkh @Daneshmand


PMU 1 missile ?? pfffffffffffff, no !!!!! it goes to 150 km the enemy can easily master it requires minimum 200 to 250Km

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## بلندر

Our Defence Minister said that : " we will unveil bavar 373 Anti Air Defence System in 1395 ( 2016-2017) , Bavar 373 is designed to Cover S300 weakness in long rage and it will get integrate with S300 , but it will be a long range missile just like S300 " ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

بلندر said:


> Our Defence Minister said that : " we will unveil bavar 373 Anti Air Defence System in 1395 ( 2016-2017) , Bavar 373 is designed to Cover S300 weakness in long rage and it will get integrate with S300 , but it will be a long range missile just like S300 " ....



Yani chi baba? Ina maro makhsareh kardan ham? In system gharar bood ke askan bejaye s-300 estefadeh beshe, alan miyan migan in tarahi shod ke weaknesse s-300 cover minkoneh? Ina mage midoonestan ke akhar s-300 ro roosiye beshoon mide?.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Daneshmand

haman10 said:


> Iranian deal with russia is apparently based on :
> 
> PMU-1 missiles and missile launchers (48N6 missiles)
> 
> PMU-2 radars :
> 
> 1- 30N6E2 Tomb Stone : engagement radar
> 
> 2- LEMZ 96L6E : primary acquisition radar & early warning
> 
> 3- NIIIP 64N6E2 : acquisition radar system
> 
> 5- clam shell low alt. radar
> 
> Favorit's new command post has the capability to control SA-5 Gammon batteries as well , meaning that Iran will be able to create a very high quality AD network that is able to coordinate incoming data from all Iranian radars in the area and control all the launchers at once .
> 
> @rahi2357 @Serpentine @kollang @Arminkh @Daneshmand



Good news. Though I think the number of systems around 5 is too low for a big country like Iran, specially in the absence of fifth G fighters. 

We still do not know for sure, what system Iran is going to get. If it is going to be S-300VM, then this is a different system than PMU-1. Russia might not easily give S-400 to Iran, but that should have been the aim and still should remain the aim for Iran to acquire.

And as always without ToT and local manufacturing capability, any strategic benefit these bring will be minimal and short-lived. Let's not forget that under Shah, Iran had one of the most capable AD and AF in the world, let alone in the region with Early Warning radars, I-Hawk batteries and superiority fighters and even had ordered AWACS. Saudi Arabia and UAE also have enormous AD and AF capability now. But without American support, these capabilities will fall apart in weeks if not in matter of days. No local expertise, no glory.



The Last of us said:


> Yani chi baba? Ina maro makhsareh kardan ham? In system gharar bood ke askan bejaye s-300 estefadeh beshe, alan miyan migan in tarahi shod ke weaknesse s-300 cover minkoneh? Ina mage midoonestan ke akhar s-300 ro roosiye beshoon mide?.



The Russians have been investing, experimenting, designing, developing and mass manufacturing AD systems since 1920's. Iran started a serious effort in 2010 and before that, the only serious effort was to make spare parts for I-Hawks and antique Russian systems starting in late 1990's. Taking into consideration, Iran's lack of a robust electronic industry, it will take a very long time to make something even close to PMU-1. Developing such systems depend much on capabilities of electronic industry, computational sciences, and rocket engineering. Even if we accept that Iran already has superb rocket engineering, I am not so sure about the electronic and computational capabilities of Iran.

Though in recent interviews of Iranian military, I have been seeing something quite good. That they have been humbled. They now know how difficult it is to design and produce these kind of systems. It is not really their intention to do "maskhareh". It is about becoming humbled. In 2010, they thought, they just push and within 2 years, they are going to have a ready system. Now they know it is not so easy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

Daneshmand said:


> Good news. Though I think the number of systems around 5 is too low for a big country like Iran, specially in the absence of fifth G fighters.
> 
> We still do not know for sure, what system Iran is going to get. If it is going to be S-300VM, then this is a different system than PMU-1. Russia might not easily give S-400 to Iran, but that should have been the aim and still should remain the aim for Iran to acquire.
> 
> And as always without ToT and local manufacturing capability, any strategic benefit these bring will be minimal and short-lived. Let's not forget that under Shah, Iran had one of the most capable AD and AF in the world, let alone in the region with Early Warning radars, I-Hawk batteries and superiority fighters and even had ordered AWACS. Saudi Arabia and UAE also have enormous AD and AF capability now. But without American support, these capabilities will fall apart in weeks if not in matter of days. No local expertise, no glory.
> 
> 
> 
> The Russians have been investing, experimenting, designing, developing and mass manufacturing AD systems since 1920's. Iran started a serious effort in 2010 and before that, the only serious effort was to make spare parts for I-Hawks and antique Russian systems starting in late 1990's. Taking into consideration, Iran's lack of a robust electronic industry, it will take a very long time to make something even close to PMU-1. Developing such systems depend much on capabilities of electronic industry, computational sciences, and rocket engineering. Even if we accept that Iran already has superb rocket engineering, I am not so sure about the electronic and computational capabilities of Iran.
> 
> Though in recent interviews of Iranian military, I have been seeing something quite good. That they have been humbled. They now know how difficult it is to design and produce these kind of systems. It is not really their intention to do "maskhareh". It is about becoming humbled. In 2010, they thought, they just push and within 2 years, they are going to have a ready system. Now they know it is not so easy.


I entirely agree with you, here is a comment realism. it is very difficult for her effet..c'est the best and purchased and request the maximum possible .it technology to do great proposition for technology, iran needs the S-400. S-300PMU1 is not enough. and 2 limit and limit.

s-400 with our defense will be assured, I think if iran again postpone the official left the bavar373 we noticed is that it is very difficult to develop a true sophisticate system and therefore iran surely awaits the arrival of s-300 to try to copy it and develop the bavar373.

and logically its breaks everything  its mean, the talash3 is not as performand test it to make us croire..le S-300 has a range of 200km ... and also talash3 200km ..

bavar373 and he is struggling to develop the ??? here is that changes everything ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blackmoon

We must use our own domestic technologies such as Bavar-373. We can use Russians and S-300 system to upgrade and make bavar fully operational because if we want S-300 to cover all around the country's borders we need at least 8-10 S-300 system which is costly and expensive to keep them operational all time + cost of each missiles. But if we have some domestic system like bavar we can easily produce and keep them operational and in future we can upgrade them to something like s-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

Blackmoon said:


> We must use our own domestic technologies such as Bavar-373. We can use Russians and S-300 system to upgrade and make bavar fully operational because if we want S-300 to cover all around the country's borders we need at least 8-10 S-300 system which is costly and expensive to keep them operational all time + cost of each missiles. But if we have some domestic system like bavar we can easily produce and keep them operational and in future we can upgrade them to something like s-400.


hahahaha. what you said is logical but it is much more difficult. he already fautdra master the C4I system. if not master the bava373 will be zero. there is enormously thing is to develop a powerful system hopes to have it not suffice to make the carcass and the missile must be the frequency interference, calculates the ......

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> Yani chi baba? Ina maro makhsareh kardan ham? In system gharar bood ke askan bejaye s-300 estefadeh beshe, alan miyan migan in tarahi shod ke weaknesse s-300 cover minkoneh? Ina mage midoonestan ke akhar s-300 ro roosiye beshoon mide?.


na ontor ke man fahmidam bavar-373 kare s-300 ro mikone + noghte zafhaye oono ham nadare... man intori fahmidam...vali khob ta ye chizi operational beshe...zamin hezar charkh mizane


----------



## Siavash

scythian500 said:


> na ontor ke man fahmidam bavar-373 kare s-300 ro mikone + noghte zafhaye oono ham nadare... man intori fahmidam...vali khob ta ye chizi operational beshe...zamin hezar charkh mizane


Bian chi began! Began 800 million dadim vali ba 1/4 oon meghdar khodemoon mitoonestim besazim y abegan 4 saal kar kardim hanooz natoonestim! Har kodoom ke dorst bashe nemitoonan began.

Az tarafi agar ham Bavar kar mikardeh va movaffagh boodeh nemitoonestan 4 milliard dolar be roosieh zarar bezanan. Ravabete technologicy do taraf va bede bestoone siasish az in 800 million mohemtar bood. Ehtemalan goftan khob ma migzarim va shoma ghara dad haye baadi jobran konid. ...

dar ghebale in soal ke chara sakhtid migan zafesho jobran mikoneh va bihoodeh nist. Ehtemalan hazineh R & D Bavar bish az 800 million dolar boodeh ke manteghi ham hast. In tarrahi ha hazineh ziadi dareh.


Oops mikhastam be yani chi baba relpy konam ... vali na marboot ham nist in reply

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

you decided to speak Farsi so I can not participate?  You are mistaken, epechera nothing to say if it's good or not. 

So I ask you to try to elevate the level pliz. before managing a powerful system, we must speak of electreonique system and integration. eceque iran produces high-tech electronic component?

I invite you cast an eye on the C4I technology .. it is essential for a high-tech defense, the enemy mastery, mastery and Russia also, the S-300 and the C4I, if the bavar373 is not on technology as C4I. or greater than the C4I it is not even worth doing the comprait our system S-300 because it will be lower.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran DM Gen Dehghan on renewal contract S300 missile with Russia and Bavar 373 AD system project*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Tomyris said:


> you can bring me what speaks General dahgan pliz?







PressTV-‘Iran to receive upgraded S-300 soon’

and 1395 or 2016 delvery of Bavar 373 and in compilation of weakness of S300

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Siavash

Tomyris said:


> you decided to speak Farsi so I can not participate?  You are mistaken, epechera nothing to say if it's good or not.
> 
> So I ask you to try to elevate the level pliz. before managing a powerful system, we must speak of electreonique system and integration. eceque iran produces high-tech electronic component?
> 
> I invite you cast an eye on the C4I technology .. it is essential for a high-tech defense, the enemy mastery, mastery and Russia also, the S-300 and the C4I, if the bavar373 is not on technology as C4I. or greater than the C4I it is not even worth doing the comprait our system S-300 because it will be lower.


Ok this is the reason for Farsi: oops I had to write it in Farsi  If you want to learn another language Farsi is a good choice!
Vaghti Farsi mishe yani masaleh namoosieh! Gheire farsi zaban ha nabayad befahman! 

By the way Iran since 1995 was working on C4 system (as far as I know)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Some new radars and upgraded radars were shown today:







































I think the Hafez radar will be used in Talash 2 and 3 system. Originally it was stated to be used in Mersad system as well. But its range which is 250km, means it is nicely suitable for Talash systems as well. Sayyad-3 missile has a range of over 200km and Sayyad-2 about 60-80km perhaps. Thus this radar should be suitable in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## The Last of us



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## haman10

@Tomyris post what you want where you want 

@2800 chi kar dari be een abji ma ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

*Iran "Moragheb" 3D surveillance and "Hafez"phased array 3D beamforming radar*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

haman10 said:


> @Tomyris post what you want where you want
> 
> @2800 chi kar dari be een abji ma ?


Ye lahze fekr kardam migi abii. Lol
Man mokhlese abji ham hastam, amma behtare in thread az khat kharej nashe va tush bahs ha va akhbare jedi bashe. Iranian chill thread vase offtopic va chat kardan hast.

@Tomyris Sisi I'm sorry. Post what you want where you want. However if you want to post offtopics too much please post them in Iranian chill thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

On Tuesday (1st of September) we are going to see 2 radars unveiled in different parts of the country.



> "Bina and Nazir radar systems will be unveiled in two mountainous and plain areas on September 1 concurrently with Air Defense Day (in Iran)," Esmayeeli told reporters in a press conference in Tehran on Saturday.



Iran unveils new missile, radar systems - Mehr News Agency

I am assuming one of those radars will be the 1000km range radars the General talked about a few weeks ago.

Iran's airdefence development is the most proactive part of the military. It has even overtaken the development pace of the ballistic missile. Although it is important to note, the ballistic missile development is influenced by politics otherwise by now we would have had much longer ranged ballistics missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tomyris

2800 said:


> Ye lahze fekr kardam migi abii. Lol
> Man mokhlese abji ham hastam, amma behtare in thread az khat kharej nashe va tush bahs ha va akhbare jedi bashe. Iranian chill thread vase offtopic va chat kardan hast.
> 
> @Tomyris Sisi I'm sorry. Post what you want where you want. However if you want to post offtopics too much please post them in Iranian chill thread.



thank you my brother,  


The Last of us said:


> On Tuesday (1st of September) we are going to see 2 radars unveiled in different parts of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> Iran unveils new missile, radar systems - Mehr News Agency
> 
> I am assuming one of those radars will be the 1000km range radars the General talked about a few weeks ago.
> 
> Iran's airdefence development is the most proactive part of the military. It has even overtaken the development pace of the ballistic missile. Although it is important to note, the ballistic missile development is influenced by politics otherwise by now we would have had much longer ranged ballistics missiles.


it is beautiful but I would like a faith that weapons be tested, first shown to the reliability of the weapons and showed our enemy that it is effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> it is beautiful but I would like a faith that weapons be tested, first shown to the reliability of the weapons and showed our enemy that it is effective.



Hopefully soon sister. They have not yet officially unveiled Talash-3. Once they do, we will see testing of it etc. 
Our enemies will get the message. The fact Iran has long range surface to air missile technology is enough to make them shiver.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Hopefully soon sister. They have not yet officially unveiled Talash-3. Once they do, we will see testing of it etc.
> Our enemies will get the message. The fact Iran has long range surface to air missile technology is enough to make them shiver.


yes but you must test them we have a lot but nobody has done such evidence, bitter I'd like to talk more in depth the electronic system, it is the most important thing snt of complex system and hard, because it requires that the system quickly calculates and trasnmet the given, it must be resistant to interference from enemy that is not easy .I think that Iran not yet mastered the art technology for air defense


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> yes but you must test them we have a lot but nobody has done such evidence, bitter I'd like to talk more in depth the electronic system, it is the most important thing snt of complex system and hard, because it requires that the system quickly calculates and trasnmet the given, it must be resistant to interference from enemy that is not easy .I think that Iran not yet mastered the art technology for air defense



Talash-3 is not unveiled officially, once it is, you will see it tested like you did with other systems. I understand how complex these systems are, don't you think the people who develop such systems in Iran know many times more than you, me and everyone else here combined? Why are we pretending to tell them about how complex such system are and tell them what capabilities those systems need to have? This is what they mean by fanboy, armchair generals etc, lets not pretend we're more enlightened than people who design and make such complex missiles. .

Your definition of evidence is not practical. No country will reveal every little detail on the system just to satisfy fanboys/girls like us. Those who need to take the message will take it even from a simple tests, just like when Iran tests ballistic missiles etc. No country's official will in their right state of mind show high level of details about such strategic systems. That would be beyond foolish.


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Talash-3 is not unveiled officially, once it is, you will see it tested like you did with other systems. I understand how complex these systems are, don't you think the people who develop such systems in Iran know many times more than you, me and everyone else here combined? Why are we pretending to tell them about how complex such system are and tell them what capabilities those systems need to have? This is what they mean by fanboy, armchair generals etc, lets not pretend we're more enlightened than people who design and make such complex missiles. .
> 
> Your definition of evidence is not practical. No country will reveal every little detail on the system just to satisfy fanboys/girls like us. Those who need to take the message will take it even from a simple tests, just like when Iran tests ballistic missiles etc. No country's official will in their right state of mind show high level of details about such strategic systems. That would be beyond foolish.


no I did not say that the secret be revealed but showed that the weapons and much effective and attein its target over long distances like the ballistic missile. and each country shows are reliable weapons.

you said that we all know better met but a faith which makes me doubt is the story of qaher313, I can not swallowed such a big lie .. so I'm suspicious about any declaration as I have not seen evidence


----------



## RAMPAGE

I deeply admire Iran's advancements in missile technology. Hope we collaborate in SAM and radar tech, now that the sanctions have been relaxed.

People of Pakistan have great respect for Iran and want to see both nations as friends and partners. God knows we have enough enemies and troubled borders.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MTN1917

The Last of us said:


> Hopefully soon sister. They have not yet officially unveiled Talash-3. Once they do, we will see testing of it etc.
> Our enemies will get the message. The fact Iran has long range surface to air missile technology is enough to make them shiver.


Talash-3 was only a development phase and a prototype, final system will only be called ''Talash air defense system".

There has been a new report by Tasnimnews which has interesting details on Talash AD system developments and its components.

According to the report 3 variants of Talash AD system was tested, these 3 variants lead the way to the final ''Talash Air defense system''

The four phases of this system are called Talash 1, Talash 2, Talash 3, Talash(the final and completely indigenous variant)

Talash 1 was the initial tested version of Talash, it used an older variant of Sayyad-2 missile and was tested against low and mid altitude targets successfully.

Talash 2 used an improved version of Sayyad-2 which had higher engagement altitude.

Talash 3 was Talash 2 synced with russian S-200 in order to have higher range.

In the final version they dropped the S-200 from Talash 3 and added the new Sayyad-3 missile to it, this last system which is the final and definite version is now called ''Talash Air defense system'', according to report it is completely indigenous and apparently this is the system that will be deployed and enter mass production.

The final Talash AD system is able to engage mid and long range targets.

The report didn't specified the Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missile ranges, according to report the Talash is consisted of 5 components.(I use the exact Persian translation as I don't know the correct terminology)

1- Information sender
2- detection and engagement system
3- control and monitoring unit
4- launcher
5- Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles

Each Talash air defense unit will be consisted of three launchers, two command and control vehicles and radars(the persian text isn't exact, it can either mean that it has one control and command vehicle and one radar or that it has two of each).

Also sayyad-3 launchers will have wider and longer canister in order to accommodate the missile.

Note the source is in Persian
خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - سامانه موشکی تلاش با تجهیز به "موشک صیاد ۳" کاملا بومی شد + جزئیات

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

RAMPAGE said:


> I deeply admire Iran's advancements in missile technology. Hope we collaborate in SAM and radar tech, now that the sanctions have been relaxed.
> 
> People of Pakistan have great respect for Iran and want to see both nations as friends and partners. God knows we have enough enemies and troubled borders.


we all hope a regional cooperation and technological development is prevalent, but Pakistan must make peace with India to create a regiona superpower.
pakistan should not become the golf dog lackey, pakistan and well above the Arab countries



MTN1917 said:


> Talash-3 was only a development phase and a prototype, final system will only be called ''Talash air defense system".
> 
> There has been a new report by Tasnimnews which has interesting details on Talash AD system developments and its components.
> 
> According to the report 3 variants of Talash AD system was tested, these 3 variants lead the way to the final ''Talash Air defense system''
> 
> The four phases of this system are called Talash 1, Talash 2, Talash 3, Talash(the final and completely indigenous variant)
> 
> Talash 1 was the initial tested version of Talash, it used an older variant of Sayyad-2 missile and was tested against low and mid altitude targets successfully.
> 
> Talash 2 used an improved version of Sayyad-2 which had higher engagement altitude.
> 
> Talash 3 was Talash 2 synced with russian S-200 in order to have higher range.
> 
> In the final version they dropped the S-200 from Talash 3 and added the new Sayyad-3 missile to it, this last system which is the final and definite version is now called ''Talash Air defense system'', according to report it is completely indigenous and apparently this is the system that will be deployed and enter mass production.
> 
> The final Talash AD system is able to engage mid and long range targets.
> 
> The report didn't specified the Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missile ranges, according to report the Talash is consisted of 5 components.(I use the exact Persian translation as I don't know the correct terminology)
> 
> 1- Information sender
> 2- detection and engagement system
> 3- control and monitoring unit
> 4- launcher
> 5- Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles
> 
> Each Talash air defense unit will be consisted of three launchers, two command and control vehicles and radars(the persian text isn't exact, it can either mean that it has one control and command vehicle and one radar or that it has two of each).
> 
> Also sayyad-3 launchers will have wider and longer canister in order to accommodate the missile.
> 
> Note the source is in Persian
> خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - سامانه موشکی تلاش با تجهیز به "موشک صیاد ۳" کاملا بومی شد + جزئیات


he was tested successfully? in what year? as if I made understands nor Talash nor bavar are ready? iran and therefore is vulnerable to an attack actuelement? .......

the system that you said are not sufficient must itemize. the increased complexity of radar and jamming of the system, we must also of inteligent and accurate missile extrenement

what you told me and reassuring but I'd like more detailed on the part of the army.

you think that the bavar373 worn and how KM? 250? 300 ??


----------



## Aramagedon

Iran unveils advanced Nazir, Bina radar systems - Mehr News Agency




1 September 2015 - 12:16

TEHRAN, Sep. 01 (MNA) – Commander of Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili unveiled new domestically-made radar systems in Tehran.
In a ceremony held on September 1, concurrent with National Air Defense Day, the commander unveiled Bina and Nazir radar systems, having advanced technological capabilities and “unique” in the region.

According to the reports, Bina is a 3D high-resolution control radar which has great ability in detection and identification of potential targets with low radar cross section, and can fully fight against electronic warfare while also detecting stealth targets.

Nazir is a long-range tracking radar with high accuracy in identification of separate targets which can detect and identify targets with its low cross section ability.

The system is protected against anti-radar missiles and enjoys the ability to detect targets at ranges in excess of 800 km and a height of 100 feet.

A number of Iran’s other homegrown air defense systems, including the upgraded model of the Keyhan (Cosmos) radar is also another system unveiled previously. This new version is a fully mobile radar system with high resolution.

Brigadier General Esmaili also unveiled a domestically-made IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) system. The system can distinguish friendly forces from the enemy by detecting 100 targets simultaneously.

Esmaili said the country's Fat'h 14 radar would also be deployed in an air defense site, adding that the long-range system has semi-conductor technology.

The commander also noted that Iran would also produce and unveil new drones, but refused to give details due to security reasons.

The country has manufactured different types of state-of-the-art radar systems, including Arash-2 and Kayhan, as well as missiles, including Khalij-e-Fars (Persian Gulf), Mehrab (Altar), Ra'd (Thunder), Qader (Mighty), Nour (Light) and Zafar (Triumph).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

One of these radars is the 1000km ranged radars they talked about a while back. Waiting for pics to post.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Last of us

Snips from the video below:

IRINN-09012015-1630

The commander of the airdefence base has stated, the new radars are completely indigenous are not only unique in the region but also in the world. They must be working in a special frequency. One of them has a range of 800km and altitude of 100,000 feet. They are very resistant to electronic warfare and can detect low RCS targets.

It seems they are resultant to show the actual radars and disclose their location. This is for security reasons and I think this is probably the right thing to do, even though I would have liked to see them.

Very good achievment and nice addition to Iran's impressive development in airdefence sector.

@haman10 @Daneshmand @Serpentine @Siavash @2800 @rahi2357 @Blackmoon @SOHEIL

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Aramagedon

The Last of us said:


> Snips from the video below:
> 
> IRINN-09012015-1630
> 
> The commander of the airdefence base has stated, the new radars are completely indigenous are not only unique in the region but also in the world. They must be working in a special frequency. One of them has a range of 800km and altitude of 100,000 feet. They are very resistant to electronic warfare and can detect low RCS targets.
> 
> It seems they are resultant to show the actual radars and disclose their location. This is for security reasons and I think this is probably the right thing to do, even though I would have liked to see them.
> 
> Very good achievment and nice addition to Iran's impressive development in airdefence sector.
> 
> @haman10 @Daneshmand @Serpentine @Siavash @2800 @rahi2357 @Blackmoon @SOHEIL


Mashallah.


----------



## MTN1917

Tomyris said:


> he was tested successfully? in what year? as if I made understands nor Talash nor bavar are ready? iran and therefore is vulnerable to an attack actuelement? .......



Sayyad-2 which is used in Talash as a mid range missile was initially tested in 2011, from that time Iran conducted tests which lead to development of the final Talash air defense system which uses both Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles, I detailed those development phases which are called Talash 1,2,3 in my previous post.

Here is Sayyad-2 test footage.





Picture of another more recent testing of new Sayyad-2 launcher





Prototype sayyad-2 launcher





Sayyad-2 launcher





Talash system has now completed its development and is ready to be deployed, I am sure they will unveil it in a ceremony which marks the first mass delivery to IRIADF but Bavar-373 is still in development.



> the system that you said are not sufficient must itemize. the increased complexity of radar and jamming of the system, we must also of inteligent and accurate missile extrenement



Don't worry they are working on a large number of different radars in VHF, UHF, S/L band and etc, there are also a variety of different Air Defense system under development or on the process of being deployed like Tabas, Raad 1, Raad 2, 3rd Khorda, Alam al Hoda and etc.

*Raad-1





Raad-2





Tabas





3rd Khordad



*




> what you told me and reassuring but I'd like more detailed on the part of the army.
> 
> you think that the bavar373 worn and how KM? 250? 300 ??


They have not specified Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 ranges which is logical because their fire control system were not complete and they were still under development and upgrading, so for now we don't have their ranges.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
2 | Like Like:
4


----------



## Serpentine

MTN1917 said:


> Sayyad-2 which is used in Talash as a mid range missile was initially tested in 2011, from that time Iran conducted tests which lead to development of the final Talash air defense system which uses both Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles, I detailed those development phases which are called Talash 1,2,3 in my previous post.
> 
> Here is Sayyad-2 test footage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picture of another more recent testing of new Sayyad-2 launcher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prototype sayyad-2 launcher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayyad-2 launcher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talash system has now completed its development and is ready to be deployed, I am sure they will unveil it in a ceremony which marks the first mass delivery to IRIADF but Bavar-373 is still in development.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry they are working on a large number of different radars in VHF, UHF, S/L band and etc, there are also a variety of different Air Defense system under development or on the process of being deployed like Tabas, Raad 1, Raad 2, 3rd Khorda, Alam al Hoda and etc.
> 
> *Raad-1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raad-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tabas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> They have not specified Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 ranges which is logical because their fire control system were not complete and they were still under development and upgrading, so for now we don't have their ranges.



Dear @MTN1917, I'd like to ask you to visit here much more, we have a shortage of people like you who are well-educated about all kinds of military stuff. Hopefully, you will be promoted to our military Think-Tank if you have a more active role here.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Snips from the video below:
> 
> IRINN-09012015-1630
> 
> The commander of the airdefence base has stated, the new radars are completely indigenous are not only unique in the region but also in the world. They must be working in a special frequency. One of them has a range of 800km and altitude of 100,000 feet. They are very resistant to electronic warfare and can detect low RCS targets.
> 
> It seems they are resultant to show the actual radars and disclose their location. This is for security reasons and I think this is probably the right thing to do, even though I would have liked to see them.
> 
> Very good achievment and nice addition to Iran's impressive development in airdefence sector.
> 
> @haman10 @Daneshmand @Serpentine @Siavash @2800 @rahi2357 @Blackmoon @SOHEIL


bla bla bla......


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> no I did not say that the secret be revealed but showed that the weapons and much effective and attein its target over long distances like the ballistic missile. and each country shows are reliable weapons.
> 
> you said that we all know better met but a faith which makes me doubt is the story of qaher313, I can not swallowed such a big lie .. so I'm suspicious about any declaration as I have not seen evidence



Your comment make little to no sense. And this is not due to your bad English but the logic you're using or lack of it.
They have already showed videos of missile like sayyad-2 being used and hitting a target. When you ask for more "evidence" then clearly you want them to start showing the more classified information. How on earth will they prove the missiles have hit targets over long distances? Do you not realise how absurd these demands are? There is no country that shows more than what Iran has showed in testing. Even when the likes of Russian test their systems, they show the missile hitting a target like Iran did with sayyad-2, ra'ad etc.

I had addressed your comment in qaher many times already, but like a broken record you keep repeating the same thing over and over.



Tomyris said:


> bla bla bla......



I think you need to stop making such childish comments because frankly, you're getting annoying now.


----------



## RAMPAGE

What radar has been coupled with Sayyad 2?

Pics and details plz.


----------



## The Last of us

RAMPAGE said:


> What radar has been coupled with Sayyad 2?
> 
> Pics and details plz.



Sayyad-2 will be part of the Talash airdefence system, which includes sayyad-2 missile, range 60-100km, altitude of 25km, and also sayyad-3 missile with range of more than 200km and very high altitude.

Not officially confirmed but *one of the *radars used in the talash airdefence could be the Hafez radar. It has a range of 250km and can simultaneously track 150 targets:
















Iran has many, many other radars that could be used as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> Your comment make little to no sense. And this is not due to your bad English but the logic you're using or lack of it.
> They have already showed videos of missile like sayyad-2 being used and hitting a target. When you ask for more "evidence" then clearly you want them to start showing the more classified information. How on earth will they prove the missiles have hit targets over long distances? Do you not realise how absurd these demands are? There is no country that shows more than what Iran has showed in testing. Even when the likes of Russian test their systems, they show the missile hitting a target like Iran did with sayyad-2, ra'ad etc.
> 
> I had addressed your comment in qaher many times already, but like a broken record you keep repeating the same thing over and over.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you need to stop making such childish comments because frankly, you're getting annoying now.


is no disc is scratched, I did not have a correct answer on who Qaher and a fake for me

israel have just announced develop a system for the S-300 countered, it will equip these aircraft with a system for 300-s countered ........ then there was interest that the Iranian system be ultramodern otherwise it is useless to easily fabricated system.


I said blah blah blah .... because your review on the radar, how dare you say that it is unique in the world with high capacity scrambling and everything else? you have heard it is the best aumonde even the most advanced nation can not design a system similitaire.

iran has made much progress but not yet to develop the system as complex and performand


----------



## The Last of us

Tomyris said:


> is no disc is scratched, I did not have a correct answer on who Qaher and a fake for me
> 
> israel have just announced develop a system for the S-300 countered, it will equip these aircraft with a system for 300-s countered ........ then there was interest that the Iranian system be ultramodern otherwise it is useless to easily fabricated system.
> 
> 
> I said blah blah blah .... because your review on the radar, how dare you say that it is unique in the world with high capacity scrambling and everything else? you have heard it is the best aumonde even the most advanced nation can not design a system similitaire.
> 
> iran has made much progress but not yet to develop the system as complex and performand





*I* did not say it is a unique radar, the commander of the Iranian airdefence base Farzad Emaili said that. I am just translating what *he* said. You want to pretend you know more than the commander of the airdefence base and we should take your word over his? Saying they have made a unique radar does not mean it has to be so advanced that other nations cannot produce it. All one has to do is use common sense just for a second.

The rest of your comment is the usual statements which I have addressed many times.

This is my last reply to you because you have done nothing but waste my time and thread space.


----------



## The Last of us

It seems the Talash airdefence system is coming along nicely and is just entering production. Now, it's just a matter of time before IRGC shows their own long range gems. What we know is after the production of the Ra'ad series and their respective taer missiles, the IRGC said a year ago that they're working on surface to air missiles with ranges of 100km and 200km. We seem to get a small shot of one of the missiles:






The missile is called sadid-630 and apparently, is up to twice as long as the Taer missile (range 50km) shown below:







The question is whether the sadid has a range of 100km or 200km.

One thing is for sure, there is some serious work being done on Iranian long range airdefences. 

There is:
1) Talash airdefence system
2) Bavar-373
3)Sadid 630 & the other missile being developed for ra'ad series.

What we need to do now is to start working on anti ballistic missile systems.


----------



## Siavash

In Iran patriot like launcher, the missile ignites from within the box where in Patriot and S-300 the missile is ejected first and ignites outside at a distance. Why is that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> *I* did not say it is a unique radar, the commander of the Iranian airdefence base Farzad Emaili said that. I am just translating what *he* said. You want to pretend you know more than the commander of the airdefence base and we should take your word over his? Saying they have made a unique radar does not mean it has to be so advanced that other nations cannot produce it. All one has to do is use common sense just for a second.
> 
> The rest of your comment is the usual statements which I have addressed many times.
> 
> This is my last reply to you because you have done nothing but waste my time and thread space.


stop believing everything he says to you, the commander also said the Qaher and a great hunter and blah blah blah.

we see what those weapons system will give a complete faith but I believe in the declaration not a ground-air defense system and super hard to produce it's not just the pitcher must be an ultra-modern missile radar super powerful interference therefore etc..etc ............. and I think that Iran not yet mastered this technology, the Western sandwich is more Decenie and we were some years you get has done better ?? it does not make sense

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomyris

The Last of us said:


> It seems the Talash airdefence system is coming along nicely and is just entering production. Now, it's just a matter of time before IRGC shows their own long range gems. What we know is after the production of the Ra'ad series and their respective taer missiles, the IRGC said a year ago that they're working on surface to air missiles with ranges of 100km and 200km. We seem to get a small shot of one of the missiles:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The missile is called sadid-630 and apparently, is up to twice as long as the Taer missile (range 50km) shown below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The question is whether the sadid has a range of 100km or 200km.
> 
> One thing is for sure, there is some serious work being done on Iranian long range airdefences.
> 
> There is:
> 1) Talash airdefence system
> 2) Bavar-373
> 3)Sadid 630 & the other missile being developed for ra'ad series.
> 
> What we need to do now is to start working on anti ballistic missile systems.


I think that the bavar 373 and outperforms the S-300 .... hahahaha. s-300 can intercepting missile.

I think iran Devera work on the electronic system and inteligent interference, the enemy has a powerful interference, and if it was a simple system it will easily countered. we need super comlexe system detects and destroy with a powerful radar and jamming mesh with ultra fast tracked for missile and inteligent any target.


----------



## The Last of us

Siavash said:


> In Iran patriot like launcher, the missile ignites from within the box where in Patriot and S-300 the missile is ejected first and ignites outside at a distance. Why is that?



You're talking about hot launched (ignites inside the tube) vs cold launch (ejected out the tube and then motor starts).
There is not really tremendous advantages over either one of these launch systems. Cold launch system is used in vertically launched systems and whereas hot launched is used in both vertical and angled firings. I think the advantage of cold launch/vertical launcher like s-300 over the likes of sayyad-2 and patriot is obviously you don't have to physically move the missile tube to face towards the target.

The patriot missile as far as I know are all hot launched. Are you sure you were not mistaken?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Falcon

@The Last of us and other respected members. Can you please tell me about these two missiles i.e. Sajiel and Fakour-90

From what I understand Sajiel did not go into production, whereas the Fakour-90 did. Can more learned members kindly shed more light on this?

*Sajiel*





*Fakour-90*


----------



## The Last of us

Iran Launches Homegrown Air Defense C2 System

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran on Thursday unveiled a fully indigenized intelligent air defense command and control system named Great Prophet (PBUH).
printPrint
Iran’s Army Commander Major General Ataollah Salehi and Commander of the country’s Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili were present at the ceremony held to unveil and launch the system.
Addressing the ceremony, Major General Salehi underlined that Iran’s experts should constantly update the country’s air defense systems.
General Esmaili, in his address, noted that all components of the C2 system have been produced by the country’s experts.
He added that from now on, all of the country’s air defense networks, which have been upgrade d and fully indigenized, will operate under the Great Prophet (PBUH) Command and Control System.
Iran has in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of military equipment, including the air defense systems that use cutting edge technologies.
Tehran has repeatedly stated that its military might is defensive in nature and poses no threat to other countries.

Tasnim News Agency - Iran Launches Homegrown Air Defense C2 System







It seems the pictures I posted earlier were of this system and not the radar Bazir etc. Do you guys know what these systems are right?  This means 3600 current airdefence points in the country have been fully integrated together. A true integrated air-defence in Iran  And who knows when this system was actually established and they're just showing it now. In the future, the airdefence centres will be increased from 3600 to over 5000

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Arminkh

Indus Falcon said:


> @The Last of us and other respected members. Can you please tell me about these two missiles i.e. Sajiel and Fakour-90
> 
> From what I understand Sajiel did not go into production, whereas the Fakour-90 did. Can more learned members kindly shed more light on this?


Fakour 90 is an air to air missile. An upgrade to AIM-54 that were use by USN Tomcats.

Sedjeel is an upgraded version of surface to air Hawk missile. Please note that we have a long range ballistic missile with same name as well.

The Sedjeel one is definitely under production because the Hawk system is the backbone of Iran's short range AA missile system and is now incorporated into Alzahra (@The Last of us correct me if I'm wrong) system.

Fakour on the other hand is used by F-14 only so it is probably produced in more limited numbers as we don't have a lot of them flying these days.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Falcon

Arminkh said:


> Fakour 90 is a air to air missile. An upgrade to AIM-54 that were use bu USN Tomcats.
> 
> Sedjeel is an upgraded version of surface to air Hawk missile. Please note that we have a long range ballistic missile with same name as well.


Please see this :

SAM system based on Nasr missile | Page 5


----------



## Arminkh

Indus Falcon said:


> Please see this :
> 
> SAM system based on Nasr missile | Page 5


I added to my comments above.



Arminkh said:


> I added to my comments above.


Shaheen missile may be the name of the operational version of upgraded Hawk while Sejjil is probably an under development system. I personally have not heard a lot about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Falcon

Arminkh said:


> I added to my comments above.
> 
> 
> Shaheen missile may be the name of the operational version of upgraded Hawk while Sejjil is probably an under development system. I personally have not heard a lot about it.



Bro, from what I understand, Shahin is SAM, Sajiel on the other hand is AAM. Both are advanced versions of the Raytheon Hawk

@The Last of us @syedali73 Comments?


----------



## Arminkh

Indus Falcon said:


> Bro, from what I understand, Shahin is SAM, Sajiel on the other hand is AAM. Both are advanced versions of the Raytheon Hawk
> 
> @The Last of us @syedali73 Comments?


This is what I found about Sejjil:

The Project sedjeel was a project done by _Jahade khodkafie-e Niruye Havaie_ to replace the AIM-54A Phoenix, there are few rumors that Iran received the help of Israel to adapt the missile to the AWG-9 radar of Tomcat.

The second statement above is too far from reality in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Falcon

Arminkh said:


> This is what I found about Sejjil:
> 
> The Project sedjeel was a project done by _Jahade khodkafie-e Niruye Havaie_ to replace the AIM-54A Phoenix, there are few rumors that Iran received the help of Israel to adapt the missile to the AWG-9 radar of Tomcat.
> 
> The second statement above is too far from reality in my opinion.



Bro, you didn't read the link I posted. GO to it, It's quoting Fars news agency. 
SAM system based on Nasr missile | Page 5

The replacement for the Phoenix is the Fakour-90 Post#875 bottom two pics. 

Anyways you are free to believe whatever you want to.


----------



## haman10

Indus Falcon said:


> Bro, you didn't read the link I posted. GO to it, It's quoting Fars news agency.
> SAM system based on Nasr missile | Page 5
> 
> The replacement for the Phoenix is the Fakour-90 Post#875 bottom two pics.
> 
> Anyways you are free to believe whatever you want to.


This is a name confusion . you're confused because of the names whereas @Arminkh is right 

we have 2 sedjil missiles , one of them is MRBM , one of them is the AAM version of MIM-23 [HAWK] .

the latter was indeed an intended replacement for AIM-54 phoenix as Armin rightfully said . it was a project back in the 80s when Iran desperately needed a replacement for it's depleting stockpile of AIM-54s .

now having said that , MIM-23's range was no where near AIM-54 , thus , years later Iran started to work on a project to RE AIM-54 . initially successful , we also did some good job in upgrading the missile . 

the new missile called Fakour or " AIM-54A+ " as it's NATO designation , was introduced not long ago to the public . 

it's been rumored that it was the missile which was installed on our PersianCats when Russian knights - being a russian Airshow team - visited Iranian skies and were scorted by our boys . 

the Russian knights took some picture that day who are available if you just google them ,

Shahin is the upgraded version of MIM-23 which works just like it's predecessor : it's a SAM

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Last of us

The below news is a testimony to the fact that the 3000km ranged Seperh OTH radar is already up and running 

Top Commander: Iran Monitoring Enemies' Slightest Move from 3,000 KM Distance



> TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli underlined that the country's integrated missile and radar systems are always monitoring moves and ready to fire and intercept hostile flying objects at any moment from over 3,000 kilometers away.
> "Today we are capable of monitoring the enemies' slightest move from a distance of more than 3,000 kilometers," Brigadier General Esmayeeli said, addressing a pre-sermon speech of Tehran Friday prayers.
> 
> He reiterated that one of the achievements in the field of Air Defense in Iran is that the country has become self-sufficient in the production of radar systems and missiles.
> 
> Brigadier General Esmayeeli said Iran's Air Defense units have been deployed in some 3,700 locations across the country to give a crushing response to enemies' threats, while they have a message of peace and security to regional and friendly states.
> 
> He underlined that Iran's military capabilities serve as a deterrent arm against enemy threats.
> 
> 
> Brigadier General Esmayeeli noted that Iran’s defense lines are not confined to the geographical borders, and said, "Given the increase in variety, speed and range of aerial weapons of the enemy and the intention of the enemy to destroy the infrastructure of the defending country, the defense lines can be expanded to all parts of the target (enemy) country."



Farsnews

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> The below news is a testimony to the fact that the 3000km ranged Seperh OTH radar is already up and running
> 
> Top Commander: Iran Monitoring Enemies' Slightest Move from 3,000 KM Distance
> 
> 
> 
> Farsnews



*این چه کووووووله!!*

موشن گرافیک یادتونه (پاسخی به زیاده گویی های غرب) | روشنگری

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Iran's New Radar System under Development

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran is preparing to launch a new radar system, 'Qaem Al-e Mohammad', in the near future.
The new radar system will cover a range of 1,000km which can increase the Iranian Armed Forces' capability to monitor different parts of the country and the regional moves.

According to Commander of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmayeeli, Qaem radar system is now being mounted and launched in a special point in Iran.

Iran unveiled two new home-made radar systems named Nazir and Bina earlier this month with the capability of detecting radar-evading targets and fighting against electronic warfare.

The two radar systems were unveiled in a ceremony attended by General Esmayeeli through a video conference.

Nazir is a long-range and high-precision radar system which is highly capable of detecting targets in low radar cross section and is resistant to radar evading and anti-radar missiles.

The radar can detect all radar-evading targets and is capable of fighting electronic warfare.

Bina and Nazir radar systems have been mounted in the mountainous and plain regions in Southeastern Iran.

Elaborating on the specifications of the two radar systems, Brigadier General Esmayeeli said that they were fully home-made and unique in the region and the world.

"The radars have been designed in different frequencies and with jump frequency and also in (special) bands which cannot be heard by the enemies," he added.

Esmayeeli explained about other features of the radar systems, and said they were multi-range radars, meaning that they can detect wide-body and stealth targets as well as small planes, including drones, in long distances before they can approach Iranian borders.

He expressed the hope that the two radar systems would be mass-produced within one year.

Also Managing Director of Iranian Electronic Industries Company Hossein Baqeri announced early September that the country's experts and engineers had designed and manufactured a radar system that could identify approaching flights from the most remote areas and high-altitudes.

"We have achieved remarkable progress in the air defense field and we have given priority to air defense and concentrated our efforts on supplying air defense equipment at the order of Iran's Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei); in cooperation with experts of Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base we have designed a powerful and indigenized communications network for air defense which has resulted in covering all blind spots in the country's air defense and tracking all flights even in the remote parts and at very high altitudes," Baqeri told FNA. 

He reiterated that the Iranian Electronic Industries Company has also made considerable progress in avionics, and said, "We have made remarkable progress in supplying and installing electronic equipment and cameras on airplanes and drones."

"Today all flights even in remote areas are under the surveillance of Iran's powerful air defense," Baqeri added.

Also in 2014, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) unveiled Qadir phased array radar system in a ceremony participated by General Esmayeeli.

The radar which can detect hostile flying objects up to 300km in altitude and 1,100km in distance was tested in Payambar-e Azam (the great messenger) 6 wargames in 2011.

The powerful radar is capable of detecting flying targets, radar-evading fighter jets and drones, cruise and ballistic missiles and low-orbit satellites.

Farsnews

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## ultron



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

تست گرم «باور 373» امسال انجام می‌شود





فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی از تست گرم سامانه موشکی باور 373 تا پایان سال جاری خبر داد.
امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا(ص) در حاشیه رزمایش بزرگ محرم با حضور در جمع خبرنگاران گفت: قرارگاه پدافند با استفاده از یگانها و سامانه های راداری، شنود و موشکی خود در این رزمایش حاضر است که در این میان می توان به سامانه های موشکی ارتفاع پست، موشک مرصاد در ارتفاع متوسط، سامانه کنترل هوشمند تاکتیکی فکور اشاره کرد.
اسماعیلی با بیان اینکه نیمی از کشو.ر به صورت مستقیم و بقیه مناطق نیز غیرمستقیم با این رزمایش درگیر هستند، افزود: سامانه های توپخانه ای و موشکی برای مقابله با تهدیدات پهپادی به کار گرفته خواهند شد.
اسماعیلی در پاسخ به سوالی درخصوص آخرین وضعیت سامانه موشکی باور 373 گفت: ما پیش از این گفتیم کار این سامانه در سال 96 تمام می شود و تست گرم آن نیز تا پایان سال جاری خواهد بود


امیر اسماعیلی در جمع خبرنگاران: تست گرم «باور 373» امسال انجام می‌شود​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIADF ''Fath 14'' radar with a range of 600km رادار ۶۰۰ کیلومتری پدافند هوایی با نام فتح ۱۴*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## بلندر

Fath 14 

Designed to detect fighters with low RCS ...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Serpentine

Brace yourselves, we might be looking at one of radars of Bavar-373 air defense system (not officially confirmed to be part of B-373 yet):

Qamar phased array radar, with detection range of 450 km and simultaneous detection of 100 targets, for low, medium and high flight altitudes.











@haman10 @Daneshmand @2800 @Madali @raptor22 @JEskandari

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## RAMPAGE

Serpentine said:


> Brace yourselves, we might be looking at one of radars of Bavar-373 air defense system (not officially confirmed to be part of B-373 yet):
> 
> Qamar phased array radar, with detection range of 450 km and simultaneous detection of 100 targets, for low, medium and high flight altitudes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @haman10 @Daneshmand @2800 @Madali @raptor22 @JEskandari


Wow!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Last of us

Another very important achievement is the radar below which is a SAR:







Video of the unveiling ceremony:
رونمایی از 16 دستاورد دفاعی در صنایع الکترونیک شیراز

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## raptor22

Serpentine said:


> Brace yourselves, we might be looking at one of radars of Bavar-373 air defense system (not officially confirmed to be part of B-373 yet):
> 
> Qamar phased array radar, with detection range of 450 km and simultaneous detection of 100 targets, for low, medium and high flight altitudes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @haman10 @Daneshmand @2800 @Madali @raptor22 @JEskandari



Good news ... thanks .... waiting to see more of it in coming months

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Serpentine

The Last of us said:


> Another very important achievement is the radar below which is a SAR:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Video of the unveiling ceremony:
> رونمایی از 16 دستاورد دفاعی در صنایع الکترونیک شیراز



If that is indeed an SAR radar (which I believe it is), it's one of the most important military unveiling in past months and as told in the video, it can be mounted on UAVs and fighter jets. This is just a great news.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## scythian500

Serpentine said:


> If that is indeed an SAR radar (which I believe it is), it's one of the most important military unveiling in past months and as told in the video, it can be mounted on UAVs and fighter jets. This is just a great news.


As I mentioned this SAR thing couple of months ago somewhere, as you said it is a part of a much bigger project that will enable new UAVs and fighter jets (including RQ version) with not only SAR but very sophisticated radars that one of them is first in world when unveiled... Imagine a hybrid system that both has X band and HF band radars installed on a bird... Consider it a response to stealthy birds of the enemy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran 3D long range multiple target radar "Qamar" رادار برد بلند سه بعدي قمر*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## بلندر

we are achieving the technologies for long range ADS step by step ... next will be Air born Radars and then Real fighter ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

بلندر said:


> we are achieving the technologies for long range ADS step by step ... next will be Air born Radars and then Real fighter ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran attains outstanding progress in electronic warfare
*
*Tehran, Oct 26, IRNA – Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan announced that the experts and engineers of Iran's defense industries have achieved considerable advances in electronic warfare systems.*






'We have made outstanding advancement in area of software production for confronting enemies' electronic warfare by relying on the country's domestic capabilities,' Brigadier General Dehqan said, addressing the unveiling ceremony of 16 new achievements of Iran's Defense Industries in the Southern city of Shiraz on Monday. 

General Dehqan unveiled over a dozen new defense products and achievements earlier today. 

The Iranian Defense Minister unveiled 16 new defense projects of SAIran Electronic Industries (Shiraz Electronic Industries) Company in the Southern city of Shiraz today.

General Dehqan pointed to the indigenization of the navigation systems of warplanes as another achievement of SAIran Electronic Industries.

The most important projects unveiled during the ceremony included a Radar system with the capability of tracking different semi-heavy and heavy weapons and providing the global positioning system (GPS) specifications for taking action during electronic warfare, Qamar 3-D search and control radar system with the capability of tracking different kinds of targets, including fighter jets and drone, up to a distance of 450 kilometers at different low and high altitudes and transferring the relevant data to the air defense network and Absar video-imaging system which can be mounted on fighter jets and drones.

General Dehqan also inaugurated the production line of air and airport navigation systems, including Multilateration (MLAT), ELINT (Electronic signals intelligence) and Communications Intelligence (COMINT) systems.

'The most important achievement of today is the manufacture of different radars which can identify and track threats and defend the country,' General Dehqan said, addressing the unveiling ceremony.

He reiterated that the SAIran Electronic Industries Company has mass produced different radar systems that can cover a range of objects in distances up to 500 kilometers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MTN1917

Also unveiled today, *''Boshra''* counter battery radar which appears to be based on *''Hafez'' *radar.

*Boshra counter battery radar





















*
Boshra compared with Hafez radar
*Boshra





Hafez





Proximity fuzes and dual Dehlavieh launcher(kornet copy)




*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## raptor22

MTN1917 said:


> Also unveiled today, *''Boshra''* counter battery radar which appears to be based on *''Hafez'' *radar.
> 
> *Boshra counter battery radar
> View attachment 267590
> 
> View attachment 267591
> 
> View attachment 267592
> 
> View attachment 267594
> 
> View attachment 267596
> 
> *
> Boshra compared with Hafez radar
> *Boshra
> View attachment 267593
> 
> 
> Hafez
> View attachment 267598
> 
> 
> Proximity fuzes and dual Dehlavieh launcher(kornet copy)
> View attachment 267599
> *



What is the diffrences btw Boshra and Hafez radars?


----------



## PeeD

raptor22 said:


> What is the diffrences btw Boshra and Hafez radars?



That dual Kornet launcher seems to integrate a small land radar. Looks like automaticly controlled from safe position. Should be a effort to counter APS by launching two missiles subsequently.

That optical system looks like a optical warning and possibly tracking system for a Iranian active protection system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

MBT subsystems ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran "Tabas" mobile air defense system سیستم دفاع هوایی طبس*


----------



## yavar

Russia has signed a contract with Iran on the delivery of S-300 missile defense systems and as soon as the first part of the contract is fulfilled
DUBAI (Sputnik) – Russia has signed a contract with Iran on the delivery of S-300 missile defense systems and as soon as the first part of the contract is fulfilled, Tehran will rescind its court case against Russia for non-delivery, the head of Russia's state technologies corporation Rostec said Monday
"The contract on delivery of S-300 to Iran has not only been signed by the sides but has already entered into force," Sergei Chemezov said at the Dubai Airshow-2015.
He added that as soon as the first part of the contract is fulfilled, then Iran would rescind its court case against Russia for the non-delivery of the system, basically due to economic sanctions that were in place against Tehran.
Chemezov didn't elaborate exactly which variations of the S-300 missile defense systems will be supplied to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rahi2357

" The IAF's initial plans were to send pilots to the US in 2016 to begin training on the F-35 together with American pilots, and to take the first deliveries of F-35s* in late 2016 or early 2017* "

+


" “The contract on delivery of S-300 to Iran has not only been signed by the sides but has already entered into force,” said Chemezov.
The deal is worth nearly $1 billion, with the equipment to be delivered* no earlier than mid-2017*, according to the publication. "

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## scythian500

The Last of us said:


> Another very important achievement is the radar below which is a SAR:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Video of the unveiling ceremony:
> رونمایی از 16 دستاورد دفاعی در صنایع الکترونیک شیراز


@Sinan do u know what r these? I mean above Quoted pictures...

and specially these ones... what are these?

*














Source: Iranian Air Defense Systems | Page 61*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## -SINAN-

scythian500 said:


> @Sinan do u know what r these?
> 
> specially these ones... what are these?
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: Iranian Air Defense Systems | Page 61*


As i understood counter-battery radar.
Counter-battery radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you know it's range ?


----------



## waz

Serpentine said:


> Brace yourselves, we might be looking at one of radars of Bavar-373 air defense system (not officially confirmed to be part of B-373 yet):
> 
> Qamar phased array radar, with detection range of 450 km and simultaneous detection of 100 targets, for low, medium and high flight altitudes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @haman10 @Daneshmand @2800 @Madali @raptor22 @JEskandari



Fantastic development!

Reactions: Like Like:

3


----------



## scythian500

Sinan said:


> As i understood counter-battery radar.
> Counter-battery radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Do you know it's range ?



*Boshra * is a counter-battery phased array radar with a range X ...As it is understandable from its name, it tracks from where all sorts of semi-heavy and heavy artillery or rockets get fired and then send the data to Iranian artillery and missile forces in real time. About the range, It is not disclosed or I could n't find it... Maybe it is classified... @SOHEIL @Serpentine any info?
I also could n't find any photos of BOSHRA radar itself but its footprint is here:

*









Qamar is a 3D AESA Radar with a range of 450 km and ability to detect and track 100 targets at once.
Qamar radar have a mate which is "Absar" imaging system will be installed on fighter jets and UCAVs. Qamar detect and track targets and send its data to both "AA network and "Absar" imaging systems in range.*

*














And this one is also a version of Hafez AESA radar as it seems... It is not Boshra as some pointed here... This is what I figured..*

*









and to my understanding this is "Absar" imaging system that is going to be installed on Iranian birds (both jets and UAVs)... and it is shown it is a SAR radar.. but I can't be %100 sure of it is Absar... any info from insider guys>?




*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Kremlin confirms Russia started supplying S-300 missile systems to Iran




Iranian ambassador to Russia Mehdi Sanai late last month said his country had received the first S-300 systems
MOSCOW, December 3. /TASS/. Russia has begun the supplies of S-300 air defense systems to Iran, Russian presidential aide for military-technical cooperation Vladimir Kozhin has told TASS.
"The contract is in action. They’ve begun," Kozhin said in reply to a question.
Iranian ambassador to Russia Mehdi Sanai late last month said his country had received the first S-300 systems.
The head of the Rostec corporation (to which the Rosoboronexport company is affiliated) Sergey Chemezov said earlier the new contract for selling S-300 to Iran had taken effect at the beginning of November. The contract was concluded after Russian President Vladimir Putin had lifted the ban from selling this air defense system to Iran. Iran will get the S-300PMU-2 configuration.
Russia and Iran signed a contract in 2007 for the supply of five S-300PMU-1 battalions but in the autumn of 2010 then-President Dmitry Medvedev banned the supply of these systems to Tehran. The contract worth more than $800 million was annulled and the paid advance was returned to Iran.
Iran filed an almost $4 billion lawsuit against Russia at the Geneva Court of Arbitration over Russia’s nonfulfillment of the contract.
In the spring of 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted the ban on the supply of S-300 systems to Tehran.
There is no official information yet which modification of S-300 Iran plans to obtain: S-300PMU-1, which has been discontinued but may be specially produced for the Iranian side, or S-300VM.


TASS: Military & Defense - Kremlin confirms Russia started supplying S-300 missile systems to Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kollang

yavar said:


> Kremlin confirms Russia started supplying S-300 missile systems to Iran
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian ambassador to Russia Mehdi Sanai late last month said his country had received the first S-300 systems
> MOSCOW, December 3. /TASS/. Russia has begun the supplies of S-300 air defense systems to Iran, Russian presidential aide for military-technical cooperation Vladimir Kozhin has told TASS.
> "The contract is in action. They’ve begun," Kozhin said in reply to a question.
> Iranian ambassador to Russia Mehdi Sanai late last month said his country had received the first S-300 systems.
> The head of the Rostec corporation (to which the Rosoboronexport company is affiliated) Sergey Chemezov said earlier the new contract for selling S-300 to Iran had taken effect at the beginning of November. The contract was concluded after Russian President Vladimir Putin had lifted the ban from selling this air defense system to Iran. Iran will get the S-300PMU-2 configuration.
> Russia and Iran signed a contract in 2007 for the supply of five S-300PMU-1 battalions but in the autumn of 2010 then-President Dmitry Medvedev banned the supply of these systems to Tehran. The contract worth more than $800 million was annulled and the paid advance was returned to Iran.
> Iran filed an almost $4 billion lawsuit against Russia at the Geneva Court of Arbitration over Russia’s nonfulfillment of the contract.
> In the spring of 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted the ban on the supply of S-300 systems to Tehran.
> There is no official information yet which modification of S-300 Iran plans to obtain: S-300PMU-1, which has been discontinued but may be specially produced for the Iranian side, or S-300VM.
> 
> 
> TASS: Military & Defense - Kremlin confirms Russia started supplying S-300 missile systems to Iran


Good news 

Yavar jan yadede rajebe tahvil s-300 az rusiye chi migofti?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

kollang said:


> Yavar jan yadede rajebe tahvil s-300 az rusiye chi migofti?



brother . Russians change their mind because they owe us favor

Iranian General Soleimani Supervised Operation to Save Russian Su-24 Pilot

secondly after Turkey shoot down of SU-24 , Russia has got involved in Syria heavily and taking some heavy moves and there is build up is taking place and the Russians got much more closer to us after backstab Putin received and Putin wet dream which he had when he came back from G20 in Turkey he is more realistic


S-300 in action in Damascus, Iranian Airforce sent to T4 airbase in Homs serviced by Russia - Fort Russ

this downing of the plan has work in your favor so much that

زدن هواپیمای سوخو 24 روسیه ‌‌تبعات استراتژیکی پیدا خواهد کرد/مطمئنا ‌ترکیه ضرر می‌کند

تحلیل ‌سرلشکر ‌رحیم‌صفوی از سقوط هواپیمای روسیه و نقش بسیج در حفظ انقلاب زدن هواپیمای سوخو 24 روسیه ‌‌تبعات استراتژیکی پیدا خواهد کرد/مطمئنا ‌ترکیه ضرر می‌کند/بسیج‌ در جلوگیری از انحرافات ‌پیشگام باشد‌​+ this today

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

any news about Bavar AD?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

yavar said:


> brother . Russians change their mind because they owe us favor
> 
> Iranian General Soleimani Supervised Operation to Save Russian Su-24 Pilot
> 
> secondly after Turkey shoot down of SU-24 , Russia has got involved in Syria heavily and taking some heavy moves and there is build up is taking place and the Russians got much more closer to us after backstab Putin received and Putin wet dream which he had when he came back from G20 in Turkey he is more realistic
> 
> 
> S-300 in action in Damascus, Iranian Airforce sent to T4 airbase in Homs serviced by Russia - Fort Russ
> 
> this downing of the plan has work in your favor so much that
> 
> زدن هواپیمای سوخو 24 روسیه ‌‌تبعات استراتژیکی پیدا خواهد کرد/مطمئنا ‌ترکیه ضرر می‌کند
> 
> تحلیل ‌سرلشکر ‌رحیم‌صفوی از سقوط هواپیمای روسیه و نقش بسیج در حفظ انقلاب زدن هواپیمای سوخو 24 روسیه ‌‌تبعات استراتژیکی پیدا خواهد کرد/مطمئنا ‌ترکیه ضرر می‌کند/بسیج‌ در جلوگیری از انحرافات ‌پیشگام باشد‌​+ this today


+ this today 
ایران اسناد جریان فروش نفت داعش به ترکیه را در اختیار دارد/به‌زودی اخبار مهمی از انهدام تکفیری‌ها به گوش مردم می‌رسد




محسن رضایی: ایران اسناد جریان فروش نفت داعش به ترکیه را در اختیار دارد/ به‌زودی اخبار مهمی از انهدام تکفیری‌ها به گوش مردم می‌رسد


----------



## Arminkh

yavar said:


> + this today
> ایران اسناد جریان فروش نفت داعش به ترکیه را در اختیار دارد/به‌زودی اخبار مهمی از انهدام تکفیری‌ها به گوش مردم می‌رسد
> 
> 
> 
> محسن رضایی: ایران اسناد جریان فروش نفت داعش به ترکیه را در اختیار دارد/ به‌زودی اخبار مهمی از انهدام تکفیری‌ها به گوش مردم می‌رسد


I think Iranian forces in Syria are tasked with taking back Palmiya. that's probably why 2 alleged Iranian squadrons are stationed close to this city.

Is it true that IRGC's mechanized artillery division has also dispatched equipment to Syria?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Last of us

Just a thought about the, *'Boshra''* counter battery radar. You remember last year when we were hearing about Iran potential developing its own superior version to Iron dome system? I am not sure whether the term iron dome was being used metaphorically or if it was meant as an actual system in development. Anyway, couldn't the existence of Boshra be a hint of such system being in development?

Also the Qamar radar has an impressive range. Even if it is not used for Bavar, it could be used in Talash air defence system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bidonv

By:www.bbc.co.uk
*Russian S-300 air defence missiles 'arrive in Iran'*


> Russia is reported to have started delivering S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Iran, under a deal opposed by Israel, the US and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hossein Jaberi-Ansari said "the first stage of the contract has been implemented".
> 
> It is not yet clear how many missiles may have been delivered.
> 
> The controversial contract got the go-ahead after international sanctions on Iran were lifted last year.
> 
> The diplomatic breakthrough involved a deal over Iran's atomic programme, imposing new international safeguards aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
> 
> Iran has insisted its nuclear programme is for purely peaceful purposes and denies seeking to build a nuclear bomb.
> 
> Profile: Russia's S-300 missile system
> 
> The $800m (£562m) contract, signed in 2007, was frozen by Russia in 2010 because of the international sanctions. President Vladimir Putin unfroze it a year ago.
> 
> Israel and the US fear the missiles could be used to protect Iranian nuclear sites from air strikes.
> 
> The S-300, made by Rostec, can be used against multiple targets including jets, or to shoot down other missiles.
> 
> The S-300V4 variant, delivered to the Russian armed forces in 2014, can shoot down any medium-range missile in the world today, flies at five times the speed of sound and has a range of 400km (249 miles), Russia's Tass news agency reports.
> 
> Rostec chief Sergei Chemezov had told the Wall Street Journal last month that delivery of the system to Iran was expected at the end of this year...............*See more*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## masud



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## masud



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Its a quite bis surprise, Iran has got the S-350, no the S-300 after all.

The Big-Bird radar is quite a big indicator for the S-300PMU2 bu the other elements are part of the S-350 system:






Here the 50K6E command post of the S-350:


----------



## VEVAK

masud said:


>



Aside from the S-300 this was a really disappointing parade!

IRGC is improving year after year while the Artesh is detreating!

IRGC has the Shahed-129 and so far the Artesh has failed to match that capability and we don't even know if they are trying

Aside from the Navy and Air Defense the number of Fighter Jets, Tanks, Artillery, Armored vehicles, etc.in Iran's Artesh is on the decline! at the same time the IRGC is constantly increasing it's Armored division, Helicopters, UAV's, Missiles etc.

Also during the marches throughout the country the IRGC forces (excluding Basij) were far more organized than Iran's Artesh and that was the biggest surprise for me this year! usually it's the other way around!

Artesh personal couldn't even march straight and in unison! I believe the commander of the Artesh needs to be replaced we need a young general that would except no nonsense and no excuses maybe promote Esmaili the commander of the Air Defense force to the head of the Artesh idk but somethings gotta be done!

Not saying Salehi is a bad guy but maybe he is just getting too old and he should retire!

10 years ago






9 years ago






8 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Its a quite bis surprise, Iran has got the S-350, no the S-300 after all.
> 
> The Big-Bird radar is quite a big indicator for the S-300PMU2 bu the other elements are part of the S-350 system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here the 50K6E command post of the S-350:



Big bird was introduced in the PMU1.


----------



## Penguin

I'm interested in this. I know Iran had ZSU-57-2s. What can be told about this cut-down ZSU-57-2 turret on truck chassis?





The configuration of the vehicle mount is very similar to that of the Thales Rapidfire, which sports a Bofors 40mm




http://www.armyrecognition.com/armo...r_defense_system_technical_data_sheet_uk.html


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Its a quite bis surprise, Iran has got the S-350, no the S-300 after all.
> 
> The Big-Bird radar is quite a big indicator for the S-300PMU2 bu the other elements are part of the S-350 system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here the 50K6E command post of the S-350:




Not the S-350!

S-300 PMU-2 & S-400 have it















idk According to wikipidia both the S-300 & the S-300V were sold to Iran so maybe we are getting the S-350 as well!

If test were successful, Iran should offer to invest in the S-500 & T-50!!!! and invest 5 Billion in each!


----------



## VEVAK

be sharaf ha gave us PMU-1

where is ? I need it!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

VEVAK said:


> be sharaf ha gave us PMU-1
> 
> where is ? I need it!!!
> 
> View attachment 300909


What is the big and small difference between PMU-1 and PMU-2?


----------



## Penguin

2800 said:


> What is the big and small difference between PMU-1 and PMU-2?


uhhm, price and performance?


----------



## VEVAK

Penguin said:


> uhhm, price and performance?



Target 12 and engage 6 simultaneously vs target 76 & engage 36 targets simultaneously!!!

That's a massive difference even more important than the additional 50km range of the PMU-2 150km vs 200km



2800 said:


> What is the big and small difference between PMU-1 and PMU-2?


Target 12 and engage 6 simultaneously vs target 76 & engage 36 targets simultaneously!!!

That's a massive difference even more important than the additional 50km range of the PMU-2 150km vs 200km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Not the S-350!
> 
> S-300 PMU-2 & S-400 have it
> 
> View attachment 300901
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 300904
> View attachment 300903
> 
> 
> idk According to wikipidia both the S-300 & the S-300V were sold to Iran so maybe we are getting the S-350 as well!
> 
> If test were successful, Iran should offer to invest in the S-500 & T-50!!!! and invest 5 Billion in each!




The 50K6E is specific to the S-350, its presence in Iran as well as the 6x6 BAZ is more or less a proof that Iran got the S-350.


----------



## PeeD

Update,

The command center container used by the S-350 is also used by the S-400 and advanced S-300PMU variants: 






So one should expect at least the S-300PMU-2 standard.
The rest of the equipment still also hints to the S-350.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Update,
> 
> The command center container used by the S-350 is also used by the S-400 and advanced S-300PMU variants:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So one should expect at least the S-300PMU-2 standard.
> The rest of the equipment still also hints to the S-350.


Is it also used in the PMU1?


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> The 50K6E is specific to the S-350, its presence in Iran as well as the 6x6 BAZ is more or less a proof that Iran got the S-350.



WRONG!

This is the S-350












https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vityaz_missile_system

I'm pretty sure your confused because the S-350 doesn't come with the big bird!

so again WRONG


----------



## yavar

*Iran the S300 AD system in Qazvin-Tehran highway سامانه اس-۳۰۰ در اتوبان قزوین-تهران*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beyonder

*Iran bought the latest variants of the system, S-300PMU-2 Favorite, TASS reported during the 2015 Dubai Airshow.*

Russia may supply radiolocation, electronic warfare systems to Iran


MOSCOW, April 26. /TASS/. Russia may supply additional types of armaments not subject to existing bans to Iran, the chief of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, Alexander Fomin, said Tuesday.

"We have contracts with Iran, other contracts are also possible, but the talk is only about the permitted objects of supply, which are not on the UN’s ban list," Fomin said when asked whether the delivery of other weapons besides S-300 missile systems was discussed.

The service chief said that the permitted armaments include small arms and other products, including non-lethal, radiolocation and electronic warfare systems etc.


*Russia’s S-300 missile system delivery to Iran going partly ahead of schedule*
According to the official, the supply of Russia’s S-300 air defense missile systems to Iran is meeting the schedule, even going partly ahead of schedule.

He said that he hoped that everything would be ok.

On April 11, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said in an interview with the Ekho Moskvy radio station Russia had started sales of S-300 systems to Iran, with the deal to be completed by the end of the year. "We are acting in strict compliance with the contract. They pay, we sell. We have already started. It is a supply in full sets," he said.

On April 21, the Islamic Republic’s parliament speaker, Ali Larijani, said in an exclusive interview with TASS First Deputy Director-General Mikhail Gusman that the delivery of Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile systems (NATO reporting name SA-10 Grumble) to Iran boosted security in the region. "As regards the contract for supplies of S-300s, the issue is the cornerstone of defense sphere talks between Iran and Russia," Larijani said. "The situation in the region obliges us to have stable security. That’s why we had to decide by which means and measures that stable security could be achieved." "We believed that if Iran and Russia are able to reach long-term agreements, this may contribute to achievement of stable security," he said.

Russia and Iran signed a contract in 2007 for the supply of five S-300PMU-1 battalions but in the autumn of 2010 then-President Dmitry Medvedev banned the supply of these systems to Tehran. The contract worth more than $800 million was annulled and the paid advance was returned to Iran. Iran filed an almost $4 billion lawsuit against Russia at the Geneva Court of Arbitration over Russia’s nonfulfillment of the contract.

In the spring of 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted the ban on the supply of S-300 systems to Teheran.

TASS learned at the Dubai Airshow 2015 international aerospace exhibition that Iran would get the S-300PMU-2 version of the air defense system.

The S-300 is a series of Russian long range surface-to-air missile systems produced by NPO Almaz, all based on the initial S-300P version. The S-300 system was developed to defend against aircraft and cruise missiles for the Soviet Air Defense Forces. Subsequent variations were developed to intercept ballistic missiles. The S-300 system was first deployed by the Soviet Union in 1979, designed for the air defense of large industrial and administrative facilities, military bases, and control of airspace against enemy strike aircraft.




http://tass.ru/en/defense/872512

Anyway,now you guys should speed up the reverse engineering process....Imagine one these systems some how pops-up in South Lebanon....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bidonv

By:sputniknews.com
*Russia Supplying S-300 to Iran Ahead of Schedule, May Ink New Arms Deals*



> Russia is supplying S-300 air defense systems to Iran ahead of schedule and may conclude new contracts with Tehran on arms deliveries that are not banned under international law, Alexander Fomin, the head of Russia's Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation, said Tuesday.
> S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems
> 
> MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The $900-million Moscow-Tehran contract to deliver five Russian S-300 systems to Iran was signed in 2007. It was suspended after the adoption of UN Security Council sanctions on Iran in mid-2010.
> 
> In April 2015, Russia resumed the talks on S-300 deliveries following a framework agreement on the landmark deal ensuring the peaceful nature of Tehran’s nuclear program. The first delivery under the contract took place earlier in April.
> 
> "The deliveries of S-300 to Iran are carried out according to schedule, even a bit ahead of it," Fomin told reporters in Moscow.
> 
> Fomin emphasized that the new possible arms contracts with Iran may involve weaponry that is not on the UN ban list, including air defense systems, small arms, and electronic warfare means.
> 
> "Everything that is allowed we can deliver," the official said...................Read more

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tanker88

*Iran starts receiving second batch of S-300s*
*
By Echelon-Defense
*
As we pointed out in our previous article, Iran has started to receive the second, and probably final batch of its S-300 order from Russia.

Witnesses on the ground in Tehran were able to locate the sophisticated anti-air system as it was being towed on a transport vehicle on the Azadegan highway.

The contract for what is thought to be the PMU-2 variant of the S-300s was inked between Iran and Russia in 2007, but delivery was postponed due to external pressure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Serpentine

In Iran's defense Industry Day, President visited an exhibition in which, some components of much awaited long range Bavar-373 air defense system was revealed for the first time. I will update this thread if more pics come out.

Sayyad 4 long range missile launchers (with range of 200-300 km)









Meraj 4 long range Engagement and Fire Control Radar









Front view of Meraj 4 engagement and fire control phased array radar

Reactions: Like Like:
34


----------



## NADIM

Serpentine said:


> In Iran's defense Industry Day, President visited an exhibition in which, some components of long range Bavar-373 air defense system was revealed for the first time. I will update this thread if more pics come out.



It looks like hard launch system.


----------



## ilia

NADIM said:


> It looks like hard launch system.



cold launch


----------



## Ibrahim2006



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

@Serpentine how do you know these are Sayyad 4 launchers? They look too small to me.



Genghis khan1 said:


> Why can't Iran simply get S-400? Even for S-300, Russia played cat and mouse game for 6 years until US and Israel gave Russians thumbs up after Nuclear deal. Iran suppose to be Russia buddy, isn't it??


That defeats the whole point of self sufficiency.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Genghis khan1 said:


> Why can't Iran simply get S-400? Even for S-300, Russia played cat and mouse game for 6 years until US and Israel gave Russians thumbs up after Nuclear deal. Iran suppose to be Russia buddy, isn't it??





Off topic



AmirPatriot said:


> @Serpentine how do you know these are Sayyad 4 launchers? They look too small to me.
> 
> 
> That defeats the whole point of self sufficiency.



They are sayyad-4 launchers...


----------



## AmirPatriot

SOHEIL said:


> They are sayyad-4 launchers



Source?

Also cold launch? Doesn't look like it.



Genghis khan1 said:


> Why won't Iran ask Russia to help them build capable SAMs system


Because neither they nor China or anyone will help us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

Well at first glance it does look like a hot launch system based on the fact that the missile canisters dont touch the ground and appear to have a blast deflector positioned underneath them,also only two missiles?,tho they do appear to be pretty long so perhaps a two stage missile like the s300vm?,actually on second thought tho` these probably aren't that long certainly not as long as the 25ft s300pmu1/2 48N6E2 missile,so it makes me wonder if this is a stretched rim66 which is only 15+ feet in length perhaps a two stage version?
All in all this raises more questions than it answered and altho this does look quite nice and impressive I am a little disappointed that we did not see the s300 clone that I for one was expecting to see,which makes me wonder was iran really ever serious about trying to copy the s300,and the fact that we saw a missile that was clearly based on the 48N6E2 does make me think that a some level iran was certainly trying to copy some of it,or did iran try to copy the system and found that it was simply beyond irans abilities to reverse engineer so went for an alternative design using existing sams in irans possession,who knows?,I dont but I really wish they`d shown us the sam as well as its launcher
Anyway good on iran,well done.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

Bavar-373 command post






Unidentified Bavar radar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

where is the chief commander of air defense headquarter?!


----------



## SOHEIL

Fafnir said:


> I am a little disappointed that we did not see the s300 clone that I for one was expecting to see,which makes me wonder was iran really ever serious about trying to copy the s300,and the fact that we saw a missile that was clearly based on the 48N6E2 does make me think that a some level iran was certainly trying to copy some of it,or did iran try to copy the system and found that it was simply beyond irans abilities to reverse engineer so went for an alternative design using existing sams in irans possession,who knows?



This is a "loser" mentality !!!

This is not a copy ...

If it was a copy of s-300 people would started to say : hey , iranians made a copy ... what a joke ... not a big deal ... etc

& as we see ... this is not a copy ... how could you underestimate it's capabilities without informations !?



AmirPatriot said:


> Because neither they nor China or anyone will help us.



You can't really understand his point !?



Genghis khan1 said:


> Why can't Iran simply get S-400? Even for S-300, Russia played cat and mouse game for 6 years until US and Israel gave Russians thumbs up after Nuclear deal. Iran suppose to be Russia buddy, isn't it??



Look at his post ... he calls iran a "Russia buddy" !!!



Genghis khan1 said:


> How is it off topic? We are talking about Air Defence acquisition, failure of which lead to the Sayyad 4. China has quite decent long range SAMs, still they are going for S-400.



BAVAR project started years before S-300 deal !

B-*** >>> B-*** >>> *B-373* >>> B-*** ...




Genghis khan1 said:


> Ya, but we all know this is more of a showoff then actual capability.



@AmirPatriot ^^^



Genghis khan1 said:


> Like Iranian IRBM launch videos which per western media are manipulated to look like many missiles are be launched.



@AmirPatriot 

IRBM !!! 

Zelzal rockets are IRBM !?



Genghis khan1 said:


> Why won't Iran ask Russia to help them build capable SAMs system, like US do for Israel.



& Iranians are unable to develop it by themselves !?



Genghis khan1 said:


> That's was my question. Why is that? I don't think there is any conflict of Interest b/w Russia and Iran. Russia don't have that many all time friends like Iran, still they don't help?



Nobody helps others in strategic capabilities !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## B@KH

Congrats Islamic IRAN and allies.

After failings in wars, Enemies amassed GCC to counter Islamic Iran that was their very bad strategy and later realized their mistake as Islamic IRAN is not comparable to that level. they thought of turkey and pak which is again wrong. even if the enemies bring in 100 turk and pak they cannot compete the capabilities of Islamic IRAN. That is the reason for the enemies to worry. Hope Islamic IRAN will go on with more advancement and is already continuing breaking the millennium old siege of the enemy everywhere and forcing and confusing enemy to change and redraw map again and again. there will be no catch up to Islamic IRAN.

Hats off for those working day and night to strengthen and progress the Islamic Revolution.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL

Serpentine said:


> In Iran's defense Industry Day, President visited an exhibition in which, some components of much awaited long range Bavar-373 air defense system was revealed for the first time. I will update this thread if more pics come out.
> 
> Sayyad 4 long range missile launchers (with range of 200-300 km)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meraj 4 long range Engagement and Fire Control Radar



Iranian made trucks ...

Iranian made launchers & missiles ...

Iranian made radars ...

What is wrong with people ???

Being not a copy makes you unhappy !? 





Genghis khan1 said:


> I was expecting a response from someone smart. You apparently ain't one.





I know you man ... you can't feed me with your bullshit !

People can take a look at your previous comments about iran to understand ... Hate & sectarianism !

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Fafnir

SOHEIL said:


> This is a "loser" mentality !!!
> 
> This is not a copy ...
> 
> If it was a copy of s-300 people would started to say : hey , iranians made a copy ... what a joke ... not a big deal ... etc
> 
> & as we see ... this is not a copy ... how could you underestimate it's capabilities without informations !?


Iran has copied a lot of systems in the past and theres nothing wrong with that,also reverse engineering something is hardly easy it takes a lot of time and talent to do this and copying systems,I use that term loosely as its really as much about re-engineering as much as it is reverse engineering,like the kh55 and possibly the s300 is a big deal simply because not a lot of countries could actually do it,one of the advantages of a copy is that people usually have a good idea of how effective it can be based on the performance of the original,I doubt many would scoff at an iranian s300 copy,its like the old saying goes:Haters are going to hate,so why should we give a fu#k what they think I dont so why do you?
Also I`m not underestimating its abilities but I am pointing out certain facts if you find those unpalatable well I`m sorry but thats not really my problem now is it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Samak

Bavar 373 is result of years and years of reverse engineering Hawks and standard air defence system and developing Sevvim khordad and Talash air defence systems ....

Probably it's not as good as Patroit or S300 , but this is just first step and as you know , first step is hardest step to take ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ibrahim2006

Fafnir said:


> I am a little disappointed that we did not see the s300 clone that I for one was expecting to see,which makes me wonder was iran really ever serious about trying to copy the s300,and the fact that we saw a missile that was clearly based on the 48N6E2 does make me think that a some level iran was certainly trying to copy some of it,or did iran try to copy the system and found that it was simply beyond irans abilities to reverse engineer so went for an alternative design using existing sams in irans possession,who knows?,.


when member Yavar comes back he will answer these question

he is only banned till next moths


----------



## SOHEIL

Fafnir said:


> Iran has copied a lot of systems in the past and theres nothing wrong with that,also reverse engineering something is hardly easy it takes a lot of time and talent to do this and copying systems,I use that term loosely as its really as much about re-engineering as much as it is reverse engineering,like the kh55 and possibly the s300 is a big deal simply because not a lot of countries could actually do it,one of the advantages of a copy is that people usually have a good idea of how effective it can be based on the performance of the original,I doubt many would scoff at an iranian s300 copy,its like the old saying goes:Haters are going to hate,so why should we give a fu#k what they think I dont so why do you?
> Also I`m not underestimating its abilities but I am pointing out certain facts if you find those unpalatable well I`m sorry but thats not really my problem now is it?



S-300 missiles reverse engineered years ago ... If you take a look at N.korean system you will understand !

But new laws demand iranian engineers to design new systems ... most of the reverse engineered products entered service years ago !

We don't need to show a jumping cold launch missile to prove our capabilities !

Do you really think americans are unable to make cold launch systems !?



Samak said:


> Bavar 373 is result of years and years of reverse engineering Hawks and standard air defence system and developing Sevvim khordad and Talash air defence systems ....
> 
> Probably it's not as good as Patroit or S300 , but this is just first step and as you know , first step is hardest step to take ....



You can't compare B-373 with patriot system !

Different categories ...

S-400 is better than B-373 ... but i am completely sure B-373 is better than S-300 !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## warfareknow

Looks promising, now we need to see how the performance is.

Btw @AmirPatriot we talked about how quiet this section has become bro, I think it is better to have such good news like today with good results of the projects than unveilings on a daily basis we had before, so your prediction was right

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Genghis khan1 said:


> Like I said, I want to talk to someone smart. Overhere we are talking about certain defence systems and international geopolitics with Russia. Right now, I don't care what Iran is doing in M.E or Ayatollahs. When you are on Syrian, Iraqi or some sectarian thread than bring up your stupid judgemental comments.





I can see your scramble to look like a smart one !

But you are still in a deep failure !

Your questions answered clearly ... but you are still trying to go off topic !


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Iranian made trucks ...

Iranian made launchers & missiles ...

Iranian made radars ...

Etc etc
https://defence.pk/threads/breaking...wn-for-first-time.445324/page-2#ixzz4Hy2lytWs
Maybe there will be people, here in Spain and other countries, who will think this is a copy from S-300, talking about S-300 Russia-Iran deal, bla bla bla...

This project has years and years of development. It's not new. And I'm sure it's in mass production time ago.

Bavar 373 is not the newest and best of long range AA system in Iran. As always, Iran does NOT show its best aces (as all the countries in the world do, it's obvious).

Bavar 373 is extremely good, but it's not the best system done by Iran.

For trolls and other stuff, I quote a sentence by mythical Don Quijote, talking to Sancho Panza:

"Ladran, Sancho, luego cabalgamos!!"

jajajajaja

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## pts_m_h_2016

Any launch videos? Congrats Iran for Bavar 373. Not many countries can achieve such under isolation perhaps except North Korea.


----------



## AmirPatriot

SOHEIL said:


> This is a "loser" mentality !!!
> 
> This is not a copy ...
> 
> If it was a copy of s-300 people would started to say : hey , iranians made a copy ... what a joke ... not a big deal ... etc
> 
> & as we see ... this is not a copy ... how could you underestimate it's capabilities without informations !?
> 
> 
> 
> You can't really understand his point !?
> 
> 
> 
> Look at his post ... he calls iran a "Russia buddy" !!!
> 
> 
> 
> BAVAR project started years before S-300 deal !
> 
> B-*** >>> B-*** >>> *B-373* >>> B-*** ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @AmirPatriot ^^^
> 
> 
> 
> @AmirPatriot
> 
> IRBM !!!
> 
> Zelzal rockets are IRBM !?
> 
> 
> 
> & Iranians are unable to develop it by themselves !?
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody helps others in strategic capabilities !



I think he is just not as well informed, I don't think he is trolling.

@Fafnir , I think its GREAT that this is no S-300 copy. We need to stop copying and learn to innovate by ourselves. This is the clear and excellent result.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

AmirPatriot said:


> I think he is just not as well informed, I don't think he is trolling.
> 
> @Fafnir , I think its GREAT that this is no S-300 copy. We need to stop copying and learn to innovate by ourselves. This is the clear and excellent result.



he is trolling ... don't even doubt that !



agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> "Ladran, Sancho, luego cabalgamos!!"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> I think he is just not as well informed, I don't think he is trolling.
> 
> @Fafnir , I think its GREAT that this is no S-300 copy. We need to stop copying and learn to innovate by ourselves. This is the clear and excellent result.


Oh quite true,but iran was working on an s300 derived system there is very good proof of that so I myself would like to know what became of that project as it certainly had more potential than a rim66 derived sam


----------



## AmirPatriot

Fafnir said:


> Oh quite true,but iran was working on an s300 derived system there is very good proof of that so I myself would like to know what became of that project as it certainly had more potential than a rim66 derived sam



I don't think Iran was working on an S-300 derived system. They said it will be in the same role as the S-300 and better, but not the same. The only evidence of such is the Sayyad-4 missile which has some similarity to the 48N6 missile, but they are not identical. 

The RIM-66 is a good mid-range missile, and in fact has been developed to a range of approx. 160 km. The Sayyad-2 that Iran unveiled seems to be developed from it, but it is much longer than the RIM-66, if you look at the pictures below and compare the nose section.












In any case, the Sayyad-2 is only one part of the system. The Sayyad-3 (left) and Sayyad-4 (right) missiles are also part of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

Genghis khan1 said:


> May be if you stop your BS, I might get an answer from someone smart.
> 
> I wanna know what is causing Russia not to cooperate with Iran on Air Defense systems. Russia is at odds with west. Iran is letting Russia use it Airbases. They seems to be in the same team, then @AmirPatriot What mistrust were you talking about?


During the 2000s russia was really quite cozy with the west and certainly had no problem selling out iran in order to extract concessions in other areas from the west and iran couldnt really do much about it except put up with russias back stabbing.Russia was and is certainly no friend or ally of iran people who think this are deluded.Today however things are very different,there is the nuclear deal with the west so no more sanctions and iran has a lot more options now,by comparison it is russia who is now sanctioned by its "good friends" in the west and needs every friend it can get,it no doubt also hopes to perhaps recoup some of the billions of euros in trade it lost by going along with the sanctions.As for syria both iran and russia have interests there tho` they are not identical but they can agree on supporting the syrian government to make sure it does not collapse,but just because they have some limited issues both agree on it does not make them allies or "in the same team".When it really comes down to it russia no more wants a strong independent iran than the west does.As for air defence systems I think today russia would probably be willing to sell iran pretty much any system it wanted but would it deliver them in a couple of years from now?,the sad fact of the matter is that russia is simply to untrustworthy and to unreliable to ever be a real friend or ally to iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

SOHEIL said:


>


I`ve always found it very interesting that the picture on the back of the truck clearly shows something that looks a lot like an s300 missile canisters..but then again maybe that was just propaganda/artistic license at work...who knows?,but it is interesting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Fafnir said:


> I`ve always found it very interesting that the picture on the back of the truck clearly shows something that looks a lot like an s300 missile canisters..but then again maybe that was just propaganda/artistic license at work...who knows?,but it is interesting.



>>>



SOHEIL said:


> BAVAR project started years before S-300 deal !
> 
> B-*** >>> B-*** >>> *B-373* >>> B-*** ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HadiHot8

Does anyone have the full view of the Bavar 373? I don't just mean the canisters, I mean the full truck with the canisters?


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Quite impressive addition , 100% locally made

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

Genghis khan1 said:


> $$$. Pakistan wants everything for free.
> 
> Even US would sell F-35s to Pakistan if Pakistan had cold hard cash. Money talks.


Thats funny when it comes to other us allies like israel and egypt the us gives them cash billions of dollars worth each year and weapons for free or "bought" with that very same cash,also why arent you getting billions out of the saudis like egypt does?,you see this is why pakistan is just a us vassal and not a real ally,its really pretty shabby treatment so why does pakistan put up with it?,this isnt meant as a criticism I`ve just always wondered why pakistan puts up with this sh!t from the us especially now that the us is happily playing footse with your old enemy india.


----------



## Ibrahim2006



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MTN1917

More pics:

Command post




Bavar TEL and the third radar




Meraj 4 radar

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Army research

Well congrats to Iran if only pak turkey a d Iran form something like eu and their own nato thingy like they tried with the rcd , damn that would be a country with oil industries farmlands deserts mountains plains seas if you come to think about it it would actually be quite stable economically and an awesome military



Army research said:


> Well congrats to Iran if only pak turkey a d Iran form something like eu and their own nato thingy like they tried with the rcd , damn that would be a country with oil industries farmlands deserts mountains plains seas if you come to think about it it would actually be quite stable economically and an awesome military


Please don't reply rhetorically


----------



## warfareknow

MTN1917 said:


> More pics:
> 
> Command post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bavar TEL and the third radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meraj 4 radar




Cannot see the pics :$


----------



## HadiHot8

Has nobody got the full view of the truck with the canisters?


----------



## MTN1917

warfareknow said:


> Cannot see the pics :$


I believe you can see them now, I have had linked them to Ministry of Defense site, sometimes mod sites can't be accessed from outside of Iran.

I have uploaded them now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Gotta love these super high resolution pics  drink it in, you won't see much of this if its about Iran's military

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rahi2357

AmirPatriot said:


> Gotta love these super high resolution pics  drink it in, you won't see much of this if its about Iran's military


LOL you are right .My phone films in 4k and takes 16 mgp photos and all we usually get are some blurry photos taken out of low quality state SD tv videos . ISIS has better quality broadcasting .God damit IRIB it's 2016 .Take my damn phone

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

rahi2357 said:


> LOL you are right .My phone films in 4k and takes 16 mgp photos and all we usually get are some blurry photos taken out of low quality state SD tv videos . ISIS has better quality broadcasting .God damit IRIB it's 2016 .Take my damn phone



I think most of them are blurry because they don't want to reveal details... but yeah sometimes its too ordinary to not be high quality, IRIB just being lazy a-holes...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

rahi2357 said:


> LOL you are right .My phone films in 4k and takes 16 mgp photos and all we usually get are some blurry photos taken out of low quality state SD tv videos . ISIS has better quality broadcasting .God damit IRIB it's 2016 .Take my damn phone


You know defense guys can't carry their smart phones with themselves!
just some decade old phones

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MTN1917

On an interview aired by IRIB2, defense minister stated that by order of president Bavar 373 will be tested on a ballistic missile, possibly by this Persian year end.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## HadiHot8

I tried to translate the interview but failed . He mentions the Bavar 373, the Karrar Tank and the Su-30

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## warfareknow

MTN1917 said:


> I believe you can see them now, I have had linked them to Ministry of Defense site, sometimes mod sites can't be accessed from outside of Iran.
> 
> I have uploaded them now.


thank you bro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

*Hope this will complete the image.. a little bit*

*Components of Bavar-373:*

In April 2015, Iran unveiled some of Bavar's subsystems, which include the Fakour commanding and smart control system which has the ability to collect information from all sources relevant to air defense, including passive and active military radars (such as the Mersad), signal surveillance, missile systems and commanding and control systems.

The Rasoul advanced communications system is for encoding information, connecting the country’s infrastructure and transferring radar information from the battle scene to commanding centers.

The canisters containing the Sayyad-3 missiles are to be carried on the Zoljanah 10×10 truck.

Also Iranians have developed a long range missile (named Sayyad-4 for the Bavar-373 system) which looks like the Russian 48N6E missile. No formal information was given about this missile but it appears from news photos that Sayyad-4 is like the 48N6E Russian missile only in frontal parts and similar to Sayyad-3 in wings and control surfaces.

Bavar-373 uses a phased array radar like Russian 96L6 radar for tracking aerodynamic targets and ballistic missiles in medium to long ranges, mounted on the ZAFAR heavy truck.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavar_373
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavar_373
Fakour:






Rasoul:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/621265/باور-ایرانی-یک-سر-و-گردن-بالاتر-از-اس-300-روسی-کشف-سه-اتفاق-مهم-در-شاهکار-متخصصان-دفاعی-کشور-عکس

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/...موشک-بالستیک-خواهد-بود-روس‌ها-بی‌معرفتی-کردند


----------



## Samak

Mrs. Rouhani act cleverly and asked to test B373 for Anti Ballistic missiles ... so now we can test new Ballistic Missiles and say :"We are testing Bavar 373 which is defensive system "

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rayanBis123456789

After 7 years almost of developpment iran keept his promise and developped a vertical SAM system, they told would be equal to S-300 PMU-1.

With this system + the PMU-2 "upgraded" a super super killer what about israel dream to deprive iran of its nuclear program?

Comments please

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

MTN1917 said:


> On an interview aired by IRIB2, defense minister stated that by order of president Bavar 373 will be tested on a ballistic missile, possibly by this Persian year end.


Ballistic missile? So they are so confident of this system that they are going to test it on a ballistic missile? Can you post the source here please. Doesn't matter if it is in Persian. Thanks!


----------



## Serpentine

Arminkh said:


> Ballistic missile? So they are so confident of this system that they are going to test it on a ballistic missile? Can you post the source here please. Doesn't matter if it is in Persian. Thanks!



Yes he said it. Rouhani has asked for it

link

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## somebozo

Hope the same is not like the picture..invisible..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SSGcommandoPAK

This is what i found .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Henry ME 95

Bavar-373 (Iranian domestic made S-300)













Note more info & discussion on this system is within the Iranian section of the forum



AsianUnion said:


> Pictures pls. So its not Iran made but rather assembled it Whats the specs?


This variant is made domestically within Iran (from a reverse engineered Belarusian S-300 launcher) not an assembly with foreign parts.
the iranians just received the russian S-300 a few weeks earlier

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arsalan

excellent acheivement, even if it is a Russian import and just modified by Iranians (which i feel is not the case) it is still a great acheivement. I hope they can add two more missiles to the carrier and make it a 4 missile vehicle.
will really appreciate some radar and missile specs if possible

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hephaestus

rayanBis123456789 said:


> After 7 years almost of developpment iran keept his promise and developped a vertical SAM system, they told would be equal to S-300 PMU-1.
> 
> With this system + the PMU-2 "upgraded" a super super killer what about israel dream to deprive iran of its nuclear program?
> 
> Comments please


Well done Iran.
Can we have the specs as well along with radar & tracking info.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Hi Guys, I though I translate the following analysis from Mashregh for those who can't read Farsi:

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/621265/باور-ایرانی-یک-سر-و-گردن-بالاتر-از-اس-300-روسی-کشف-سه-اتفاق-مهم-در-شاهکار-متخصصان-دفاعی-کشور-عکس

*Iranian Bavar: Three significant breakthroughs:
*
After a long wait, finally Bavar 373 system was revealed on Aug 21st, 2016 (which is the "Defense Industry Day") in the presence of Iran's President. It took almost 10 years for this project that started with Supreme Leaders's command to come to turn into a reliable and proud product.

*Where did Bavar 373 come form?
*
According to general Esmaili, Iran's head of air defense division, in the very first days that there were talks bout purchase of S300 and our troops were still being trained in Russia, Supreme leader commanded us to start a national project for air defense. Since then, this was entered into the formal plan and conceptual design started in defense industry, Khatam al anbia base and some of universities.

He also noted that 373 is one of Prophent Mohammed's titles in "Abjad" and Bavar means belief.

*4 systems were revealed
*
The following four systems were revealed during the ceremony and as usual, no technical details were publicized.

One of the systems was the command and control post which is responsible for receipt and processing all the data and information from sensors and radars, choosing the targets and firing the missiles:






Othere system was Meraj 4 fire control radar that according to existing news, is a phased array radar. This radar is responsible for supplying Bavar system with target related data like speed, altitude and direction and helps the system with choosing and locking on the target.






There was a smaller radar shown in the back ground of one of the pictures:






That radar looks like Bavar tracking radar of which pictures leaked during Larijani's (Iran parliament head) visit to Iran's defense products exhibition:






This is the a medium to high rage tracking radar which is tasked with tracking ballistic missiles or air crafts. This radar was also shown earlier mounted on Zafar tractor about two years ago.

*Launchers, what makes Bavar different:
*
But the most attractive and different part of Bavar is its launchers. Previously and since Bavar had been introduced as an Iranian version of S300, everyone was anticipating a tube shape launcher like that of S300. But after revealing below pics, some interesting points were noticed:











Judging by their look, these launchers reminds us of Mark 41 launchers more than anything else and shows Iranian designers, were after using all international practices without any insistence on S300 to introduce a local product.

Mark 41 launcher:






In this US system, the launchers are positioned vertically next to each other in a vessel. This way of design shows that Iranian engineers have moved towards a different pattern in this section and basically, due to impossibility of any cooperation with those countries in this section, we are facing a totally native design. This should rule out any suspect in the independence of design process of Bavar System.

On the other hand, the fact that the tubes are vertical shows we are looking at a vertical launch system which in turn means gaining an important new technology. Vertical launchers need less area and thus in a limited space, more of them can be installed.

The fact that all of these systems are mobile, shows that mobility is a principle in Iran's defense strategy.

*Vertical Launch, cold or hot? this is the question*

There are two ways to launch a missile vertically, cold and hot. In a hot launch, missile's engine starts inside the launcher and the resulted gas are exhausted through the holes on the body of the launcher. This type of launch needs material that are resilient to very high temperature.

In cold launch, like S300, missiles is thrown out in the first stage using a gas generator system and then missile engine starts. These launchers are heavier and more expensive compared to Hot launchers.

Bavar pictures empowers the theory of using hot launch system. Gap between bottom of the launcher and ground and the two holes on the upper part are probably for facilitating the exhaust of the missile's engine gas.

The other important point is that in comparison to other Talash launchers, the length and size has significantly increased, which mean a bigger missile with larger range:

Talash system with Sayad 2 system:






*Bavar's next probable destination: Iran's naval fleet:
*
Even though, nothing has bee said about this so far, with some changes, Bavar launchers can be used on Navy's heavy vessels.

If that ever materializes, it means that our navy can now easily defend itself against any air raid.

In addition, the old allegation of attributing Iran's achievements to copying Chinese or Russian systems is ruled out with this new system and Iran now formally joins very few countries that can build sophisticated AA missile systems.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
9


----------



## AmirPatriot

In addition to Henry's pictures:






































Does anyone need any more evidence?

I've shown TELs, transport trucks, 3 different types of missiles, several different radars, and a command and control post. 

If anyone thinks this is an S-300 copy... well... 



Hephaestus said:


> Well done Iran.
> Can we have the specs as well along with radar & tracking info.



We only have official specifications of one of the fire control radars, which has a range of 450 km and tracks over 100 targets. The Bavar-373 will be integrated into the national Integrated Air Defence Network.

We can guess by the size of the 3 different missiles that the Sayyad-2 (RIM-66 like missile, last photo) has a range of about 80 km, based on the official designation as a "mid-range" missile.

The Sayyad-3 (the red missile) is speculated to have a range of up to 200 km. 

The large white missile is thought to have a range of some 300 km, with anti-ballistic capability. In fact, the President has asked the military to test the Bavar-373 on a ballistic missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Rukarl

Henry ME 95 said:


> but according to every source i have seen this system is a S-300 base.



There is not a single source online that has claimed Bavar is based on s-300 after if was unveiled. The only thing they have said is that Bavar started when s-300 deal went sour.

Lets forget all that, you can visually see Bavar and s-300 are *completely *different. Everything from radar, missile, truck, launch canister etc. How do you not see this friend?

S-300 launcher:







Bavar launcher:






S-300 radar:





Bavar radar:






S-300 missile:





Bavar missile:







Want more?

I mean seriously, how does one even for a second try to link these two obviously different systems together? only thing they have in common is that they're both long range air defence.

So lets be done with this ridiculous attemps to link two obviously different systems to each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## waz

Rukarl said:


> Yes, I had hoped for the thread to be closed not merged. @waz bro, is it possible to de-merge the threads and simply close the one that was made in wrong section? combining them now has meant there are pages of mostly useless pages. Thanks bro.



I'm sorry bro I made a mistake. I thought I was doing you guys a favour by merging the thread, I only just read the content. I will make sure no one trolls on here if that helps.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

I deleted many posts from other thread that was merged, and also some from current thread. It's cleaner now.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rayanBis123456789

SOHEIL said:


> S-300 missiles reverse engineered years ago ... If you take a look at N.korean system you will understand !
> 
> But new laws demand iranian engineers to design new systems ... most of the reverse engineered products entered service years ago !
> 
> We don't need to show a jumping cold launch missile to prove our capabilities !
> 
> Do you really think americans are unable to make cold launch systems !?
> 
> 
> 
> You can't compare B-373 with patriot system !
> 
> Different categories ...
> 
> S-400 is better than B-373 ... but i am completely sure B-373 is better than S-300 !





Probably better than the PMU-1, friend YES, but better than the super killer PMU-2 ... its doubtful !

Anyway its only the begining, the first iteration .. we should expect improvement years after years



Arminkh said:


> Hi Guys, I though I translate the following analysis from Mashregh for those who can't read Farsi:
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/621265/باور-ایرانی-یک-سر-و-گردن-بالاتر-از-اس-300-روسی-کشف-سه-اتفاق-مهم-در-شاهکار-متخصصان-دفاعی-کشور-عکس
> 
> *Iranian Bavar: Three significant breakthroughs:
> *
> After a long wait, finally Bavar 373 system was revealed on Aug 21st, 2016 (which is the "Defense Industry Day") in the presence of Iran's President. It took almost 10 years for this project that started with Supreme Leaders's command to come to turn into a reliable and proud product.
> 
> *Where did Bavar 373 come form?
> *
> According to general Esmaili, Iran's head of air defense division, in the very first days that there were talks bout purchase of S300 and our troops were still being trained in Russia, Supreme leader commanded us to start a national project for air defense. Since then, this was entered into the formal plan and conceptual design started in defense industry, Khatam al anbia base and some of universities.
> 
> He also noted that 373 is one of Prophent Mohammed's titles in "Abjad" and Bavar means belief.
> 
> *4 systems were revealed
> *
> The following four systems were revealed during the ceremony and as usual, no technical details were publicized.
> 
> One of the systems was the command and control post which is responsible for receipt and processing all the data and information from sensors and radars, choosing the targets and firing the missiles:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Othere system was Meraj 4 fire control radar that according to existing news, is a phased array radar. This radar is responsible for supplying Bavar system with target related data like speed, altitude and direction and helps the system with choosing and locking on the target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There was a smaller radar shown in the back ground of one of the pictures:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That radar looks like Bavar tracking radar of which pictures leaked during Larijani's (Iran parliament head) visit to Iran's defense products exhibition:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the a medium to high rage tracking radar which is tasked with tracking ballistic missiles or air crafts. This radar was also shown earlier mounted on Zafar tractor about two years ago.
> 
> *Launchers, what makes Bavar different:
> *
> But the most attractive and different part of Bavar is its launchers. Previously and since Bavar had been introduced as an Iranian version of S300, everyone was anticipating a tube shape launcher like that of S300. But after revealing below pics, some interesting points were noticed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judging by their look, these launchers reminds us of Mark 41 launchers more than anything else and shows Iranian designers, were after using all international practices without any insistence on S300 to introduce a local product.
> 
> Mark 41 launcher:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this US system, the launchers are positioned vertically next to each other in a vessel. This way of design shows that Iranian engineers have moved towards a different pattern in this section and basically, due to impossibility of any cooperation with those countries in this section, we are facing a totally native design. This should rule out any suspect in the independence of design process of Bavar System.
> 
> On the other hand, the fact that the tubes are vertical shows we are looking at a vertical launch system which in turn means gaining an important new technology. Vertical launchers need less area and thus in a limited space, more of them can be installed.
> 
> The fact that all of these systems are mobile, shows that mobility is a principle in Iran's defense strategy.
> 
> *Vertical Launch, cold or hot? this is the question*
> 
> There are two ways to launch a missile vertically, cold and hot. In a hot launch, missile's engine starts inside the launcher and the resulted gas are exhausted through the holes on the body of the launcher. This type of launch needs material that are resilient to very high temperature.
> 
> In cold launch, like S300, missiles is thrown out in the first stage using a gas generator system and then missile engine starts. These launchers are heavier and more expensive compared to Hot launchers.
> 
> Bavar pictures empowers the theory of using hot launch system. Gap between bottom of the launcher and ground and the two holes on the upper part are probably for facilitating the exhaust of the missile's engine gas.
> 
> The other important point is that in comparison to other Talash launchers, the length and size has significantly increased, which mean a bigger missile with larger range:
> 
> Talash system with Sayad 2 system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Bavar's next probable destination: Iran's naval fleet:
> *
> Even though, nothing has bee said about this so far, with some changes, Bavar launchers can be used on Navy's heavy vessels.
> 
> If that ever materializes, it means that our navy can now easily defend itself against any air raid.
> 
> In addition, the old allegation of attributing Iran's achievements to copying Chinese or Russian systems is ruled out with this new system and Iran now formally joins very few countries that can build sophisticated AA missile systems.




HOT launch, i pretty sure!!! because it has the metalic protect the FRENCH SAMP-T has to prevent crater, its called "déflécteur de G", on the groud:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Samak

rayanBis123456789 said:


> Probably better than the PMU-1, friend YES, but better than the super killer PMU-2 ... its doubtful !
> 
> Anyway its only the begining, the first iteration .. we should expect improvement years after years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOT launch, i pretty sure!!! because it has the metalic protect the FRENCH SAMP-T has to prevent crater on the groud:




I think hot lunch is cheaper .... Anyway , after developing and produce enough of these systems , then we can work on cold lunch feature ( if it's necessary )


----------



## rayanBis123456789

Samak said:


> I think hot lunch is cheaper .... Anyway , after developing and produce enough of these systems , then we can work on cold lunch feature ( if it's necessary )



YES BRO !


----------



## scythian500

Samak said:


> I think hot lunch is cheaper .... Anyway , after developing and produce enough of these systems , then we can work on cold lunch feature ( if it's necessary )


Hot launch has much higher tech level while cold launch makes the system heavier and more expensive... The super alloys needed to have a hot launch is the key...



rayanBis123456789 said:


> Probably better than the PMU-1, friend YES, but better than the super killer PMU-2 ... its doubtful !
> 
> Anyway its only the begining, the first iteration .. we should expect improvement years after years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOT launch, i pretty sure!!! because it has the metalic protect the FRENCH SAMP-T has to prevent crater, its called "déflécteur de G", on the groud:


Based on Iranian sources it is better than PMU-2 in general and more close to S-400 with one a little shorter range... The first official test is requested by the president to be a anti-ballistic missile launch... This shows it is a higher class than PMUs...

Btw, Bavar will be the base platform for new upgrades per defense minister. It would mean the next version will kill ballistics out there in space.


----------



## Malik Alashter

now the question is when this system going to enter service?.


----------



## Serpentine

Malik Alashter said:


> now the question is when this system going to enter service?.



Next year.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

how many countries can build state of the art air defense system like this one?.


----------



## raptor22

Malik Alashter said:


> how many countries can build state of the art air defense system like this one?.


9 countries ... the US, Russia , China, India, Iran, France Italy and England, israel ... all of them have enjoyed foreign technical supports to some extend except Iran which has been under sanction for more than 4 decades ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rayanBis123456789

scythian500 said:


> Hot launch has much higher tech level while cold launch makes the system heavier and more expensive... The super alloys needed to have a hot launch is the key...
> 
> 
> Based on Iranian sources it is better than PMU-2 in general and more close to S-400 with one a little shorter range... The first official test is requested by the president to be a anti-ballistic missile launch... This shows it is a higher class than PMUs...
> 
> Btw, Bavar will be the base platform for new upgrades per defense minister. It would mean the next version will kill ballistics out there in space.




I have no doubt about iranians capabilities, however the PMU-2 is huge upgrade from PMU-1, the PMU-2 (iran has now) is the world's second best SAM in the world, only to S-400.

maybe somes specifications of b-373 are better, but doubfull it can surpass a system that neither the west nor china could !

But again, its an impressive achievement, and only the first iteration ,ZIONISTS have better start to love iranians air defense RIGHT NOW !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fafnir

raptor22 said:


> 9 countries ... the US, Russia , China, India, Iran, France Italy and England, israel ... all of them have enjoyed foreign technical supports to some extend except Iran which has been under sanction for more than 4 decades ...


You left out japan[Type 03 Chu-SAM] and the dprk[Pŏn'gae-5/KN-06] and also possibly rok [KM-Sam] tho` they are probably getting substantial help from the russians[almaz antey] with this,germany would be another one as it is working on Meads with italy and the us,lastly I`d also possibly consider adding turkey to the list as they are trying to develop indigenous short range sams[*HİSAR*] but were also looking at chinas HQ9 for long range use .


----------



## raptor22

Fafnir said:


> You left out japan[Type 03 Chu-SAM] and the dprk[Pŏn'gae-5/KN-06] and also possibly rok [KM-Sam] tho` they are probably getting substantial help from the russians[almaz antey] with this,germany would be another one as it is working on Meads with italy and the us,lastly I`d also possibly consider adding turkey to the list as they are trying to develop indigenous short range sams[*HİSAR*] but were also looking at chinas HQ9 for long range use .



He asked "how many countries can build state of the art air defense system" and I meant by themselves .. south Koria gets help from Almaz ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Fafnir

Rok is little different to india,israel,italy,turkey,they`ve all received help but they also have pretty good industrial/technological resources at their disposal as well thats why they`ve been able with help to produce their own systems rather than just license produce somebody elses,I`ve no doubt that even without the russians help that the rok would still be able to produce their own sams but if you have the financial and tech resources that the rok has its probably easier and quicker to hire something like almaz to help you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Army research

Screw everything they made a long range air defence system which they can manufacture weather in sanction or not so yes congrats it doesn't matter if it is copied ,based ,or even looks like other systems it's indigenous and can shoot missles and planes so that's what Iran needs again congrats

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rayanBis123456789

Army research said:


> Screw everything they made a long range air defence system which they can manufacture weather in sanction or not so yes congrats it doesn't matter if it is copied ,based ,or even looks like other systems it's indigenous and can shoot missles and planes so that's what Iran needs again congrats




OF COURSE congrats to iranians brothers !!! true muslims !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Army research said:


> it doesn't matter if it is copied ,based ,or even looks like other systems it's indigenous and can shoot missles and planes so that's what Iran needs again congrats



This system is purely indigenous, heck it does not even look like any other system.



raptor22 said:


> 9 countries ... the US, Russia , China, India, Iran, France Italy and England, israel ... all of them have enjoyed foreign technical supports to some extend except Iran which has been under sanction for more than 4 decades ...



Isreal does not have long range air defence developed by themselves, their anti ballistic missile shield are made with help from US. As for England, what long range air ground based defence do they have? Don't they rely on the patriot?


----------



## raptor22

Army research said:


> Screw everything they made a long range air defence system which they can manufacture weather in sanction or not so yes congrats it doesn't matter if it is copied ,based ,or even looks like other systems it's indigenous and can shoot missles and planes so that's what Iran needs again congrats



The best part of it is no one know what this system is capable of , westerns had access to S300 and studied it but no one knows anything about Bavar.



Rukarl said:


> This system is purely indigenous, heck it does not even look like any other system.
> 
> 
> 
> Isreal does not have long range air defence developed by themselves, their anti ballistic missile shield are made with help from US. As for England, what long range air ground based defence do they have? Don't they rely on the patriot?



As I said many of these countries have enjoyed technical helps from outside ...
Italy, France and England have Aster AD and now are cooperating on Aster 30 Block ....


----------



## Rukarl

raptor22 said:


> The best part of it is no one know what this system is capable of , westerns had access to S300 and studied it but no one knows anything about Bavar.
> 
> 
> 
> As I said many of these countries have enjoyed technical helps from outside ...
> Italy, France and England have Aster AD and now are cooperating on Aster 30 Block ....



So then no point including them in your list. Only nations that have shown capability to produce such a system independently should be considered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yantong1980

Good job, great step for Iran. Congrats!


----------



## TrMhMt

Is there any success firing test videos? At least a demonstration video.?


----------



## Rukarl

This system is clearly hot launched guys, I don't see any benefit of it being cold launch anyway. Cold launch is something which provides no added benefit but instead makes it more expensive, heavy and increases probability of something going wrong. Hope to see this bad boy used on naval vessels in future.




TrMhMt said:


> Is there any success firing test videos? At least a demonstration video.?



This exhibition just showed its components for the first time, no video of testing so far. However, the president ordered them to do a test on a ballistic missile as that is one of its purposes, so maybe the first test they will show will be against a missile. The system is still not fully ready for delivery, one more year till then, by then, vids of variety of tests will be shown.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Army research

Rukarl said:


> This system is purely indigenous, heck it does not even look like any other system.
> 
> 
> 
> Isreal does not have long range air defence developed by themselves, their anti ballistic missile shield are made with help from US. As for England, what long range air ground based defence do they have? Don't they rely on the patriot?


Sir I was just saying that it does not matter even if does look like any other system when I said this I was not addressing respectable members but the hundreds of trolls sitting out there sir

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rayanBis123456789

raptor22 said:


> The best part of it is no one know what this system is capable of , westerns had access to S300 and studied it but no one knows anything about Bavar.
> 
> 
> 
> As I said many of these countries have enjoyed technical helps from outside ...
> Italy, France and England have Aster AD and now are cooperating on Aster 30 Block ....




Western had access to old S300 familly ... not the newer PMU-1 and certainly not PMU-2 since none of them had it !!! first point.

Second point, there is now way GREECE will allow israel to traine with their PMU-1, no way greece defense minister STRONGLY denbied no country in the world allow intrusion in their vital defense systems.

If the PMU-2 was that easy to defeat netanyahu wouldn't have make 12 trips to moscou, only about s300 issue !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

rayanBis123456789 said:


> Western had access to old S300 familly ... not the newer PMU-1 and certainly not PMU-2 since none of them had it !!! first point.
> 
> Second point, there is now way GREECE will allow israel to traine with their PMU-1, no way greece defense minister STRONGLY denbied no country in the world allow intrusion in their vital defense systems.
> 
> If the PMU-2 was that easy to defeat netanyahu wouldn't have make 12 trips to moscou, only about s300 issue !!!



*Israel trained against Russian-made air defense system in Greece: sources*


----------



## rayanBis123456789

raptor22 said:


> *Israel trained against Russian-made air defense system in Greece: sources*



GUY what sources? israelnews ? JPOST , have u noticed that each time iran, or another coutnry in ME get powerful and reliable system, 2 minutes later israelis news, rush to dismiss this as "nothing burger" or a "surmontable challenge" do u know of a single country that let another, test its own system (and share with turkey in israHELLI case)?

Greece minsister strongly denied, and franckly he doesn't need. that the first point.

Second, Greece had the old version, iran has the newest and yet even then, it got a "serious upgrading" according TO RUSSIAN's SOURCES

Get serious guy don't buy ZIONISTS bulshit, and even if they trained with the PMU-2, then what ? does it mean they automatically defeat it ? do you think russia 's air space is defensless BECAUSE ISRAHELL trained with greece ?

Israel's so vaunted "HIGHT TECH" was even not able to shoot down a slow flying drone a month ago. Their so called "invisible" corvette was disasble by an old and cheap AS missils, their "nothing can stop that" merkava 3/4 were stoped 125 times, 52 severly damaged, and 5 100% destroyed. their arrow 3 system, they boast about failled, to hit a 60's scud type missile WITH PREDETERMINED TRAJECTORY on 2 occasion

And the list go on, their so called "advanced weapons" proved effective only against palestinians childrens or against arabs bedwins (soldiers IN NAME ONLY....)

Do u think beacause israel defeated arabs armies, it mean anything in this WORLD ? there is nothing easier to defeat than arabs in this world !!

C'mon GUY i

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/breaking...wn-for-first-time.445324/page-6#ixzz4IGp8gJsx

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Rukarl said:


> This system is clearly hot launched guys, I don't see any benefit of it being cold launch anyway. Cold launch is something which provides no added benefit but instead makes it more expensive, heavy and increases probability of something going wrong. Hope to see this bad boy used on naval vessels in future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This exhibition just showed its components for the first time, no video of testing so far. However, the president ordered them to do a test on a ballistic missile as that is one of its purposes, so maybe the first test they will show will be against a missile. The system is still not fully ready for delivery, one more year till then, by then, vids of variety of tests will be shown.



Cold launch is often used for large missiles because it enables the rocket motor to be fired outside of the canister. This means the canister doesn't have to withstand the rocket motor, therefore reducing the cost of the materials. Furthermore, in the event of a failure, the missile would be expelled out of the canister already, thus increasing safety.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

AmirPatriot said:


> Cold launch is often used for large missiles because it enables the rocket motor to be fired outside of the canister. This means the canister doesn't have to withstand the rocket motor, therefore reducing the cost of the materials. Furthermore, in the event of a failure, the missile would be expelled out of the canister already, thus increasing safety.



A hot launched system points to a more advanced system. Given more advanced technology, missile can be become smaller. For example, look at the size of sayyad 3 missile it has a range of around 200km but it is relatively small. This point that Iran is highly advanced in the SAM engineering.







In terms of safety, if you look at s-300 fails, you can see the missile go out fail to ignite and fall back on the truck, usually they got lucky it did not explode. If that happens in a hard launch system, the damage is less, however if an explosion is involved it does not matter if it hot or cold launch, either way tremendous damage will be done, thus the safety point is quite moot. Furthermore, given that there is a higher probability of something going wrong in a cold launch (as it relies on 2 mechanism ejection+ignition) system, it actually means a cold launch is less safe, in theory.

Cold launch is only an advantage if the nation is not advanced enough to make a hard launch system. Because as you said, they may not have the technology for smaller missile or metallurgy of the canisters etc.



rayanBis123456789 said:


> GUY what sources? israelnews ? JPOST , have u noticed that each time iran, or another coutnry in ME get powerful and reliable system, 2 minutes later israelis news, rush to dismiss this as "nothing burger" or a "surmontable challenge" do u know of a single country that let another, test its own system (and share with turkey in israHELLI case)?
> 
> Greece minsister strongly denied, and franckly he doesn't need. that the first point.
> 
> Second, Greece had the old version, iran has the newest and yet even then, it got a "serious upgrading" according TO RUSSIAN's SOURCES
> 
> Get serious guy don't buy ZIONISTS bulshit, and even if they trained with the PMU-2, then what ? does it mean they automatically defeat it ? do you think russia 's air space is defensless BECAUSE ISRAHELL trained with greece ?
> 
> Israel's so vaunted "HIGHT TECH" was even not able to shoot down a slow flying drone a month ago. Their so called "invisible" corvette was disasble by an old and cheap AS missils, their "nothing can stop that" merkava 3/4 were stoped 125 times, 52 severly damaged, and 5 100% destroyed. their arrow 3 system, they boast about failled, to hit a 60's scud type missile WITH PREDETERMINED TRAJECTORY on 2 occasion
> 
> And the list go on, their so called "advanced weapons" proved effective only against palestinians childrens or against arabs bedwins (soldiers IN NAME ONLY....)
> 
> Do u think beacause israel defeated arabs armies, it mean anything in this WORLD ? there is nothing easier to defeat than arabs in this world !!
> 
> C'mon GUY i
> 
> Source: https://defence.pk/threads/breaking...wn-for-first-time.445324/page-6#ixzz4IGp8gJsx



The zionists are too puny to threaten Iranian airspace. These air defence development are being made to nullify potential airstrike from regional usa forces from the carriers etc and not against zionists. Iranian air defence even back in 2010 could have easily dealt with the zionists. They are simply too weak to threaten Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rukarl

@Henry ME 95

It seems our other comments was deleted. Anyway I asked you to present me with sources and evidence that anyone claims Bavar is based on s-300 and you resorted to some mainstream media sources. Forgetting the fact mainstream media are hardly worthy sources, you posted sources that were *2-3 years old*. Do I need to remind you that Bavar has only been revealed *2-3 days* ago? One of the sources you used was RT i.e the Russia today. Since you seem to use that source, here is a Russia today on Bavar from 3 days ago after Bavar was revealed:



> *Bavar-373 is the country’s first air defense system, manufactured solely by local specialists.* It was commissioned back in 2010 following a suspended deal with Moscow on the delivery of similar S-300 defense systems due to nuclear sanctions adopted by the UN over Iran’s nuclear program.





> *“We did not intend to make an Iranian version of the S-300 – we wanted to build an Iranian system, and we built it,”* Iran’s Minister of Defense Hossein Dehghan said on Saturday as quoted by The Times of Israel. The weapon was first time successfully test-fired in August of 2014.



https://www.rt.com/news/356677-iran-defense-air-bavar/

As you can see, nowhere do they make the claim Bavar and S-300 are related in terms of hardware. Reason is quite clear, as I even showed you in 2 pages ago, these two system are completely different in terms of just about everything, only thing they have in common is both are long range air defence systems. You failed to back up your claims using even an iota of hard evidence, and how can you? Claiming Bavar and s-300 are related is like saying Pak-FA and F-22 are related, you would be right to some extent as both are 5th gen fighter planes, however in terms of hardware they are completely designed independently.

I think people like you are confused. You are confused because Iran had said Iran will build an Iranian S-300 alternative and you mistook that for Iran saying it will build a S-300. Those whom speak Persian know right from the beginning they were saying they are building a purely indigenous system and it will have nothing to do with s-300.

I hope this clears things up for you.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Rukarl said:


> Given more advanced technology, missile can be become smaller


That would be because it would be using a more energetic fuel, therefore making it burn with more power and still damage the canister. This would limit the canister to a small number of launches before having to be replaced.

As for launch failures, there are a number of scenarios which might happen. For example, the rocket may tend to go wildly off course due to a storage or production error. In a cold launch system, the rocket would fly away from the TEL instead of into it, increasing safety. Or, if a hot launch missile fails to ignite altogether, it is stuck inside the canister - there, canister useless. But if it is ejected out of the canister, it may fall, as you said, on a truck or on the ground. The truck would still be usable. 

There are other contingencies, but its late and I can't think of any.


----------



## Rukarl

AmirPatriot said:


> As for launch failures, there are a number of scenarios which might happen. For example, the rocket may tend to go wildly off course due to a storage or production error. In a cold launch system, the rocket would fly away from the TEL instead of into it, increasing safety. Or, if a hot launch missile fails to ignite altogether, it is stuck inside the canister - there, canister useless. But if it is ejected out of the canister, it may fall, as you said, on a truck or on the ground. The truck would still be usable.
> 
> There are other contingencies, but its late and I can't think of any.



We can create as much hypothetical scenario we like, but nothing will change the fact there is more probability of going wrong in a cold launch system vs hot launch, this is pure common sense as cold launch involves a whole extra stage during firing. The missile firing going off course is not something that is really relevant in this discussion as that is discussing what happens *after *the missile ignites, whereas the problem we see is that in cold launch system, the missile is expelled *before* ignition and it fails to ignite, it falls back and damages the launching systems. Problems with after ignition effect both hard and cold launches.

You said the truck would still be usable during the scenario, however it, along with missile itself and what ever else are in the surrounding are still damaged, such as the other canisters which means potential damage to other missiles. One can see that from below video:






Whereas if a hard launched missile fails to ignite, nothing of sort will happen.

Either way, there is zero evidence of advantage of cold launch, negatives such as more cost etc exist however.


----------



## Army research

Why don't Pakistan and Iran have good defence relations ?? Now that sanctions lifted Pakistan can offer cheap fighters eg jf 17 , weapons guided bombs tot apcs etc and Iran can offer sam etc they have common problems eg Baluchistan and pipeline on between and cultural links and for Iran this is second largest shia population (if that interests them) then why ? Is it Indian meddling ( just asking) because look in past we helped each other before and after 79 and pak was first to recognize Iran new gov in 79 Pakistan can help them in their aviation missilr heck even nuclear programs then WHY


----------



## SOHEIL

Army research said:


> Why don't Pakistan and Iran have good defence relations ?? Now that sanctions lifted Pakistan can offer cheap fighters eg jf 17 , weapons guided bombs tot apcs etc and Iran can offer sam etc they have common problems eg Baluchistan and pipeline on between and cultural links and for Iran this is second largest shia population (if that interests them) then why ? Is it Indian meddling ( just asking) because look in past we helped each other before and after 79 and pak was first to recognize Iran new gov in 79 Pakistan can help them in their aviation missilr heck even nuclear programs then WHY



We need customers not suppliers !

But interested to know , what exactly pakistan can offer ?


----------



## Army research

SOHEIL said:


> We need customers not suppliers !
> 
> But interested to know , what exactly pakistan can offer ?


We can buy sams ships etc from you you can buy manpads ANZA upgraded g3m and g3s sniper , AL Khalid tank which is equivalent to t90 m1a1 , APC TALHA AND SAAD , JF17 fighter as cheap planes to support superior sukhoi Iran will buy mushak propeller trainer and K8 jet trainer , guided munitions etc POF EYE ibms and and loads of other stuff while Pakistan can buy sams and other indigenous Iran stuff if they pass test and provide financing etc


----------



## SOHEIL

Army research said:


> manpads



Iran is one of the leading countries in manpads !



Army research said:


> AL Khalid tank























Army research said:


> APC TALHA AND SAAD










Army research said:


> JF17 fighter as cheap planes to support superior sukhoi Iran will buy



We are developing a homemade fighter jet & currently we demonstrated jet engine technology !








Army research said:


> mushak propeller trainer and K8 jet trainer

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

Army research said:


> guided munitions

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The SC

rayanBis123456789 said:


> GUY what sources? israelnews ? JPOST , have u noticed that each time iran, or another coutnry in ME get powerful and reliable system, 2 minutes later israelis news, rush to dismiss this as "nothing burger" or a "surmontable challenge" do u know of a single country that let another, test its own system (and share with turkey in israHELLI case)?
> 
> Greece minsister strongly denied, and franckly he doesn't need. that the first point.
> 
> Second, Greece had the old version, iran has the newest and yet even then, it got a "serious upgrading" according TO RUSSIAN's SOURCES
> 
> Get serious guy don't buy ZIONISTS bulshit, and even if they trained with the PMU-2, then what ? does it mean they automatically defeat it ? do you think russia 's air space is defensless BECAUSE ISRAHELL trained with greece ?
> 
> Israel's so vaunted "HIGHT TECH" was even not able to shoot down a slow flying drone a month ago. Their so called "invisible" corvette was disasble by an old and cheap AS missils, their "nothing can stop that" merkava 3/4 were stoped 125 times, 52 severly damaged, and 5 100% destroyed. their arrow 3 system, they boast about failled, to hit a 60's scud type missile WITH PREDETERMINED TRAJECTORY on 2 occasion
> 
> And the list go on, their so called "advanced weapons" proved effective only against palestinians childrens or against arabs bedwins (soldiers IN NAME ONLY....)
> 
> Do u think beacause israel defeated arabs armies, it mean anything in this WORLD ? there is nothing easier to defeat than arabs in this world !!
> 
> C'mon GUY i
> 
> Source: https://defence.pk/threads/breaking...wn-for-first-time.445324/page-6#ixzz4IGp8gJsx


Ask Usrael (on the death row) in 1973 and its supporters (US) how easy it was to fight let alone "defeat", 2 Arab armies! or was it defeated_ had to threaten with (American) nuclear bombs_ Before that the Arabs were fighting France, England through their proxy Usrael....
You are most probably missing some facts about the Arabs.. read about Bosnia and what they have done to the Serbs in Bosnia on the ground, and that at a thousand kilometers from home..
Anyways, we are here to say congrats to Iran about another milestone great achievement..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Army research said:


> upgraded g3m and g3s sniper

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The SC

SOHEIL said:


>


Maybe this can shoot down a low flying airplane, a helly, a drone r anything flying at low altitude too!


----------



## Fafnir

Army research said:


> We can buy sams ships etc from you you can buy manpads ANZA upgraded g3m and g3s sniper , AL Khalid tank which is equivalent to t90 m1a1 , APC TALHA AND SAAD , JF17 fighter as cheap planes to support superior sukhoi Iran will buy mushak propeller trainer and K8 jet trainer , guided munitions etc POF EYE ibms and and loads of other stuff while Pakistan can buy sams and other indigenous Iran stuff if they pass test and provide financing etc


Its a nice dream but unfortunately pakistan is still far,far too close to the us and saudi and sadly it still continues to put their interests ahead of its own,the perfect example of this being pakistans inability to even begin construction of its part of the ip pipeline even tho it badly needed that natural gas,it still did not want to offend the us or saudi and so did nothing.Perhaps when pakistan throws off the yoke of us/saudi "friendship" and starts putting its own national interests first then maybe iran and pakistan could have a much closer relationship rather than just the very limited one that the two countries currently have at the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Army research said:


> Pakistan can buy sams and other indigenous Iran stuff if they pass test and provide financing



Exporting AD systems to foreign countries is impossible ... especially to pakistan which has relations with US And saudis !

& Saudis don't even bother to hide their relations with israel !!! 

We can't finance any other countries right now ... syria & iraq are more than enough for iran in the current economic situation !!!



Fafnir said:


> Its a nice dream but unfortunately pakistan is still far,far too close to the us and saudi and sadly it still continues to put their interests ahead of its own,the perfect example of this being pakistans inability to even begin construction of its part of the ip pipeline even tho it badly needed that natural gas,it still did not want to offend the us or saudi and so did nothing.Perhaps when pakistan throws off the yoke of us/saudi "friendship" and starts putting its own national interests first then maybe iran and pakistan could have a much closer relationship rather than just the very limited one that the two countries currently have at the moment.



In Fact Iran/Pakistan relationship getting worse day by day !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Army research

The SC said:


> Maybe this can shoot down a low flying airplane, a helly, a drone r anything flying at low altitude too!


I meant g3 m g3 s and sniper


----------



## The SC

Army research said:


> I meant g3 m g3 s and sniper


Yes antimaterial guns, but this one is very big and very long, I think it can be used for Anti air too, very easilly against slow, low flying objects..


----------



## The SC

On topic:
Sayad 4 missile





This is the Bavar 373 main missile, it has many similarities with the Russian 48N6E Missile that is used in both S-300 and S-400 systems for antibalistic role. And it has been successfully tested. The Russian model is 7.5m long and around 51cm in diameter. it weighs around 1800kg and can reach Mach 6 . It can hit targets at 10,000 to 27,000m altitude and has a range of 5 -150 km. Its warhead is 150 kg.


Najm Radar: The most advanced Iranian Radar (mobile)







It is the most advanced Iranian built radar which will be part of the Bavar 373 AD system. It was first revealed a few years ago. It is built by SAIRAN industries.

It is a phased array radar _AESA_ composed of 5120 elements (64x80) which can search and intercept flying objects at the same time. It is a 3D radar that probably works in L or S bands. Its operational range is estimated to be between 10km - 400km. It is similar to Russian Gama and Chinese Type 305 B radars..
It has abilities to change frequency and wave 1000 times per second which makes finding it for enemy very difficult. It also has wave shaping ability meaning it uses physical rotation for sweeping horizontal plain but uses wave shaping technology to intercept/ illuminate and search for new targets at the same time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

The SC said:


> On topic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the Bavar 373 main missile, it has many similarities with the Russian 48N6E Missile that is used in both S-300 and S-400 systems for antibalistic role. And it has been successfully tested. The Russian model is 7.5m long and around 51cm in diameter. it weighs around 1800kg and can reach Mach 6 . It can hit targets at 10,000 to 27,000m altitude and has a range of 5 -150 km. Its warhead is 150 kg.



What "many similarities"? They are completely different:

Here is the full view of the white missile:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

Rukarl said:


> What "many similarities"? They are completely different:
> 
> Here is the full view of the white missile:


That might be Sayad 2 or 3, they have no specs for the Sayad 4, so they compare it to the best S-300/400 misile


----------



## Rukarl

The SC said:


> That might be Sayad 2 or 3



No, sayyad-2 (looks nothing like sayyad-2) and 3 are part of the talash air defence system. This white missile was parade as Bavar-373's missile.

The picture you posted of the white missile from the exhibition, there was another pic that showed a part of its behind and you could clearly see that it matched the one they paraded. The white missile and sayyad-3 have similar fin section, but the front of the white missile aka sayyad-4 is different. Sayyad-4 has a more curved shape as you go along the missile, sayyad-3 is straight and also apparently smaller.

Nevertheless, you are correct that sayyad-4 certainly will have anti ballistic missile capabilities, even sayyad-3 with range of 200km should have such capabilities.


----------



## The SC

Keyhan long range mobile radar is a multi frequency 2d OTH











It can detect missiles and low RCS planes


----------



## SOHEIL

http://www.janes.com/article/63215/iran-unveils-bavar-373-long-range-air-defence-system

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

SOHEIL said:


> http://www.janes.com/article/63215/iran-unveils-bavar-373-long-range-air-defence-system


From one of the most pessimistic sources (Janes):

_The announcement that Iran was working on its own long-range air-defence system prompted speculation that S-300-lookalike components seen in the 18 April 2010 Army Day parade may have been for the Bavar-373.

*That theory has now been categorically disproved as the Bavar-373 displayed on 21 August is clearly a unique Iranian system that appears to reflect extensive investment in its ability to develop phased array radars.
*_
It is a totally new and independent design!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rukarl

Even Janes international with their biased history towards Iran have made it very clear this a purely Iranian designed system. Thanks for posting Soheil.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

*Iran Can Now Detect U.S. Stealth Jets at Long Range*
*New over-the-horizon radar negates stealth advantage*

*




*

*



*

*Ismaeli described the complex of wire nets and buildings as the Ghadir radar, Iran’s first operational over-the-horizon sensor. OTH radars can detect stealthy and small targets at very long ranges, regardless of the target’s altitude.*

*It’s a capability that promises to dramatically improve Iran’s ability to detect and defend against an aerial attack, potentially altering the military balance of power in the Persian Gulf.*

*For years, OTH radars have formed the back bone of territorial defense for the world’s superpowers. The United States currently operates an OTH radar network that can spot target as far as 3,000 kilometers from U.S. shores.*

*Australia, a potential target of Chinese strategic bombers, has the new Jindalee OTH sensor, with a similar range.*

*To achieve such incredible performance, OTH radars take advantage of a unique natural phenomenon. Instead of emitting radio waves directly into the target space, OTH radars blast very long wave pulses into the ionosphere.*

*Waves of certain frequencies bounce back down to the target area, enabling the radar to look at objects from above and identify them even behind ground terrain such as hills and mountains.*

*In addition to detecting stealth warplanes, OTH radars can also pick out ballistic missiles and even satellites in low orbit. Their long range makes them impervious to small-scale attacks by anti-radiation missiles and jammers.*

*On the down side, OTH radars are bulky, immobile and imprecise. The distance error in detecting a typical target can be as high as a kilometer. OTH radars also need enormous power sources.*

*



*
*Ghadir radar. FARS News photo*
*Compared to other countries’ OTH radars, Ghadir seems to possess modest performance. Ismaeli claimed it has an 1,100-kilometer range and a maximum detection altitude of 300 kilometers.*

*Ghadir has four transmitters for 360-degree coverage, but given the huge amount of energy they require, it’s not clear that all four can broadcast at once. The phased-array layout closely resembles the Soviet Duga-3 radar near Chernobyl, perhaps indicating a fairly old-style design.*

*https://warisboring.com/iran-can-now-detect-u-s-stealth-jets-at-long-range-765efd6253e2#.p3iqpxx9j*

*Sepehr*, nicknamed 'Ghadir', is an Iranian over the horizon radar, part of Iran's Sepehr Phased Radar System. Sepehr is a 360°, 3D-radar, with a ceiling of 300 km, and a maximum range of 1,100 km. You can hear a high and a low tone, corresponding to the sweep rates of 870 and 307 sweeps/sec. sent in two separated bursts.

Unlike other OTHR's, Sepehr doesn't use FMCW modulation. Instead, it uses a shaped pulsed system which makes the edges of the signal hard to define. Because of this, the bandwidth of this signal can vary greatly, ranging from around 60 kHz to splattering over 1MHz, depending on the power of the received signal for the user.





http://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/Sepehr_'Ghadir'_OTH_Radar

Ghadir radar can detect all aerial targets, including cruise and ballistic missiles, stealth drones, as well as *low-altitude satellites.*



Rukarl said:


> No, sayyad-2 (looks nothing like sayyad-2) and 3 are part of the talash air defence system. This white missile was parade as Bavar-373's missile.
> 
> The picture you posted of the white missile from the exhibition, there was another pic that showed a part of its behind and you could clearly see that it matched the one they paraded. The white missile and sayyad-3 have similar fin section, but the front of the white missile aka sayyad-4 is different. Sayyad-4 has a more curved shape as you go along the missile, sayyad-3 is straight and also apparently smaller.
> 
> Nevertheless, you are correct that sayyad-4 certainly will have anti ballistic missile capabilities, even sayyad-3 with range of 200km should have such capabilities.


If we go by the names I can say that Sayad 4 has a 400 km range, since Sayad 2 has 200, km and Sayad 3 most probably 300km range.. I have also heard before that Bavar-373 would have anti-satellite missiles ..well at least for low orbiting ones!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Rukarl said:


> What "many similarities"? They are completely different:
> 
> Here is the full view of the white missile:


I wouldn't say there are "many" similarities, but the nose shape is definitely similar.


----------



## Rukarl

AmirPatriot said:


> I wouldn't say there are "many" similarities, but the nose shape is definitely similar.



These similarities that exists between missile are more coincidental than anything else based on similar design parameters that went into creating them. If sayyad-4 missile was straight like the sayyad-3 then could compare it to other straight missile, thus these similarities are very minor. Important aspects such as the fin section are completely different.


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> I wouldn't say there are "many" similarities, but the nose shape is definitely similar.


Its not just the tapering nose you also have the long cable duct on the body as well,its pretty obvious that the white sam is either a very close copy or has been directly inspired by the 48N6 sam


----------



## Rukarl

The SC said:


> If we go by the names I can say that Sayad 4 has a 400 km range, since Sayad 2 has 200, km and Sayad 3 most probably 300km range.. I have also heard before that Bavar-373 would have anti-satellite missiles ..well at least for low orbiting ones!



Well I am not sure, but to be frank, 400km seems too much. I think sayyad-2M (newer version) is around 60-120km, sayyad-3 is 200km and sayyad-4 is around 300. But we won't know till they officially release such info, or they may not release them at all!



Fafnir said:


> Its not just the tapering nose you also have the long cable duct on the body as well,its pretty obvious that the white sam is either a very close copy or has been directly inspired by the 48N6 sam



What is with your obsession with s-300 that you try to link everything to do with bavar to it? Yeah it is a direct copy or inspired even though the fin section is completely different. Sayyad-3 also has the "cable duct" so by your logic it is also based on the 48N6.


----------



## rayanBis123456789

Army research said:


> Why don't Pakistan and Iran have good defence relations ?? Now that sanctions lifted Pakistan can offer cheap fighters eg jf 17 , weapons guided bombs tot apcs etc and Iran can offer sam etc they have common problems eg Baluchistan and pipeline on between and cultural links and for Iran this is second largest shia population (if that interests them) then why ? Is it Indian meddling ( just asking) because look in past we helped each other before and after 79 and pak was first to recognize Iran new gov in 79 Pakistan can help them in their aviation missilr heck even nuclear programs then WHY




WHY, now that sanctions are lifted? during the sanctions iran needed support he got nothing !!


----------



## Army research

rayanBis123456789 said:


> WHY, now that sanctions are lifted? during the sanctions iran needed support he got nothing !!


Well Pakistan could not do anything heck our people suffered because we need your gas trust me when I say I mean like NEED IT now project is back on track

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Rukarl said:


> Well I am not sure, but to be frank, 400km seems too much. I think sayyad-2M (newer version) is around 60-120km, sayyad-3 is 200km and sayyad-4 is around 300. But we won't know till they officially release such info, or they may not release them at all!
> 
> 
> 
> .


The S-200D had already a 400km range in 1976.. Iran had modernised its S-200 (do not know which version it had tough!) system to cover for long range air defense in combination with Talash 1 and 2 that cover short and medium range..


----------



## Rukarl

The SC said:


> The S-200D had already a 400km range in 1976.. Iran had modernised its S-200 (do not know which version it had tough!) system to cover for long range air defense in combination with Talash 1 and 2 that cover short and medium range..



Bro, The s-200 is a huge missile! I am not talking about capability bro, Iran could with relative ease make longer range missile, but whether they did use a 400km ranged missile in Bavar, it remains to be seem.

Also, you need to note than the "Talash" is not a name of a missile but an air defence system. If you want more info, I found that this thread was opened about it.

https://defence.pk/threads/irans-talash-airdefence.395070/

Simply put, Talash is a name for the whole air defence system including radars, command vehicle etc but its missiles are the Sayyad-2 and 3.

Talash 3 had s-200 in it, but the final and ultimate Talash air defence system was just called "Talash", think of it as Talash 4, and in this final version the s-200 missile was removed and replaced with the indigenous, long range sayyad-3.


----------



## The SC

Rukarl said:


> Bro, The s-200 is a huge missile! I am not talking about capability bro, Iran could with relative ease make longer range missile, but whether they did use a 400km ranged missile in Bavar, it remains to be seem.
> 
> Also, you need to note than the "Talash" is not a name of a missile but an air defence system. If you want more info, I found that this thread was opened about it.
> 
> https://defence.pk/threads/irans-talash-airdefence.395070/
> 
> Simply put, Talash is a name for the whole air defence system including radars, command vehicle etc but its missiles are the Sayyad-2 and 3.
> 
> Talash 3 had s-200 in it, but the final and ultimate Talash air defence system was just called "Talash", think of it as Talash 4, and in this final version the s-200 missile was removed and replaced with the indigenous, long range sayyad-3.


Thanks, I am aware of the Talash being an air defense system using the Sayyad series missiles, it is a great system that cover the whole air defense spectrum from low and medium altitude to very high altitude..
My thinking of Sayyad 4 That it might have a 400km range is also based on the rejection by Iran of the S-400 system , because it won't add much more to the capabilities of the New Bavar-373..


----------



## Fafnir

Rukarl said:


> Well I am not sure, but to be frank, 400km seems too much. I think sayyad-2M (newer version) is around 60-120km, sayyad-3 is 200km and sayyad-4 is around 300. But we won't know till they officially release such info, or they may not release them at all!
> 
> 
> 
> What is with your obsession with s-300 that you try to link everything to do with bavar to it? Yeah it is a direct copy or inspired even though the fin section is completely different. Sayyad-3 also has the "cable duct" so by your logic it is also based on the 48N6.


Sayyad three doesnt have both the tapered nose and the cable duct only sayyad 4 does and both of these are prominent features on the 48N6 which we know iran had access to and in my book thats more than a coincidence.It seems for whatever reason that you dont even want to consider the very possible fact that iran may have borrowed not only concepts such as the separate fire control and search radars but also technology like the 48N6/Sayyad 4 from the s300,I`m not linking everything to do with bavar with the s300 there are original features altho just how many its hard to say at this point.
Also that "cable duct" is exactly that a cable duct these are common on missiles in fact you can see them on irans medium range missiles they`re for carrying cables that cant be routed internally through the missile.


----------



## rayanBis123456789

The SC said:


> Ask Usrael (on the death row) in 1973 and its supporters (US) how easy it was to fight let alone "defeat", 2 Arab armies! or was it defeated_ had to threaten with (American) nuclear bombs_ Before that the Arabs were fighting France, England through their proxy Usrael....
> You are most probably missing some facts about the Arabs.. read about Bosnia and what they have done to the Serbs in Bosnia on the ground, and that at a thousand kilometers from home..
> Anyways, we are here to say congrats to Iran about another milestone great achievement..




BY arabs i mean arabs ARMY not, arabs heros hezbollah,hamas etc...

Arabs armies in second part of century was simply not professional enough, and not disciplined and committed to victory to win over israHELL, yet i agree in 73's israHELL own its survival only to US massive support and their nuclear deterrence, but then WHAT.?

what prevent arabs from fallowing ISRAHELLI EXEMPLE and developpe nuclear industrie like pakistan and iran ? what prevent them ? what prevent egypt from going nuclear ?? israel what a joke ? what prevented iraq from having the bomb saddam adventure in iraq and kuweit .... not israel; what prevent whabits to get the bomb ? tnothing !! arabs like to remain eternal victimes !


Mr butto said in 70's " our peoples will grass, if needed, and will be ungry, but PAKISTAN will get its own bomb" and 11 years later it got it !!!!

Khamenei made a big mistake by delaying nuclear weapons, for sanctions relief, BIG MISTAKE


----------



## Rukarl

Fafnir said:


> Sayyad three doesnt have both the tapered nose and the cable duct only sayyad 4 does and both of these are prominent features on the 48N6 which we know iran had access to and in my book thats more than a coincidence.It seems for whatever reason that you dont even want to consider the very possible fact that iran may have borrowed not only concepts such as the separate fire control and search radars but also technology like the 48N6/Sayyad 4 from the s300,I`m not linking everything to do with bavar with the s300 there are original features altho just how many its hard to say at this point.
> Also that "cable duct" is exactly that a cable duct these are common on missiles in fact you can see them on irans medium range missiles they`re for carrying cables that cant be routed internally through the missile.



It seems you are just trolling. Or maybe you're just really ignorant in this topic.
No matter what people try to tell you, it seems to just go through you. Just because the missile has a duct it does not mean anything nor does it mean much else if the shape of the missile seem to be slightly similar, as I explained earlier these are just coincident. Just like it is a coincident that sayyad-3 has a duct as well. The missile, sayyad-4 has a completely different guidance fin section, next you'll be claiming it is based on PAC-3 just because they have similar fin part. You are just making random claims, like it may have borrowed xyz, I bet even if they showed the inside, and it is 100% different, you'll just find something else to claim. Give it a rest.


----------



## rayanBis123456789

The SC said:


> The S-200D had already a 400km range in 1976.. Iran had modernised its S-200 (do not know which version it had tough!) system to cover for long range air defense in combination with Talash 1 and 2 that cover short and medium range..






Rukarl said:


> Bro, The s-200 is a huge missile! I am not talking about capability bro, Iran could with relative ease make longer range missile, but whether they did use a 400km ranged missile in Bavar, it remains to be seem.
> 
> Also, you need to note than the "Talash" is not a name of a missile but an air defence system. If you want more info, I found that this thread was opened about it.
> 
> https://defence.pk/threads/irans-talash-airdefence.395070/
> 
> Simply put, Talash is a name for the whole air defence system including radars, command vehicle etc but its missiles are the Sayyad-2 and 3.
> 
> Talash 3 had s-200 in it, but the final and ultimate Talash air defence system was just called "Talash", think of it as Talash 4, and in this final version the s-200 missile was removed and replaced with the indigenous, long range sayyad-3.


S200 are for HEAVY but easy target, that cannot avoid missils and maneuver, not a reliate SAM against what US has !


----------



## B@KH

Army research said:


> Why don't Pakistan and Iran have good defence relations ?? Now that sanctions lifted Pakistan can offer cheap fighters eg jf 17 , weapons guided bombs tot apcs etc and Iran can offer sam etc they have common problems eg Baluchistan and pipeline on between and cultural links and for Iran this is second largest shia population (if that interests them) then why ? Is it Indian meddling ( just asking) because look in past we helped each other before and after 79 and pak was first to recognize Iran new gov in 79 Pakistan can help them in their aviation missilr heck even nuclear programs then WHY





Army research said:


> We can buy sams ships etc from you you can buy manpads ANZA upgraded g3m and g3s sniper , AL Khalid tank which is equivalent to t90 m1a1 , APC TALHA AND SAAD , JF17 fighter as cheap planes to support superior sukhoi Iran will buy mushak propeller trainer and K8 jet trainer , guided munitions etc POF EYE ibms and and loads of other stuff while Pakistan can buy sams and other indigenous Iran stuff if they pass test and provide financing etc



If we had a leader, we would be great. because Leader is always from God for faithful [7:186]

I love this song, though persian but understandable for urdu too.
http://www.telewebion.com/#!/episode/1496783/

we are bridge to Afghanistan for imperialist usa and nato
we can be a bridge to ME, europe usa for communist china.
we too can go for Ghazwa hind under communist china command.
we think our policies are so smart that others get fool but infact we are harming ourselves.
our fools want to help God but God do not need our help. 
so this saga will go on....like this.... due to corruption.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

rayanBis123456789 said:


> S200 are for HEAVY but easy target, that cannot avoid missils and maneuver, not a reliate SAM against what US has !



Thats why you have other SAM systems to protect something like the S-200 or S-300 or so on.


----------



## Fafnir

Rukarl said:


> It seems you are just trolling. Or maybe you're just really ignorant in this topic.
> No matter what people try to tell you, it seems to just go through you. Just because the missile has a duct it does not mean anything nor does it mean much else if the shape of the missile seem to be slightly similar, as I explained earlier these are just coincident. Just like it is a coincident that sayyad-3 has a duct as well. The missile, sayyad-4 has a completely different guidance fin section, next you'll be claiming it is based on PAC-3 just because they have similar fin part. You are just making random claims, like it may have borrowed xyz, I bet even if they showed the inside, and it is 100% different, you'll just find something else to claim. Give it a rest.


I think its rather funny that you prefer to just ignore/dismiss the two very obvious similarities of the sam in favor of the one very minor difference,it sounds to me like you just cant stand the possibility that this systems isnt 100% original,c`mon stop your nationalist cheer leading and think about it for just a second do you really think that iran whos only prior experience with sams has been reverse/reengineering 1960s era legacy systems like the hawk and standard could then go and build from scratch a sam system that would be as good as or as better than the pmu2?,the chinese tried the exact same thing with the hq9 and they werent able to do it.Theres no way that bavar could be technologically based on the pac3 as iran simply did not have access to that system but iran did have access to the s300


----------



## Rukarl

Fafnir said:


> I think its rather funny that you prefer to just ignore/dismiss the two very obvious similarities of the sam in favor of the one very minor difference,it sounds to me like you just cant stand the possibility that this systems isnt 100% original,c`mon stop your nationalist cheer leading and think about it for just a second do you really think that iran whos only prior experience with sams has been reverse/reengineering 1960s era legacy systems like the hawk and standard could then go and build from scratch a sam system that would be as good as or as better than the pmu2?,the chinese tried the exact same thing with the hq9 and they werent able to do it.Theres no way that bavar could be technologically based on the pac3 as iran simply did not have access to that system but iran did have access to the s300



You are talking nonsense that's all. The only person dismissing anything here is you because you seem not have the logical capacity to understand that a duct and some similarities in shape does not mean anything when the major factors such as guidance system are completely different. I said, you'll probably end up claiming sayyad-3 is based on PAC-3 due to similar guidance fins. Here are the missiles in question:







Here is the bavar missile:





How dumb does one have to be to think sayyad-4 is a copy or based on the Russian system? They are completely different and similarities in shape is nothing but coincidence. By your logic, all straight missile must be copied of each other. Many missiles share similarities in their shapes. The main parts i.e guidance section are completely different. How many time do we need to tell you this obvious fact? But then again, you're just a troll. Since the beginning of the thread you've been acting insane and had to bring s-300 into everything. You're just a waste of space here with your 12 year old kid logic.


----------



## Rukarl

Oldman1 said:


> Thats why you have other SAM systems to protect something like the S-200 or S-300 or so on.



Either way, s-200 in my opinion should just be converted for anti ship roles. Their usefulness against modern craft is highly questionable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

Land Platforms
*Iran unveils Bavar-373 long-range air-defence system*
*Jeremy Binnie, London* - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
24 August 2016
Iran unveiled its locally developed Bavar-373 long-range air-defence system on 21 August, indicating it is continuing the programme even though it is now receiving S-300 systems from Russia.




President Rouhani stands beside the missile launcher from the Bavar-373. (president.ir)

The head of the Iranian air-defence command first announced the Bavar-373 was being developed in September 2011, a little over a year after Russia cancelled a contract to supply Iran with S-300 long-range air-defence systems. Russia reversed that decision in 2015 and delivered the first S-300 components earlier this year.

The announcement that Iran was working on its own long-range air-defence system prompted speculation that S-300-lookalike components seen in the 18 April 2010 Army Day parade may have been for the Bavar-373.




The Bavar-373 target-engagement radar. (president.ir)

*That theory has now been categorically disproved as the Bavar-373 displayed on 21 August is clearly a unique Iranian system that appears to reflect extensive investment in its ability to develop phased array radars.*

The system's missile launcher, target-acquisition radar, and target-engagement radar were all seen in a series of photographs released by President Hassan Rouhani's office showing him inspecting military technology developments made by the country.

*Although the system's Sayyad-3 missile appears to have already been seen in the Army Day parade held earlier this year, this is the first time its launcher has been displayed.


It follows the trend set by the Sayyad-2, unveiled in November 2013, of using a canister with a square-cross section in the style of the US Patriot rather than the round ones seen on Russian long-range air-defence systems.*

The launcher appeared to be mounted on a 10x10 Zoljanah heavy equipment transporter and had two missile canisters elevated to a nearly vertical position. The canisters appeared to be approximately 6.5 m in length, which would make the Sayyad-3 shorter than the 7.5 m-long 48N6 missile used with the S-300PMU2.

*Want to read more? For analysis on this article and access to all our insight content, please enquire about our subscription options　**ihs.com/contact*



To read the full article, Client Login
(318 of 680 words)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Samak

Rukarl said:


> Either way, s-200 in my opinion should just be converted for anti ship roles. Their usefulness against modern craft is highly questionable.


Let our enemies have one more obstacles (s200 ) in attacking us ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

monitor said:


> That theory has now been categorically disproved as the Bavar-373 displayed on 21 August is clearly a unique Iranian system that appears to reflect extensive investment in its ability to develop phased array radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

I hope member yavar will soon say something about Bavar-373

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Draco.IMF said:


> I hope member yavar will soon say something about Bavar-373



what exactly ?


----------



## The SC

Samak said:


> Let us our enemies have one more obstacles (s200 ) in attacking us ....


Very efficient against B-52 bombers



monitor said:


> Land Platforms
> *Iran unveils Bavar-373 long-range air-defence system*
> *Jeremy Binnie, London* - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
> 24 August 2016
> Iran unveiled its locally developed Bavar-373 long-range air-defence system on 21 August, indicating it is continuing the programme even though it is now receiving S-300 systems from Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> President Rouhani stands beside the missile launcher from the Bavar-373. (president.ir)
> 
> The head of the Iranian air-defence command first announced the Bavar-373 was being developed in September 2011, a little over a year after Russia cancelled a contract to supply Iran with S-300 long-range air-defence systems. Russia reversed that decision in 2015 and delivered the first S-300 components earlier this year.
> 
> The announcement that Iran was working on its own long-range air-defence system prompted speculation that S-300-lookalike components seen in the 18 April 2010 Army Day parade may have been for the Bavar-373.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bavar-373 target-engagement radar. (president.ir)
> 
> *That theory has now been categorically disproved as the Bavar-373 displayed on 21 August is clearly a unique Iranian system that appears to reflect extensive investment in its ability to develop phased array radars.*
> 
> The system's missile launcher, target-acquisition radar, and target-engagement radar were all seen in a series of photographs released by President Hassan Rouhani's office showing him inspecting military technology developments made by the country.
> 
> *Although the system's Sayyad-3 missile appears to have already been seen in the Army Day parade held earlier this year, this is the first time its launcher has been displayed.
> 
> 
> It follows the trend set by the Sayyad-2, unveiled in November 2013, of using a canister with a square-cross section in the style of the US Patriot rather than the round ones seen on Russian long-range air-defence systems.*
> 
> The launcher appeared to be mounted on a 10x10 Zoljanah heavy equipment transporter and had two missile canisters elevated to a nearly vertical position. The canisters appeared to be approximately 6.5 m in length, which would make the Sayyad-3 shorter than the 7.5 m-long 48N6 missile used with the S-300PMU2.
> 
> *Want to read more? For analysis on this article and access to all our insight content, please enquire about our subscription options　**ihs.com/contact*
> 
> 
> 
> To read the full article, Client Login
> (318 of 680 words)


What if the same as in this configuration of Sayyad 2? it does not have to be shorter..


----------



## Draco.IMF

so Sayyad 4 = B373 ?
and the Sayyad family consists of different radars, missiles, range for different tasks?
in iranmilitaryforum yavar wrote that there are different Bavar projects, and B373 is not even the the most powerful one
IMF is down so i cant look after, but he wrote, there are several projects ongoing which outclass B373 (B373 < B... < B... <B...), maybe satellite killers?


----------



## Rukarl

Draco.IMF said:


> so Sayyad 4 = B373 ?
> and the Sayyad family consists of different radars, missiles, range for different tasks?
> in iranmilitaryforum yavar wrote that there are different Bavar projects, and B373 is not even the the most powerful one
> IMF is down so i cant look after, but he wrote, there are several projects ongoing which outclass B373 (B373 < B... < B... <B...), maybe satellite killers?



Yes, sayyad-4 is one of the missiles for Bavar-373. 
As for your other statement, there is no evidence of another Bavar. What we do know however is that IRGC also has their own air defence programs, how they stack up to Bavar, we don't know.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Rukarl said:


> Either way, s-200 in my opinion should just be converted for anti ship roles. Their usefulness against modern craft is highly questionable.



They already have other systems for anti ship roles.


----------



## Rukarl

Oldman1 said:


> They already have other systems for anti ship roles.



I am aware of that, what I meant is that if S-200 outlive their usefulness in air defence role, they should still be highly useful for anti ship role.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Rukarl said:


> I am aware of that, what I meant is that if S-200 outlive their usefulness in air defence role, they should still be highly useful for anti ship role.



It all depends on money and is it worth converting it to anti ship role when newer systems could do the job and better.


----------



## Rukarl

Oldman1 said:


> It all depends on money and is it worth converting it to anti ship role when newer systems could do the job and better.



They probably will just get rid of them, but from I see in Iran, if they can keep a system and use it, they will. Besides, I doubt Iran has that many s-200 launchers anyway. But you're correct, their anti ship ballistic missile like Persian gulf missile, hormuz-1 and 2 are much more capable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ibrahim2006

Draco.IMF said:


> I hope member yavar will soon say something about Bavar-373


Yavar is banned till next month . when he comes maybe he shed light on some of the question


----------



## Ibrahim2006



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NADIM

Commander: Iran to Put into
Operation Home-Made Bavar-373
Missile Shield Soon
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran will put into operation its
home-made version of the sophisticated Russian
S-300 missile defense system, dubbed as Bavar
(Belief) 373, in the near future, a senior
commander announced on Monday, adding that
the two systems play complementary roles for
each other.
"The radar and missile defense system,
Bavar-373, is a powerful and fully indigenous
supplement for the S-300 defense system which
will be put into operation soon," Commander of
Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base Brigadier
General Farzad Esmayeeli said.
"The S-300 and Bavar-373 systems will be highly
lethal for the enemy," he added.
Noting that Iran is also building two other defense
systems named Talash 2 and Talash 3, Esmayeeli
said that the country no more needs the Russian-
made S-400 missile shield.
In similar remarks on Thursday, Iranian Defense
Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan
underlined that the Russian S-300 missile defense
system is enough to defend the country against
high-altitude threats, and said Tehran doesn’t
intend to purchase the S-400 shield.
"We produce (defense) systems at three levels to
provide the needs of the country's air defense and
security and we had some deficiencies in
(defending the country against the) high altitude
(threats) which were removed by purchasing the
S-300," General Dehqan said in a press
conference in the Central city of Isfahan.
Asked if Iran seeks to buy the S-400 missile
defense system from Russia too, he said, "We
don’t need to buy another system anymore and
we can meet our needs by production (of home-
made defense systems)".
Earlier this month, Iran unveiled the Bavar (Belief)
373 missile shield.
The indigenized strategic product was unveiled in
a ceremony in Tehran participated by Iranian
President Hassan Rouhani.
Iran designed and developed its own version of
the S-300 missile shield after the Russians
shrugged off delivery of their advanced missile
defense system to Iran on the pretext of the UN
Security Council sanctions.
The Iranian version has superior features over the
original Russian model as it enjoys increased
mobility, agility and reduced launch-preparation
time.
Iranian commanders had earlier said that Bavar
373 is similar to its original Russian model and
traces and intercepts high-altitude targets.
After the removal of sanctions, Russia delivered
half of S-300 air defense systems to Iran under
the existing contract.
Head of Russia's Rostec corporation, Sergei
Chemezov, said in July that Russia was planning
to complete the deliveries of the S-300 air
defense systems to Iran by the end of 2016.


----------



## Arminkh

Ibrahim2006 said:


>


They need to change its camouflage. Its not suitable for Iran.


----------



## BlueInGreen

As per usual the US and my fellow American citizens have completely discredited and by in large disregarded the potency of the this heavily upgraded and customized S-300 missile defense system which from what I know will be integrated into a nation wide Iranian multi-tier air defense network comprising of many different and equally potent systems all complementing each other in different ways.

But this is not in essence what I wanted to shed light upon in this post. What I want to present for discussion is a retrospective/holistic look on how the entire Iranian Air defense network stacks up to the US and Israel plus the PERSIAN gulf states in a potential attack (which by all indications is still very, very likely sorry to say) and how accurately we can assess the effectiveness of Iran's upgraded and very deadly air defense network.

First I would like to start off with every Americans point of reference, Iraq ( I am fully aware that Iran is not Iraq ). Many here in the US simply don't know or don't care about what factors went into the multiple defeats of Iraq and the final defeat of Saddam's military back in 2003. Most Americans would like to believe that there was some kind of military parity between the US and Iraq but the reality was Iraq was in COMPLETE shambles and disarray before the 2003 invasion, with the sanctions that contributed to the killing of over 500,000 Iraqi children and Saddam's stupid policies that lead to many in the military not wanting to fight for Iraq or for Saddam. The sanctions themselves completely destroyed Iraq's ability to acquire military equipment, so most of their Air craft were not at full fighting capacity and their air defense were simply not adequate enough to stop or deter any attack by the US air force and Navy what-so-ever. And probably one of the biggest issues at least when I look at it. Iran, due to the sanctions, was forced to arm itself while Iraq just relied on outside military equipment (big mistake for a nation at war, to not have an industrial base for fighting). So knowing this, my fellow Americans still like to believe that the US military can strike WITH IMPUNITY at any time it want's and completely omit any danger to its attacking force ( now I know that the Americans here are more aware and educated on the actual lethality of the US military and make no mistake the US is very lethal but to my fellow Americans you know exactly what I am talking about when I talk about the 'Murican pride and no one can beat us or defend themselves from us attitude). 

When this it taken into account, the next thing to talk about is the actual attack on Iraq's infrastructure itself. This point that I will bring up will be my own assessment that is based on mostly fact but some speculations as well. It is well known that the US used the F-15, F-16, B-52's and B-2's and many other complementary air craft that provided air support, early warning and electronic war fare capabilities. But what I think most people don't mention is the speculated use of small scale nuclear or neutron weapons which worked to completely quell Iraq's existing defense network or whatever was left of it. These nuclear/neutron bombs are very deadly and completely destroy it's target and other electronic equipment around it ( this is obviously the speculation part of this post with regard to the neutron bombs capability to destroy electronic equipment) all the while Tomahawk cruise missiles were being launched from Arleigh-Burke class destroyer as well as the Ticonderoga class destroyers with F-18's flying from US super carriers in the Persian Gulf all hitting at the same time, all of Iraq's critical infrastructure (power generation, military etc...). 

So, when this situation is potentially applied to the Iran, and if the goal of the US ( Israel and the rest included, you guys know who they are) is to destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure, there really is no other alternative other then full out war since Iran will not just sit and let it's source of national energy and pride just be destroyed because other nations sad it can't have it due to "terrorism" and supposed genocidal ambitions ( Total destruction of Israel, I don't believe in this crap by the way lol). 

Based on what I have learned over the 5-6 years on IMF (Iranian military forum) Iran's air defense network is comprised of both western and indigenous systems that work in tandem it seems. There is the HAWK, zu-23-2, S-300, Talash 3, Herz 9, S-200, Sayyad missiles and the newly made Bavar-373 and many other home made defense systems. BUT and this is a vey big but, is it all enough to stop or deter an attack? Given the history of both US and Israel (these two countries are the only two I honestly see ever conducting an attack on Iranian soil for any reason) the attack will most likely be a saturated one that will be composed of air, land and sea multi-pronged strikes that will test many aspects of Iran's defense structure. The long range high altitude defense of the S-300 and Bavar 373 will be imperative in fending off many of the more potent enemy attacks while the medium to lower range defense systems will be used to clean up whatever is left that made it through. 

It's just that, as an American ( my parents are Iranian and I was born here in the states, I have a strong connection to Iran, so naturally I get worried for Iran's well-being since many of my family members and in Iran, actually most of my family members are in Iran )

I do think that Iran's current Air defense network is adequate and beyond deadly to any air force but will it be enough to stop the US and Israel in the future ( the US will most likely be more hawkish after Obama leaves ). 

As always to everyone here no matter what country or religion you are, stay healthy and safe.

Thank you very much for reading this post,

P.S: If you guys wanna add to this go right ahead and if I made some factual inaccuracies please feel free to correct me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zestokryl

BlueInGreen said:


> Based on what I have learned over the 5-6 years on IMF (Iranian military forum) Iran's air defense network is comprised of both western and indigenous systems that work in tandem it seems. There is the HAWK, zu-23-2, S-300, Talash 3, Herz 9, S-200, Sayyad missiles and the newly made Bavar-373 and many other home made defense systems. BUT and this is a vey big but, is it all enough to stop or deter an attack?




Question is pointless

Does the fact Bush administration refrained themselves from attacking Iran, tells you something

Iran is no Iraq or Libia, regardless of any military technicality. iran is whole different leaugue

Of course, Bush administration dropping the idea of agression against Iran is to some extent they own fault, since they were stuck i the iraqi mud, rendering them easy targets for iranian missiles

Iran has steady militarily improving track record. Iran is not arab country, which they crooked, treacherous, bask stabbing mentality. Iran is no prone to easy internal destabilization

Iran had much weaker air defence in 2007, but the american administration restricted theirs actions, only to the treats and satanization. Meaning its not AD that made the difference

Iran is tough nut to crack

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen said:


> As per usual the US and my fellow American citizens have completely discredited and by in large disregarded the potency of the this heavily upgraded and customized S-300 missile defense system which from what I know will be integrated into a nation wide Iranian multi-tier air defense network comprising of many different and equally potent systems all complementing each other in different ways.
> 
> But this is not in essence what I wanted to shed light upon in this post. What I want to present for discussion is a retrospective/holistic look on how the entire Iranian Air defense network stacks up to the US and Israel plus the PERSIAN gulf states in a potential attack (which by all indications is still very, very likely sorry to say) and how accurately we can assess the effectiveness of Iran's upgraded and very deadly air defense network.
> 
> First I would like to start off with every Americans point of reference, Iraq ( I am fully aware that Iran is not Iraq ). Many here in the US simply don't know or don't care about what factors went into the multiple defeats of Iraq and the final defeat of Saddam's military back in 2003. Most Americans would like to believe that there was some kind of military parity between the US and Iraq but the reality was Iraq was in COMPLETE shambles and disarray before the 2003 invasion, with the sanctions that contributed to the killing of over 500,000 Iraqi children and Saddam's stupid policies that lead to many in the military not wanting to fight for Iraq or for Saddam. The sanctions themselves completely destroyed Iraq's ability to acquire military equipment, so most of their Air craft were not at full fighting capacity and their air defense were simply not adequate enough to stop or deter any attack by the US air force and Navy what-so-ever. And probably one of the biggest issues at least when I look at it. Iran, due to the sanctions, was forced to arm itself while Iraq just relied on outside military equipment (big mistake for a nation at war, to not have an industrial base for fighting). So knowing this, my fellow Americans still like to believe that the US military can strike WITH IMPUNITY at any time it want's and completely omit any danger to its attacking force ( now I know that the Americans here are more aware and educated on the actual lethality of the US military and make no mistake the US is very lethal but to my fellow Americans you know exactly what I am talking about when I talk about the 'Murican pride and no one can beat us or defend themselves from us attitude).
> 
> When this it taken into account, the next thing to talk about is the actual attack on Iraq's infrastructure itself. This point that I will bring up will be my own assessment that is based on mostly fact but some speculations as well. It is well known that the US used the F-15, F-16, B-52's and B-2's and many other complementary air craft that provided air support, early warning and electronic war fare capabilities. But what I think most people don't mention is the speculated use of small scale nuclear or neutron weapons which worked to completely quell Iraq's existing defense network or whatever was left of it. These nuclear/neutron bombs are very deadly and completely destroy it's target and other electronic equipment around it ( this is obviously the speculation part of this post with regard to the neutron bombs capability to destroy electronic equipment) all the while Tomahawk cruise missiles were being launched from Arleigh-Burke class destroyer as well as the Ticonderoga class destroyers with F-18's flying from US super carriers in the Persian Gulf all hitting at the same time, all of Iraq's critical infrastructure (power generation, military etc...).
> 
> So, when this situation is potentially applied to the Iran, and if the goal of the US ( Israel and the rest included, you guys know who they are) is to destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure, there really is no other alternative other then full out war since Iran will not just sit and let it's source of national energy and pride just be destroyed because other nations sad it can't have it due to "terrorism" and supposed genocidal ambitions ( Total destruction of Israel, I don't believe in this crap by the way lol).
> 
> Based on what I have learned over the 5-6 years on IMF (Iranian military forum) Iran's air defense network is comprised of both western and indigenous systems that work in tandem it seems. There is the HAWK, zu-23-2, S-300, Talash 3, Herz 9, S-200, Sayyad missiles and the newly made Bavar-373 and many other home made defense systems. BUT and this is a vey big but, is it all enough to stop or deter an attack? Given the history of both US and Israel (these two countries are the only two I honestly see ever conducting an attack on Iranian soil for any reason) the attack will most likely be a saturated one that will be composed of air, land and sea multi-pronged strikes that will test many aspects of Iran's defense structure. The long range high altitude defense of the S-300 and Bavar 373 will be imperative in fending off many of the more potent enemy attacks while the medium to lower range defense systems will be used to clean up whatever is left that made it through.
> 
> It's just that, as an American ( my parents are Iranian and I was born here in the states, I have a strong connection to Iran, so naturally I get worried for Iran's well-being since many of my family members and in Iran, actually most of my family members are in Iran )
> 
> I do think that Iran's current Air defense network is adequate and beyond deadly to any air force but will it be enough to stop the US and Israel in the future ( the US will most likely be more hawkish after Obama leaves ).
> 
> As always to everyone here no matter what country or religion you are, stay healthy and safe.
> 
> Thank you very much for reading this post,
> 
> P.S: If you guys wanna add to this go right ahead and if I made some factual inaccuracies please feel free to correct me.


Thanks for your comment.

Please bear in mind that no Iranian (despite all the rhetoric from Iran military leaders, which is a normal behavior in any country to boost moral an deter the enemies) is under the delusion to think in a case of all out war between Iran and US, Iran will be the winner. Putting aside the technicality and capabilities of each side, it boils down to this: US is a 360 million strong nation (4.5 time more than that of Iran), with a land area 6 times that of Iran and an economy which is 45 times larger. These are the numbers that eventually define who will win in an actual war.

Imperial Japan made that mistake back in WWII. They were order of magnitude stronger in sea and air when compared to US after the Pearl Harbor attack so they thought they are stronger and they can keep it that way but what they didn't realize is that bigger population, economy and resources can easily translate to superior military might and/or number so just after two years, Japan fell behind because it was not able to replenish its lost units as fast as US could.

Back to Iran VS US case, it is the same situation. We may end up in a similar outcome like that of Veitnam war where in a war of attrition, eventually public pressure forces US to withdraw but at the same time we know we will lose all our infrastructure. Iranian are smart enough not to seek such an outcome even if they are announced winner of the war.

So Iran is never looking for an all out war scenario and its strategy is to make its opponents also think twice before they go down such a path. Iran's strategy is to increase the cost of any attack on Iran to the point that any potential enemy like US or Israel, opt for other means like diplomacy or even sanctions.

Going back to your question about Iran's AD system. I can assure you they are as accurate and deadly as you can get. After watching US previous wars eagerly, Iranians know that if they can ground or at least counter US airforce, then they have already raised the cost of any military option for US enough to prevent any attacks to begin with. Thus, AD has been Iran's top priority since almost 15 years ago. Iran established an independent division in its armed forces for AD, started with investing heavily on Radar design and production and at the same time increasing the range and accuracy of its AD missiles. Bavar 373's capacity are yet to be seen but they are already picking the fruit of their investment in Radars and early warning systems.

Here is a sample of how accurate and effective Iran's radars are. A couple of days ago, Iran's head of AD division announced activation of Iran's Nazir radar which is designed to detect drones, stealth and high flying objects. He said from now on, no drone or spy plane can enter Iran's air space without us knowing. Only a few days after that, Iran warned off a US drone, 20 miles off Iran border that was heading towards Iran from Afghanistan:







This is the screen of radar showing the incoming drone. As you can see all parameters of the object is recognized and displayed.

Here is the source that is in Persian:

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/624576/شناساسی-و-اخطار-قرارگاه-پدافند-به-پهپاد-رادارگریز-آمریکایی-سند

Iran says it was a stealth drone probably judging by its RCS. Look at the height of the drone: 137, it can be meters or most probably feet. So the radar was able to find an object as small as a drone flying only 41m (height of a ten story building) in a mountainous area like that of Afghanistan.

Everyone knows that detection and guidance is the toughest part of designing an effective AD missiles system. The above news and similar shows Iran already has been successful in designing potent radars. Designing the missile that can carry the warhead to the target, should be peanuts for a nation that can put satellites in the orbit.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## BlueInGreen

Thank you very much for your reply Arminkh, but still... The thought of Iran becoming a Vietnam for the US is just horrible... American troops walking in Tehran rapping the women killing the men and destroying thousands of years of culture and history that will be forever lost not to mention the loss of millions ( possibly tens of millions ) of Iranians who have been wrongly demonized by the West ( Zionist influenced of coursed ).

It truly is horrible to see what the US has become, a monster in sheep's clothing promising one thing but doing the exact opposite, not to mention the... See when your born here and you know of how the US military and US war machine operates, you begin to have feelings of despair because of the seemingly unstoppable nature of the US war machine. Defense contractors pushing for money and continuation of wars in order to sell weapons to who ever wants to spill blood for reasons that can be solved diplomatically.

5-6 years ago I was very pro-American, and I honestly had believed that US could do no wrong but these past years my eyes have opened to a greater world outside and that we here in the US do not have any right to dictate what goes on outside our borders. ( I do still love The US very, very much )

I just... I can't even begin to see Tehran in ruins from American/Israeli airstrikes... I have been there many times and it is one of this worlds hidden beauties, truly it is, the food, the handsome men and beyond gorgeous women ( not to mention the other places in Iran ). The innate Iranian trait for knowledge and scientific advances, the love of family, friends and religion ( for those Iranians who practice it ). All of it is admirable and beautiful and is an example to the rest of the world.

And yet all we hear in the west see is "Iran is bad, Iran is a devil worshipping country, Glass Iran, Kill all Iranians, Protect Israel and kill all Iranians".. This ignorance and disgusting arrogance kills me inside.

Why can't my fellow countrymen just accept other people and cultures and not compare everything to our own damn standards. And I know someone will say something like "Iran doesn't respect Israel's right of existence" but even that argument is dumb since Israel's are notorious for ethnocide and subjugation of Palestinians... Damn it... just damn... I am off topic aren't I...

To get back to what you said. I had honestly believed that Iran could somehow militarily beat the US but if the best case scenario is a war of attrition like Vietnam then... Well I guess we will just have to wait and see how the world events play out.

Sorry I am just ranting at this point lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen said:


> Thank you very much for your reply Arminkh, but still... The thought of Iran becoming a Vietnam for the US is just horrible... American troops walking in Tehran rapping the women killing the men and destroying thousands of years of culture and history that will be forever lost not to mention the loss of millions ( possibly tens of millions ) of Iranians who have been wrongly demonized by the West ( Zionist influenced of coursed ).
> 
> It truly is horrible to see what the US has become, a monster in sheep's clothing promising one thing but doing the exact opposite, not to mention the... See when your born here and you know of how the US military and US war machine operates, you begin to have feelings of despair because of the seemingly unstoppable nature of the US war machine. Defense contractors pushing for money and continuation of wars in order to sell weapons to who ever wants to spill blood for reasons that can be solved diplomatically.
> 
> 5-6 years ago I was very pro-American, and I honestly had believed that US could do no wrong but these past years my eyes have opened to a greater world outside and that we here in the US do not have any right to dictate what goes on outside our borders. ( I do still love The US very, very much )
> 
> I just... I can't even begin to see Tehran in ruins from American/Israeli airstrikes... I have been there many times and it is one of this worlds hidden beauties, truly it is, the food, the handsome men and beyond gorgeous women ( not to mention the other places in Iran ). The innate Iranian trait for knowledge and scientific advances, the love of family, friends and religion ( for those Iranians who practice it ). All of it is admirable and beautiful and is an example to the rest of the world.
> 
> And yet all we hear in the west see is "Iran is bad, Iran is a devil worshipping country, Glass Iran, Kill all Iranians, Protect Israel and kill all Iranians".. This ignorance and disgusting arrogance kills me inside.
> 
> Why can't my fellow countrymen just accept other people and cultures and not compare everything to our own damn standards. And I know someone will say something like "Iran doesn't respect Israel's right of existence" but even that argument is dumb since Israel's are notorious for ethnocide and subjugation of Palestinians... Damn it... just damn... I am off topic aren't I...
> 
> To get back to what you said. I had honestly believed that Iran could somehow militarily beat the US but if the best case scenario is a war of attrition like Vietnam then... Well I guess we will just have to wait and see how the world events play out.
> 
> Sorry I am just ranting at this point lol.


I wouldn't worry about that kinds of events anymore, besides Iran's achievements in military industry, Iran's current cooperation with Russia, its potential involvement in Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the fact that it is a threshold nuclear power (it doesn't take much for Iran to build its first nuclear warhead as it does have the knowledge and infrastructure), are all reasons for me to believe an all out war between US and Iran will never happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

@mike2000 is back Since you might be interested in Iranian development, what's your thought on this long range air defence developed by Iran? Iran is far more advanced than you think bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Today commander of air defence has confirmed Nazir radar has been activated. From what I keep hearing about this radar, apparently it is a very unique radar. Could it be a HF radar? They once said no other nation has such radar in service. What do you think @Arminkh?


----------



## SOHEIL

They don't even show it's shape !

It's a highly classified system...

State of the art...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Rukarl said:


> Today commander of air defence has confirmed Nazir radar has been activated. From what I keep hearing about this radar, apparently it is a very unique radar. Could it be a HF radar? They once said no other nation has such radar in service. What do you think @Arminkh?


This is all we know about Nazir radar:

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/461427/بهره‌برداری-از-رادارهای-برد-بلند-و-3-بعدی-قرارگاه-پدافند

But as @SOHEIL said, no picture or technical information is revealed yet but the news I mentioned above about discovering a drone 20 miles off border shows it works.


----------



## PeeD

The Nazir is on the top of a 3000m mountain. It would make no sense to place a HF OTH radar on that location. Likely is that it is something between L-UHF-VHF-band, large aperture, phased array radar. Mounted at 3000m such a line of sight system can use its electronic scanning, anti-cutter function and pencil beams to look down. Something like the Voronezh-M but only a friction of the size is a good candidate.


----------



## mohsen

Arminkh said:


> Thanks for your comment.
> 
> Please bear in mind that no Iranian (despite all the rhetoric from Iran military leaders, which is a normal behavior in any country to boost moral an deter the enemies) is under the delusion to think in a case of all out war between Iran and US, Iran will be the winner. Putting aside the technicality and capabilities of each side, it boils down to this: US is a 360 million strong nation (4.5 time more than that of Iran), with a land area 6 times that of Iran and an economy which is 45 times larger. These are the numbers that eventually define who will win in an actual war.
> 
> Imperial Japan made that mistake back in WWII. They were order of magnitude stronger in sea and air when compared to US after the Pearl Harbor attack so they thought they are stronger and they can keep it that way but what they didn't realize is that bigger population, economy and resources can easily translate to superior military might and/or number so just after two years, Japan fell behind because it was not able to replenish its lost units as fast as US could.
> 
> Back to Iran VS US case, it is the same situation. We may end up in a similar outcome like that of Veitnam war where in a war of attrition, eventually public pressure forces US to withdraw but at the same time we know we will lose all our infrastructure. Iranian are smart enough not to seek such an outcome even if they are announced winner of the war.
> 
> So Iran is never looking for an all out war scenario and its strategy is to make its opponents also think twice before they go down such a path. Iran's strategy is to increase the cost of any attack on Iran to the point that any potential enemy like US or Israel, opt for other means like diplomacy or even sanctions.
> 
> Going back to your question about Iran's AD system. I can assure you they are as accurate and deadly as you can get. After watching US previous wars eagerly, Iranians know that if they can ground or at least counter US airforce, then they have already raised the cost of any military option for US enough to prevent any attacks to begin with. Thus, AD has been Iran's top priority since almost 15 years ago. Iran established an independent division in its armed forces for AD, started with investing heavily on Radar design and production and at the same time increasing the range and accuracy of its AD missiles. Bavar 373's capacity are yet to be seen but they are already picking the fruit of their investment in Radars and early warning systems.
> 
> Here is a sample of how accurate and effective Iran's radars are. A couple of days ago, Iran's head of AD division announced activation of Iran's Nazir radar which is designed to detect drones, stealth and high flying objects. He said from now on, no drone or spy plane can enter Iran's air space without us knowing. Only a few days after that, Iran warned off a US drone, 20 miles off Iran border that was heading towards Iran from Afghanistan:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the screen of radar showing the incoming drone. As you can see all parameters of the object is recognized and displayed.
> 
> Here is the source that is in Persian:
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/624576/شناساسی-و-اخطار-قرارگاه-پدافند-به-پهپاد-رادارگریز-آمریکایی-سند
> 
> Iran says it was a stealth drone probably judging by its RCS. Look at the height of the drone: 137, it can be meters or most probably feet. So the radar was able to find an object as small as a drone flying only 41m (height of a ten story building) in a mountainous area like that of Afghanistan.
> 
> Everyone knows that detection and guidance is the toughest part of designing an effective AD missiles system. The above news and similar shows Iran already has been successful in designing potent radars. Designing the missile that can carry the warhead to the target, should be peanuts for a nation that can put satellites in the orbit.


I just wanted to point out that some people (Iranian or none Iranian) were in the delusion that Israel army can easily annihilate the Hizbollah, if I want to compare the numbers like you, it would be X VS XXXX, this is the result which un-delusional people like you predicted back in 2006.
Japan with one of the greatest Naval forces realized it half decade ago that their world's biggest warship is useless in that war, Americans destroyed it in an Asymmetric warfare. so we may have to teach you and Americans once more time .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> I just wanted to point out that some people (Iranian or none Iranian) were in the delusion that Israel army can easily annihilate the Hizbollah, if I want to compare the numbers like you, it would be X VS XXXX, this is the result which un-delusional people like you predicted back in 2006.
> Japan with one of the greatest Naval forces realized it half decade ago that their world's biggest warship is useless in that war, Americans destroyed it in an Asymmetric warfare. so we may have to teach you and Americans once more time .


There was two yamato class battleship the finished one destroyed when it was out gunned ridiculously ,there was another one that sanked easily because of a fatal mistake by Japanese. They sent it to open see before installing the door that separated its compartment from each other.


----------



## Rukarl

mohsen said:


> I just wanted to point out that some people (Iranian or none Iranian) were in the delusion that Israel army can easily annihilate the Hizbollah, if I want to compare the numbers like you, it would be X VS XXXX, this is the result which un-delusional people like you predicted back in 2006.
> Japan with one of the greatest Naval forces realized it half decade ago that their world's biggest warship is useless in that war, Americans destroyed it in an Asymmetric warfare. so we may have to teach you and Americans once more time .



He is not an enemy of Iran, go easy on him dude. Calm down.


----------



## mohsen

Rukarl said:


> He is not an enemy of Iran, go easy on him dude. Calm down.


we are friends. but I like to reply in the same style!


----------



## Rukarl

mohsen said:


> we are friends.
> but I like to reply in the same style!



You said teach "*you* and Americans". They guy already said he is not pro US policy etc. Chill out dude.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> I just wanted to point out that some people (Iranian or none Iranian) were in the delusion that Israel army can easily annihilate the Hizbollah, if I want to compare the numbers like you, it would be X VS XXXX, this is the result which un-delusional people like you predicted back in 2006.
> Japan with one of the greatest Naval forces realized it half decade ago that their world's biggest warship is useless in that war, Americans destroyed it in an Asymmetric warfare. so we may have to teach you and Americans once more time .


Yes Hezbollah defeated Israel but their infrastructure was destroyed while that of Israel was intact. You need to look at the results as a whole and don't even compare US to Israel. Yes you may destroy their fleet in Persian Gulf, then what? 

You are banking on the assumption that a significant blow to US fleet in Persian Gulf will make them accept the defeat and back off. What if they don't? In a case of an all out war, where both sides are determined to continue until the end, US is not going to back off just because it lost 10% of its naval power. Even more important, now they need to defend their superpower status that has been badly challenged by a country like Iran. So for them it is either lose their status and let any other country here and there challenge their power or they will make an example of Iran so that no one else would ever do the same. My bet is on the latter.

They will continue while their infrastructure is intact and their plants are running 24/7 to produce what their war machine needs while every singe missile or fighter of theirs that can get through our air defense will destroy a vital plant or infrastructure that we can't replace as fast as it is destroyed. Eventually there will come a day when Iran's production capacity is gone while that of US is intact.

Read the history and learn. Until the day that Iran doesn't have any viable means to threat US on its own mainland, asymmetric warfare can only increase the cost of attack for US, it won't change the outcome. Yes, we can defeat them at a war of attrition after all our infrastructure and cities are ruined but so what? 

Don't put me on the same side of US because I'm being logical. Sun Tzu more than 2500 years ago in his masterpiece "Art of War" said don't ever start a war that you can't win. 

Iran has done a great job in deterring US by increasing the cost of any attack so far. But Iran should not ever be fooled by current status quo and think it can win an all out war with US. Not yet.



Rukarl said:


> You said teach "*you* and Americans". They guy already said he is not pro US policy etc. Chill out dude.


It is ok. We have all been in this age. Full of emotion and neglecting the truth. War is won by people who are realistic and know their limits.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Rukarl said:


> You said teach "*you* and Americans". They guy already said he is not pro US policy etc. Chill out dude.


well, you misunderstood me. he learns by looking at their fate!


----------



## mohsen

Arminkh said:


> Yes Hezbollah defeated Israel but their infrastructure was destroyed while that of Israel was intact. You need to look at the results as a whole and don't even compare US to Israel. Yes you may destroy their fleet in Persian Gulf, then what?
> 
> You are banking on the assumption that a significant blow to US fleet in Persian Gulf will make them accept the defeat and back off. What if they don't? In a case of an all out war, where both sides are determined to continue until the end, US is not going to back off just because it lost 10% of its naval power. Even more important, now they need to defend their superpower status that has been badly challenged by a country like Iran. So for them it is either lose their status and let any other country here and there challenge their power or they will make an example of Iran so that no one else would ever do the same. My bet is on the latter.
> 
> They will continue while their infrastructure is intact and their plants are running 24/7 to produce what their war machine needs while every singe missile or fighter of theirs that can get through our air defense will destroy a vital plant or infrastructure that we can't replace as fast as it is destroyed. Eventually there will come a day when Iran's production capacity is gone while that of US is intact.
> 
> Read the history and learn. Until the day that Iran doesn't have any viable means to threat US on its own mainland, asymmetric warfare can only increase the cost of attack for US, it won't change the outcome. Yes, we can defeat them at a war of attrition after all our infrastructure and cities are ruined but so what?
> 
> Don't put me on the same side of US because I'm being logical. Sun Tzu more than 2500 years ago in his masterpiece "Art of War" said don't ever start a war that you can't win.
> 
> Iran has done a great job in deterring US by increasing the cost of any attack so far. But Iran should not ever be fooled by current status quo and think it can win an all out war with US. Not yet.


well, escalating the situation is the reason that many analysis consider attack on Iran the start of world war III. but let's keep it to ourself (Iran vs America).
Those aircrafts which are supposed to bombard us, where they are going to land and take off from? we will bombard their bases with our missiles, how many missiles we need, you name the number!

what will happen to Americans economy if we cut their passage through strait of Hormuz? the economy already in 19 trillion dollars debt. and about their army, they can bring another 10% for us to destroy! and from where? their other fleets around the world? doesn't it means their hegemony ended in that part? each aircraft carrier costs about $5b, what's the cost(missile) to drown it? how much time it takes to build another carrier?
it doesn't matter what, just like what happened to Israelis, in the end of that war, there will be no floating American ship in the Persian gulf, sea of Oman and faraway in the Indian ocean! and they can forget the strait of Hormuz forever.
That's the new world order!

War is destructive, it's the nature of war. but sometimes you have to pay the price. yet, today, a decade after Israel invasion, is Lebanon living in ruins? did you say Hezbollah defeated Israel because of destroying more infrastructure?! then what about the hegemony which you talked about?! do you know that before that war Israel army was considered the forth powerful army in the world? now defeated by an armed *group*??? with no air defense, no airforce, no armored vessel light or heavy, no naval forces! then what about defending the forth powerful army statues?????
the answer: It joined the history!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

Arminkh said:


> Yes Hezbollah defeated Israel but their infrastructure was destroyed while that of Israel was intact. You need to look at the results as a whole and don't even compare US to Israel. Yes you may destroy their fleet in Persian Gulf, then what?
> 
> You are banking on the assumption that a significant blow to US fleet in Persian Gulf will make them accept the defeat and back off. What if they don't? In a case of an all out war, where both sides are determined to continue until the end, US is not going to back off just because it lost 10% of its naval power. Even more important, now they need to defend their superpower status that has been badly challenged by a country like Iran. So for them it is either lose their status and let any other country here and there challenge their power or they will make an example of Iran so that no one else would ever do the same. My bet is on the latter.
> 
> They will continue while their infrastructure is intact and their plants are running 24/7 to produce what their war machine needs while every singe missile or fighter of theirs that can get through our air defense will destroy a vital plant or infrastructure that we can't replace as fast as it is destroyed. Eventually there will come a day when Iran's production capacity is gone while that of US is intact.
> 
> Read the history and learn. Until the day that Iran doesn't have any viable means to threat US on its own mainland, asymmetric warfare can only increase the cost of attack for US, it won't change the outcome. Yes, we can defeat them at a war of attrition after all our infrastructure and cities are ruined but so what?
> 
> Don't put me on the same side of US because I'm being logical. Sun Tzu more than 2500 years ago in his masterpiece "Art of War" said don't ever start a war that you can't win.
> 
> Iran has done a great job in deterring US by increasing the cost of any attack so far. But Iran should not ever be fooled by current status quo and think it can win an all out war with US. Not yet.
> 
> 
> It is ok. We have all been in this age. Full of emotion and neglecting the truth. War is won by people who are realistic and know their limits.


US has no chance against Iran as long as we have thousands of missles and '15 million manpower' in case of war. even aliens can't defeat us. be realistic.

Futhermore any confilict between Iran and the US will turn Iranian peaceful nuclear program into military version and it would be so bad for the yanks and europeans considering that we have ICBMs that can land in the US. Ayatollah Khamenei in his speeches says: the time that imperial powers attack a country and run away is over, if anyone do something wrong against Iran they will pay it equally in their own country (the US).


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> well, escalating the situation is the reason that many analysis consider attack on Iran the start of world war III. but let's keep it to ourself (Iran vs America).
> Those aircrafts which are supposed to bombard us, where they are going to land and take off from? we will bombard their bases with our missiles, how many missiles we need, you name the number!



From their bases in Garcia Island, Europe and even US. B52 range is around 14,000 km (more than the distance between New York and central Iran and that's without counting in the range of stand off weapons they carry. They can take off from US east coast and fire their missiles when they are above Mediterranean sea and we can't do anything about it but hoping our Bavar system can shoot down all of their cruise and glider bombs with 100% accuracy.

From their submarines in Mediterranean, red and Oman sea. We still don't have any weapon that can hit a submerged submarine at that distance. 


mohsen said:


> what will happen to Americans economy if we cut their passage through strait of Hormuz? the economy already in 19 trillion dollars debt. and about their army, they can bring another 10% for us to destroy! and from where? their other fleets around the world? doesn't it means their hegemony ended in that part? each aircraft carrier costs about $5b, what's the cost(missile) to drown it? how much time it takes to build another carrier?
> it doesn't matter what, just like what happened to Israelis, in the end of that war, there will be no floating American ship in the Persian gulf, sea of Oman and faraway in the Indian ocean! and they can forget the strait of Hormuz forever.
> That's the new world order!



I'm afraid nothing major. Canada oil sand can easily replace any oil from middle east. And don't forget Russia would gladly step up and sell its oil at premium price.

They don't need to bring their fleet in. The keep shooting their missiles at us from distance until our refineries, power plants, airports, military bases, radars, power grids and .... are gone and then they can bring their fleet close.

And yes, It will be costly. But on the other hand all that money spent on replacing the lost units will actually help their economy the same way it did back in WWII.



mohsen said:


> War is destructive, it's the nature of war. but sometimes you have to pay the price. yet, today, a decade after Israel invasion, is Lebanon living in ruins? did you say Hezbollah defeated Israel because of destroying more infrastructure?! then what about the hegemony which you talked about?! do you know that before that war Israel army was considered the forth powerful army in the world? now defeated by an armed *group*??? with no air defense, no airforce, no armored vessel light or heavy, no naval forces! then what about defending the forth powerful army statues?????
> the answer: It joined the history!



No I said Lebanon lost more than Israel in terms of infrastructure.

It depends how you define cost? A country that depends on help from KSA or even Iran to arm its military, IS IN RUINS. Lebanon and Hezbollah are standing because we want them to. If it was not because of our help, they wouldn't be where they are. Their infrastructure has no supportive role in their war with Israel because they are getting their arms from Iran or Syria. So they can afford to lose their infrastructure and still continue to fight.

In case of Iran, who will supply us with arms when our production capacity is gone? Russia? China? Do we really want to go that cheap to fight a proxy war for China and Russia just to prove we can defeat US? Yes lose 60 years of development and millions of soul to break US image only for others to pick the fruit because we will be in such a mess after the war that we probably won't be standing straight for decades.

No country can defeat another country in a war without having a means to attack its infrastructure and kill its production capacity. Germany and Japan lost the war exactly because of the same reason. Their plants and infrastructure were being destroyed in air raids while those of Allied forces were sitting intact in Canada and US. Do you have any doubt that Germany would have won the war if there weren't any US or Canada to produce what allies needed?



2800 said:


> US has no chance against Iran as long as we have thousands of missles and '15 million manpower' in case of war. even aliens can't defeat us. be realistic.
> 
> Futhermore any confilict between Iran and the US will turn Iranian peaceful nuclear program into military version and it would be so bad for the yanks and europeans considering that we have ICBMs that can land in the US. Ayatollah Khamenei in his speeches says: the time that imperial powers attack a country and run away is over, if anyone do something wrong against Iran they will pay it equally in their own country (the US).


We are talking about an all out war. Deterrence is another issue.

US population is 360 million. They can draft 30 or hell even equal to Iran's population (80 million) if they need to. I'm sure you can find 80 million qualified male in a 360 million nation if we can get 15 million soldiers in an 80 million nation.


----------



## Aramagedon

Arminkh said:


> From their bases in Garcia Island, Europe and even US. B52 range is around 14,000 km (more than the distance between New York and central Iran and that's without counting in the range of stand off weapons they carry. They can take off from US east coast and fire their missiles when they are above Mediterranean sea and we can't do anything about it but hoping our Bavar system can shoot down all of their cruise and glider bombs with 100% accuracy.
> 
> From their submarines in Mediterranean, red and Oman sea. We still don't have any weapon that can hit a submerged submarine at that distance.
> 
> 
> I'm afraid nothing major. Canada oil sand can easily replace any oil from middle east. And don't forget Russia would gladly step up and sell its oil at premium price.
> 
> They don't need to bring their fleet in. The keep shooting their missiles at us from distance until our refineries, power plants, airports, military bases, radars, power grids and .... are gone and then they can bring their fleet close.
> 
> And yes, It will be costly. But on the other hand all that money spent on replacing the lost units will actually help their economy the same way it did back in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> No I said Lebanon lost more than Israel in terms of infrastructure.
> 
> It depends how you define cost? A country that depends on help from KSA or even Iran to arm its military, IS IN RUINS. Lebanon and Hezbollah are standing because we want them to. If it was not because of our help, they wouldn't be where they are. Their infrastructure has no supportive role in their war with Israel because they are getting their arms from Iran or Syria. So they can afford to lose their infrastructure and still continue to fight.
> 
> In case of Iran, who will supply us with arms when our production capacity is gone? Russia? China? Do we really want to go that cheap to fight a proxy war for China and Russia just to prove we can defeat US? Yes lose 60 years of development and millions of soul to break US image only for others to pick the fruit because we will be in such a mess after the war that we probably won't be standing straight for decades.
> 
> No country can defeat another country in a war without having a means to attack its infrastructure and kill its production capacity. Germany and Japan lost the war exactly because of the same reason. Their plants and infrastructure were being destroyed in air raids while those of Allied forces were sitting intact in Canada and US. Do you have any doubt that Germany would have won the war if there weren't any US or Canada to produce what allies needed?
> 
> 
> We are talking about an all out war. Deterrence is another issue.
> 
> US population is 360 million. They can draft 30 or hell even equal to Iran's population (80 million) if they need to. I'm sure you can find 80 million qualified male in a 360 million nation if we can get 15 million soldiers in an 80 million nation.


Mate you have forgotten [the homosexual] American soldiers are even afraid of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq let alone Iran. in addition American soldiers fight for money and if the US begin a war it will cost billions $$$ for them but Iranian soldiers fight to save their country.


----------



## Arminkh

2800 said:


> Mate you have forgotten [the homosexual] American soldiers are even afraid of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq let alone Iran. in addition American soldiers fight for money and if the US begin a war it will cost billions $$$ for them but Iranian soldiers fight to save their country.


That's a very shortsighted view of ones enemy. 

Let's leave it here.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aramagedon

Arminkh said:


> That's a very shortsighted view of ones enemy.
> 
> Let's leave it here.


It was a time Americans and israelis threatened Iran to war for many times and some so called Iran lover patriots like yourself wanted government to stop nuclear programs and they said US is very strong, dangerous etc.....

But Iranians didn't stop enrichmenting uranium even for one day let alone stop nuclear programs even for a while! despite Americans were at our right and left side in Iraq and Afghanistan. if Iranians didn't trust in themselves they would stop nuclear programs after five American threats at most!


----------



## Rukarl

*Nazir radar's control center*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Rukarl said:


> *Nazir radar's control center*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *


Sounds familiar?!







This is almost covering half of Afghanistan's area:






Yup, it was Nazir that detected that incoming drone!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Arminkh said:


> Sounds familiar?!
> 
> View attachment 330846
> 
> 
> This is almost covering half of Afghanistan's area:
> 
> View attachment 330847
> 
> 
> Yup, it was Nazir that detected that incoming drone!



Good eyes bro, I did not look at in that much detail.

I think the next step should be to do our best to make mobile versions of nazir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Rukarl said:


> Good eyes bro, I did not look at in that much detail.
> 
> I think the next step should be to do our best to make mobile versions of nazir.


We may already have.

Now I'm making a very wild guess here but judging by where the radar is located, it seem to be between Tabas and Khor. 

Even though it is said it has been deployed in an area that had 3000m hight (above sea? what is the reference point here). That area is covered with a lot of mountains which makes it almost impossible to detect incoming drones that usually fly at low altitude.

So it may have some type of OTH capacity or even be a hybrid radar. And maybe that's why they don't even show how it looks as it may be a new concept.


----------



## Tanker88

Iran has not deployed the S-300 air defense system around nuclear facility as claimed

http://echelon-defense.com/2016/09/...se-system-around-nuclear-facility-as-claimed/


----------



## mohsen

Tanker88 said:


> Iran has not deployed the S-300 air defense system around nuclear facility as claimed
> 
> http://echelon-defense.com/2016/09/...se-system-around-nuclear-facility-as-claimed/


did that smart arse really expected us to share the real location of the system with them???!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The SC

Arminkh said:


> From their bases in Garcia Island, Europe and even US. B52 range is around 14,000 km (more than the distance between New York and central Iran and that's without counting in the range of stand off weapons they carry. They can take off from US east coast and fire their missiles when they are above Mediterranean sea and we can't do anything about it but hoping our Bavar system can shoot down all of their cruise and glider bombs with 100% accuracy.
> 
> From their submarines in Mediterranean, red and Oman sea. We still don't have any weapon that can hit a submerged submarine at that distance.
> 
> 
> I'm afraid nothing major. Canada oil sand can easily replace any oil from middle east. And don't forget Russia would gladly step up and sell its oil at premium price.
> 
> They don't need to bring their fleet in. The keep shooting their missiles at us from distance until our refineries, power plants, airports, military bases, radars, power grids and .... are gone and then they can bring their fleet close.
> 
> And yes, It will be costly. But on the other hand all that money spent on replacing the lost units will actually help their economy the same way it did back in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> No I said Lebanon lost more than Israel in terms of infrastructure.
> 
> It depends how you define cost? A country that depends on help from KSA or even Iran to arm its military, IS IN RUINS. Lebanon and Hezbollah are standing because we want them to. If it was not because of our help, they wouldn't be where they are. Their infrastructure has no supportive role in their war with Israel because they are getting their arms from Iran or Syria. So they can afford to lose their infrastructure and still continue to fight.
> 
> In case of Iran, who will supply us with arms when our production capacity is gone? Russia? China? Do we really want to go that cheap to fight a proxy war for China and Russia just to prove we can defeat US? Yes lose 60 years of development and millions of soul to break US image only for others to pick the fruit because we will be in such a mess after the war that we probably won't be standing straight for decades.
> 
> No country can defeat another country in a war without having a means to attack its infrastructure and kill its production capacity. Germany and Japan lost the war exactly because of the same reason. Their plants and infrastructure were being destroyed in air raids while those of Allied forces were sitting intact in Canada and US. Do you have any doubt that Germany would have won the war if there weren't any US or Canada to produce what allies needed?
> 
> 
> We are talking about an all out war. Deterrence is another issue.
> 
> US population is 360 million. They can draft 30 or hell even equal to Iran's population (80 million) if they need to. I'm sure you can find 80 million qualified male in a 360 million nation if we can get 15 million soldiers in an 80 million nation.


While there are some logical points in you answers above, there are also some mistakes.. let me explain by starting from the US can bomb Iran with missiles from a distancen yes in theory it is feasible but in practice those missiles will have to cross many nations skies and the US needs their approval (not in case of Ballistic missiles though, but that is another game all together), that puts at least the neighboring coutries of Iran in jeopardy from Iranian missie retaliation..
The second point has to do with mobilization of troops, The US in contrast to Iran, will have to send its troops for a 10 000 km journey, in the Gulf war's desert storm, they've sent around 
350 000 with a cost of almost a trillion $ and they had also bases and a huge coalition of more than 50 countries to help them out..So sending even 500 000 men to no nearby base is more than impossible for the US in practical terms.. only in a world war scenario where the US is attacked, they might mobilize 2, 3 million men and maybe a bit more, if they have a coalition again where to send them to, otherwise they will have to use their nukes to compensate..But the war scenario with Iran (gone by!), they could do nothing much, because of no new coalition for them, and no neighbor of Iran was totally sure that Iran didn't have a Nuclear weapon or was able to make one in a few weeks time, like it was assumed by the latest US estimates.. while at the same time it was much easier for Iran to mobilize millions of its citizens (in case of possible invasion), because the war was to be local to them and in the immediate vicinity, without the need like for the US to displace millions of troops for more than 10 000 km away from their home!!!



Arminkh said:


> Thanks for your comment.
> 
> Please bear in mind that no Iranian (despite all the rhetoric from Iran military leaders, which is a normal behavior in any country to boost moral an deter the enemies) is under the delusion to think in a case of all out war between Iran and US, Iran will be the winner. Putting aside the technicality and capabilities of each side, it boils down to this: US is a 360 million strong nation (4.5 time more than that of Iran), with a land area 6 times that of Iran and an economy which is 45 times larger. These are the numbers that eventually define who will win in an actual war.
> 
> Imperial Japan made that mistake back in WWII. They were order of magnitude stronger in sea and air when compared to US after the Pearl Harbor attack so they thought they are stronger and they can keep it that way but what they didn't realize is that bigger population, economy and resources can easily translate to superior military might and/or number so just after two years, Japan fell behind because it was not able to replenish its lost units as fast as US could.
> 
> Back to Iran VS US case, it is the same situation. We may end up in a similar outcome like that of Veitnam war where in a war of attrition, eventually public pressure forces US to withdraw but at the same time we know we will lose all our infrastructure. Iranian are smart enough not to seek such an outcome even if they are announced winner of the war.
> 
> So Iran is never looking for an all out war scenario and its strategy is to make its opponents also think twice before they go down such a path. Iran's strategy is to increase the cost of any attack on Iran to the point that any potential enemy like US or Israel, opt for other means like diplomacy or even sanctions.
> 
> Going back to your question about Iran's AD system. I can assure you they are as accurate and deadly as you can get. After watching US previous wars eagerly, Iranians know that if they can ground or at least counter US airforce, then they have already raised the cost of any military option for US enough to prevent any attacks to begin with. Thus, AD has been Iran's top priority since almost 15 years ago. Iran established an independent division in its armed forces for AD, started with investing heavily on Radar design and production and at the same time increasing the range and accuracy of its AD missiles. Bavar 373's capacity are yet to be seen but they are already picking the fruit of their investment in Radars and early warning systems.
> 
> Here is a sample of how accurate and effective Iran's radars are. A couple of days ago, Iran's head of AD division announced activation of Iran's Nazir radar which is designed to detect drones, stealth and high flying objects. He said from now on, no drone or spy plane can enter Iran's air space without us knowing. Only a few days after that, Iran warned off a US drone, 20 miles off Iran border that was heading towards Iran from Afghanistan:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the screen of radar showing the incoming drone. As you can see all parameters of the object is recognized and displayed.
> 
> Here is the source that is in Persian:
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/624576/شناساسی-و-اخطار-قرارگاه-پدافند-به-پهپاد-رادارگریز-آمریکایی-سند
> 
> Iran says it was a stealth drone probably judging by its RCS. Look at the height of the drone: 137, it can be meters or most probably feet. So the radar was able to find an object as small as a drone flying only 41m (height of a ten story building) in a mountainous area like that of Afghanistan.
> 
> Everyone knows that detection and guidance is the toughest part of designing an effective AD missiles system. The above news and similar shows Iran already has been successful in designing potent radars. Designing the missile that can carry the warhead to the target, should be peanuts for a nation that can put satellites in the orbit.


Totally true statement,, it is deterrent at its best (without nukes)
Most probably in meters, because that the international system of measurement (feet is British, hence its use in Canada and the US, but now in parllel wit the International System)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> We may already have.
> 
> Now I'm making a very wild guess here but judging by where the radar is located, it seem to be between Tabas and Khor.
> 
> Even though it is said it has been deployed in an area that had 3000m hight (above sea? what is the reference point here). That area is covered with a lot of mountains which makes it almost impossible to detect incoming drones that usually fly at low altitude.
> 
> So it may have some type of OTH capacity or even be a hybrid radar. And maybe that's why they don't even show how it looks as it may be a new concept.


I tried to find the location of radar too but I dunno that it's mountainous or not .... it ain't precise but at least gives a clue .. probably in Tabas as you mentioned

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

raptor22 said:


> I dunno that it's mountainous or not

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

well if thats the area then yes its mountainous , but are they 3km high,you can beat me .
https://www.google.de/maps/place/Ta...95b2c70aa129497!8m2!3d33.6033455!4d56.9323531

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


>



Then it is mountainous:

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> Then it is mountainous:
> 
> View attachment 331110


Nice work man!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> I hope member yavar will soon say something about Bavar-373


brother at this moment time i am looking for forum to join .

since the Russia has delivered S300 PUMx the the orgival bavar 373 has been modified .

the missile and system below which is original bavar project NOT Sayyad 3 missile or Talash 3 system

















it is no longer wise to waste money to get to same thing so rather than canceling project scraping it it been modified to get to pass PUM..... technology barrier because no long time the PUM2 technology barrier has been over come .
that one main reason that Russia has delivered PUM2 to us because there full knowledge we Iran is and Russian made sure just give us as much we over come .
same goes with T90 thank offer which Russia has offered Iran . becuase they know very well how far we have over come so they make offer in same level not higher technology


here is video that *Gen Esmaeili talk about Tlash system ( Talash 3 system is not been annuce i dont mean Talash 2 with Sayyad 2 missile )*





this system which been show now it been called Bavar 373 ............... the orginal bavar project still ...................


----------



## Rukarl

I believe bavar-373 will compose of only one missile, which is the sayyad-4.
It will be used in conjunction with the Talash long range air defence which is composed of sayyad-2 and 3.

I really don't see Bavar-373 having 2 other missiles, it will be just a waste of resources.


----------



## HadiHot8

Are their any new pictures?


----------



## Rukarl

HadiHot8 said:


> Are their any new pictures?



Sadly,no.


----------



## Hassan Guy

Can Pakistan make an air defence system?


----------



## yavar

Rukarl said:


> I believe bavar-373 will compose of only one missile,


ویژگی های سامانه باور 373

به دلیل برخی از ملاحظات اطلاعات زیادی در رابطه با سامانه ی باور ۳۷۳ فاش نشده است، ولی براساس خبرهای منتشر شده برخی از ویژگی های این سامانه به شرح زیر است:

این سامانه موشکی همانند اس 300 ( s300) توانایی رهگیری و درگیری با اهداف متنوع را دارد بنابراین سامانه باور ۳۷۳ علاوه بر قابلیت درگیری با اهداف ایرودینامیکی (هواپیماها) توانایی درگیری با موشک های بالستیک، کروز و هم چنین سایر موشک ها را دارد.

در باور 373 قابلیت درگیری با اهداف با سطح مقطع راداری پایین مورد توجه قرار گرفته است.

این سامانه موشکی که تمام اجزاء آن از رادار گرفته تا موشک در بخش های نظامی و دانشگاهی کشور انجام شده است در آن از ۲ نوع یا ۳ نوع موشک در برد ها و لایه های مختلف برای پوشش بهتر ارتفاعات استفاده می شود.

http://www.mizanonline.ir/fa/news/7...ی-s300-شگفتی-روس‌ها-از-پیشرفت-موشکی-ایران-عکس


----------



## Rukarl

yavar said:


> ویژگی های سامانه باور 373
> 
> به دلیل برخی از ملاحظات اطلاعات زیادی در رابطه با سامانه ی باور ۳۷۳ فاش نشده است، ولی براساس خبرهای منتشر شده برخی از ویژگی های این سامانه به شرح زیر است:
> 
> این سامانه موشکی همانند اس 300 ( s300) توانایی رهگیری و درگیری با اهداف متنوع را دارد بنابراین سامانه باور ۳۷۳ علاوه بر قابلیت درگیری با اهداف ایرودینامیکی (هواپیماها) توانایی درگیری با موشک های بالستیک، کروز و هم چنین سایر موشک ها را دارد.
> 
> در باور 373 قابلیت درگیری با اهداف با سطح مقطع راداری پایین مورد توجه قرار گرفته است.
> 
> این سامانه موشکی که تمام اجزاء آن از رادار گرفته تا موشک در بخش های نظامی و دانشگاهی کشور انجام شده است در آن از ۲ نوع یا ۳ نوع موشک در برد ها و لایه های مختلف برای پوشش بهتر ارتفاعات استفاده می شود.
> 
> http://www.mizanonline.ir/fa/news/74737/سامانه-موشکی-باور-373-جایگزین-ایرانی-s300-شگفتی-روس‌ها-از-پیشرفت-موشکی-ایران-عکس



Dadash, I still think these two other missile are the sayyad-2 and 3. I think they have linked Bavar with Talash. I just don't see why they would make 2 new missiles. What for?
Anyway best thing to do is just wait for new information. If we see new missiles, then we know I am wrong.



Hassan Guy said:


> Can Pakistan make an air defence system?



What does that have to do with this thread?
To answer your question, Pakistan has not made any air defence systems (minus manpads) .However, you're purchasing Chinese system however such as Hq-7 and maybe even the Hq-9/16. But lets not take this thread off track.


----------



## Samak

Hassan Guy said:


> Can Pakistan make an air defence system?


yes , Pakistan can but need money , patient and right guys to do the job ...


----------



## SOHEIL

Samak said:


> yes , Pakistan can but need money , patient and right guys to do the job ...



Every country with money , patient and right guys can do the job !

If they don't ... means they can't !!!

Such projects also need a systematic management !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## rayanBis123456789

SOHEIL said:


> Every country with money , patient and right guys can do the job !
> 
> If they don't ... means they can't !!!
> 
> Such projects also need a systematic management !




A french military expert, close to NATO said in 2011, on france 24

France 24 journalist question 1 : "could iran build such a system ( a long range SAM )"

The military analyst :" YES, a big country with scientifics capability can do it"

France 24 journalist question 2 :" as effective as RUSSIAN s300?"

The military analyst :" He ( iran ) doesn't need, 50% as affective as S-300 is enough, it could then inffic such haevy cost that it will deterre any attacker"

PURE AND SIMPLE

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rukarl

rayanBis123456789 said:


> A french military expert, close to NATO said in 2011, on france 2.
> 
> France 24 journalist question 1 : "could iran build such a system ( a long range SAM )"
> 
> The military analyst :" YES, a big country with scientifics capability can do it"
> 
> France 24 journalist question 2 :" as effective as RUSSIAN s300?"
> 
> The military analyst :" He ( iran ) doesn't need, 50% as affective as S-300 is enough, it could then inffic such haevy cost that it will deterre any attacker"
> 
> PURE AND SIMPLE



I think I remember seeing that interview. How time flies man! It's been 5 years already.


----------



## rayanBis123456789

Rukarl said:


> I think I remember seeing that interview. How time flies man! It's been 5 years already.




Exactly 6 years or so later iranians livd up their promise !!!!



SOHEIL said:


> We need customers not suppliers !
> 
> But interested to know , what exactly pakistan can offer ?



Nuclear cooperation !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

rayanBis123456789 said:


> Nuclear cooperation !


really.


----------



## SOHEIL

yavar said:


> really.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rayanBis123456789

SOHEIL said:


>


????


----------



## SOHEIL

rayanBis123456789 said:


> ????



Impossible


----------



## OldTwilight

Last post of this topic :

Really

????
Impossible


What are you saying ?!


----------



## SOHEIL

OldTwilight said:


> Last post of this topic :
> 
> Really
> 
> ????
> Impossible
> 
> 
> What are you saying ?!



Are you our twilight guy?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

SOHEIL said:


> Are you our twilight guy?


I am ....


----------



## raptor22

Rukarl said:


> Today we saw this system revealed in parade:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This could be the system we seen many years ago:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's been described as being able to hot very mobile targets.
> It seems this is perfect SAM to give to our regional allies like Hezbollah.



Where is the radar of this system?


----------



## Rukarl

raptor22 said:


> Where is the radar of this system?



No need for a specific radar. Could be link to any radar if need be.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Upgraded ra'ad air defence:






Top = new, bottom = old.
Seems its radar is ready and it seems to be a high power radar!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

*S-300 PMU2








B-373 with cover ???







*
Camerawork of cameramen was just catastrophic, amateurs...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Draco.IMF said:


> *B-373 with cover ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Camerawork of cameramen was just catastrophic, amateurs...



That's just a mobile command and control centre. Part of air defences, not necessary specific for Bavar.
Bavar was not shown in this parade.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radar for Talash air defence:











They could have done a better job with its paint job...

Talash launch canister. This one is 2 instead of 4.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rukarl

Another radar, this one seems to be the Bashir radar for ra'ad air defence:







Here is the pics of bashir we seen in 2014:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Vincent Alvares

Damn! So, how many Air Defense system Iran has? That's already 4-5 system right there!



Vincent Alvares said:


> Damn! So, how many Air Defense system Iran has? That's already 4-5 system right there!


And why don't you guys put some of those systems in Syria? They could really use some Anti-Aircraft system.



Vincent Alvares said:


> Damn! So, how many Air Defense system Iran has? That's already 4-5 system right there!
> 
> 
> And why don't you guys put some of those systems in Syria? They could really use some Anti-Aircraft system.


I was hoping to get a good glance of Complete Bavar-373 system! bummer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Vincent Alvares said:


> Damn! So, how many Air Defense system Iran has? That's already 4-5 system right there!
> 
> 
> And why don't you guys put some of those systems in Syria? They could really use some Anti-Aircraft system.
> 
> 
> I was hoping to get a good glance of Complete Bavar-373 system! bummer.



 Well bro airdefence is Iran's top prioty so it's no suprise we have so many projects. But we can split them (generally speaking) into two groups: IRGC projects and Katam al binya air defence base projects.

Katam al binya air defence base has these indigenous projects that we know of:

Bavar-373 (range >200km) consisting of sayyad-4 missiles or perhaps other missiles too.
Talash air defence (range 60-200km)consisting of sayyad 2 and 3 missiles.

IRGC has:
Ra'ad which consist of 3rd of khordad and Tabas. They use medium ranged high altitude Taer missiles. 50km range and 25km altitude.There are different versions of Taer missiles.

They are also working on a 100km and 200km ranged missiles of which the sadid-630 may be one of them.

Now these units are not isolated. The IRGC works with Katam al binya air defence base.

And of course Iran has countless indigenously designed radars like OTH ghadir, sepehr, kayhan. And so many others radars like Nazir etc.

So we can say, Iran's integrated air defence is truly of the best in the world without a doubt.



Vincent Alvares said:


> I was hoping to get a good glance of Complete Bavar-373 system! bummer.



Bavar-373 will start mass production next year. Next year's parade you'll see it for sure. Don't worry, we're all eagerly waiting its final arrival

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vincent Alvares

Rukarl said:


> Well bro airdefence is Iran's top prioty so it's no suprise we have so many projects. But we can split them (generally speaking) into two groups: IRGC projects and Katam al binya air defence base projects.
> 
> Katam al binya air defence base has these indigenous projects that we know of:
> 
> Bavar-373 (range >200km) consisting of sayyad-4 missiles or perhaps other missiles too.
> Talash air defence (range 60-200km)consisting of sayyad 2 and 3 missiles.
> 
> IRGC has:
> Ra'ad which consist of 3rd of khordad and Tabas. They use medium ranged high altitude Taer missiles. 50km range and 25km altitude.There are different versions of Taer missiles.
> 
> They are also working on a 100km and 200km ranged missiles of which the sadid-630 may be one of them.
> 
> Now these units are not isolated. The IRGC works with Katam al binya air defence base.
> 
> And of course Iran has countless indigenously designed radars like OTH ghadir, sepehr, kayhan. And so many others radars like Nazir etc.
> 
> So we can say, Iran's integrated air defence is truly of the best in the world without a doubt.
> 
> 
> 
> Bavar-373 will start mass production next year. Next year's parade you'll see it for sure. Don't worry, we're all eagerly waiting its final arrival


Thanks for that. I was going through Wiki. to do some catch-up ..didn't help much.
If I figured it out correctly you guys have(right now) 
Long range AD: S-200(if you consider it as long range though!),S-300 PMU2 and upcoming Bavar-373
Mid range: Talash,Raad
Short range: Mersad
Anything missing?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Vincent Alvares said:


> Thanks for that. I was going through Wiki. to do some catch-up ..didn't help much.
> If I figured it out correctly you guys have(right now)
> Long range AD: S-200(if you consider it as long range though!),S-300 PMU2 and upcoming Bavar-373
> Mid range: Talash,Raad
> Short range: Mersad
> Anything missing?



Talash is a long range air defence which also has a medium range missile sayyad-2. However its sayyad-3 missile is long ranged.
Mersad is a medium ranged system. It uses medium ranged shalamche (heavily upgraded HAWK) missile with range of 60km.
S-200 is frankly only useful against AWACs. And s-300 is good system but has many disadvantaged such as its technology being known to outsiders and Iran only has a limited number of them.

In my original reply to you, I deliberately only included Iranian designed systems as they're by far the most important systems.


----------



## Arminkh

Vincent Alvares said:


> And why don't you guys put some of those systems in Syria? They could really use some Anti-Aircraft system.



Well ISIS still doesn't have any Airforce so if we provide Syria with such system it only means that they are going to be used against US, Canadian, French or even Turkish jets which I highly doubt is something Iran wants to be accused of. On the other hand Syria already has S-300 and BUK systems and Russia has a S-400 system there that covers whole Syria.


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> Well ISIS still doesn't have any Airforce so if we provide Syria with such system it only means that they are going to be used against US, Canadian, French or even Turkish jets which I highly doubt is something Iran wants to be accused of. On the other hand Syria already has S-300 and BUK systems and Russia has a S-400 system there that covers whole Syria.



I heard the system that recently hit israeli fighters in Golan was Iranian origin ...


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> I heard the system that recently hit israeli fighters in Golan was Iranian origin ...


To be honest with you I can't believe that Iran would miss such an opportunity to test its system in a real scenario. But as everyone knows it should be in total secrecy. If it is approved that Iran has moved its AA systems to Syria, there will be a lot of pressure on Iran and who knows, they may also play a dirty trick like what they did in Ukraine, shooting down a passenger airliner and then blame and sanction Iran for it.

Do you have a source for that by the way?

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Draco.IMF

raptor22 said:


> I heard the system that recently hit israeli fighters in Golan was Iranian origin ...



it was allegedly an syrian S-200


----------



## Arminkh

Draco.IMF said:


> it was allegedly an syrian S-200


The manpads that shot down the choppers were probably Iranian:

*Syria Shoots Down Israeli Warplane F-16 Bomber, Using Russian S-300 Air Defense System*
By Ziad Fadel
Global Research, August 23, 2015
Syrian Perspective

29.3K





*GR Editor’s Note:*

The shooting down of an Israeli warplane by Syria has not been reported by Western and Israeli media sources. According to Sputnik, on August 21, “the Israeli Air Force resumed airstrikes on Western Syria, targeting a government army base at Khan Al-Sheih in Damascus province and another in the al-Quneitra province after a six-hour halt in attacks that followed their multiple air raids over the Golan Heights.”

Fars News Agency (FNA) also confirmed the Israeli attacks and the shooting down of an Israeli fighter plane

The Syrian air defense system shot down an Israeli warplane violating the Arab country’s air space.

The Israeli fighter jet was targeted over the city of Al-Quneitra on Friday.

Israel regularly violates the Syrian airspace and it launches missile attacks against the Arab country.

On Friday, the Israeli Air Force resumed airstrikes on Western Syria, targeting Brigade 68 Base in Khan Al-Sheih in Damascus province and Brigade 90 Base in the al-Quneitra province after a six hour halt in attacks that followed their multiple air raids over the Golan Heights.

* * *

Yesterday, Friday, August 21, 2015 in the early hours, Damascus time, an Israeli US made F-16 fighter-bomber, flew into Syrian airspace brazenly and fired at Brigade 68 and, then, turned and flew back toward Brigade 90 in Qunaytra in order to insure a safe landing in occupied Palestine if the aircraft was struck. It was struck. An SA-9 from the_ Iftiraas_ Air Defense Base and an SA-2 near the _Khalkhaala_ AB were fired. But, the technical wizardry was most on display when an S-300 (SA-10 “Grumble) super-air-defense missile was fired from the Republican Guard base near the _Mazza _AB at the foot of _Qaasiyoon_ Mountain west of Damascus. This was done so that the F-16’s electronic countermeasures would first fix on the SA-2 and SA-9 while the S-300 plowed forward to exterminate the vermin inside the Israeli aircraft. The S-300 vaporized the Israeli bomber. No evidence was seen of the pilot ejecting. Instead, eyewitness accounts described a ball of fire over the Golan and the remains scattering into the air over the _Huleh_ Valley in Palestine.

_*Also, the Israelis lost 2 helicopters while flying missions over the Golan Heights in an effort to bolster the sagging morale of the Takfiri rats of Nusra/Alqaeda and Al-Ittihaad Al-Islaami li-Ajnaad Al-Shaam. The 2 helicopters went down over the area near Qunaytra City and were reportedly shot down by shoulder fired, heat-seeking missiles deployed throughout the Syrian Army.*_

*Syria’s Right to Self Defense*

_It had to happen, sooner or later. The seeming diffidence of the Syrian brass had to transform into a bolder and more pugnacious articulation of Syria’s right to self-defense. With Russia now inevitably bound to the Syrian government for reasons discussed at length on our website; and Iran, now dazzled by a new role to play in regional politics; the green light turned on, finally, with Moscow withdrawing all restrictions on the use of advanced weaponry sold to the Syrian military. If you want to know what the former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Martin Dempsey, meant when he told Congress Syria had a “robust air defense system”, the Zionists just found out for themselves._

Yesterday, there was despondence after Israel assaulted Qunaytra and killed civilians seated in a public vehicle. The Israelis also killed one Syrian soldier and wounded several others in the Brigade 68 base.



Via Wikimapia: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.080898&lon=36.612282&z=12&m=b

But, the Syrian Army Chief of Staff, in consultation with the president and the Defense Minister, had no intention of letting this episode slide by especially in light of President Putin’s recent meeting with the Turkish ambassador in Moscow during which he flatly told the diplomat that relations with Turkey would be severed if Erdoghan did not stop supporting terrorism. It also came just after Sergei Lavrov called the Saudi foreign minister an “imbecile” just as the latter was renouncing any intention to treat with the Syrian government. There is a new belligerency in both Moscow and Teheran and it is being translated into action over Syria.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-shoots-down-israeli-warplane-f-16-bomber-and-helicopters/5471009


----------



## NaCon

there is no proof that the missile(s) hit it's (their) target. Israel denied that any of their aircraft went down but did acknowledged that they were targeted and besides the Israeli government can't cover it up since the area where it would have fallen is a residential area.


----------



## MTN1917

Some interesting highlights from Holy Defense week parade

IRIADF Talash(with longer canisters possibly for Sayyad3 missile)





IRGCASF paraded a possibly new air defense called "Sayyad" unfortunately due to bad filming of parade we only caught a glimpse of Sayyad radar.

Sayyad air defense system(not to be mistaken with sayyad missile)





Bashir radar, used by Raad family





Unidentified system accompanying Bashir





Raad family TELARs and TELs have also evolved, which possibly indicates that mass production is either underway or will happen soon.

New 3rd Khordad TELARs.





New Tabas TELARs.





S300 components(launcher and big bird radar)

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Arminkh

MTN1917 said:


> New 3rd Khordad TELARs.
> View attachment 337109



Are those the illuminators in front of the missile?


----------



## BlueInGreen

There has been an increase in US spy plane close encounters with the Iranian air defence forces. This can only mean one thing, they are probing Iran for potential weaknesses in the defense grid for an eventual pre-emptive strike.

Situation in the middle east is also worsening, US generals have said that a no fly zone over Aleppo would cause a direct war with both Russia and Syria and these close incursions by thr US are in definite preperation for that. 

I hope Iran doesn't just parade these high tech air defense systems around while the US is literally getting ready for an attack. 

I think Iran knows an attack is coming soon since the supreme leader has called for increase in offensive power rather than the standard defense power that we are used to hearing. 

The war of words between Russia and the US are getting hotter and hotter by the minute. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

What are your guys thoughts on these recent developments?


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen said:


> There has been an increase in US spy plane close encounters with the Iranian air defence forces. This can only mean one thing, they are probing Iran for potential weaknesses in the defense grid for an eventual pre-emptive strike.
> 
> Situation in the middle east is also worsening, US generals have said that a no fly zone over Aleppo would cause a direct war with both Russia and Syria and these close incursions by thr US are in definite preperation for that.
> 
> I hope Iran doesn't just parade these high tech air defense systems around while the US is literally getting ready for an attack.
> 
> I think Iran knows an attack is coming soon since the supreme leader has called for increase in offensive power rather than the standard defense power that we are used to hearing.
> 
> The war of words between Russia and the US are getting hotter and hotter by the minute. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
> 
> What are your guys thoughts on these recent developments?


I think all sides are wiser then that to start a war.

Russia already has a S-400 system stationed in Syria. that's beside the Missile cruiser Moscova (which is a sea based S-300) and the S-300 systems that Syria possesses. So I can't see how anyone but Russia could impose a no fly zone over Syria.

Regarding Iran, the flights are nothing new. US has had these types of flights happening ever since 80s. I think what has changed is that now Iran has better equipment and have become bolder which leads to the stand offs. I don't think that would lead to any war.

Here is a recent example:

https://www.rt.com/news/360409-us-spy-plane-iran/

I'm sure the U-2 is flying over many other countries without them even noticing and that's why it is not in the news either.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

can anyone tell the difference between RAAD, 3rd Khordad & Tabas Air Defence systems?
There are so many AD systems in development I completely lost the overview regarding the RAAD family
AFAIK the differences lies in different kind of missiles, range, radars and so on, right?
Are they already deployed? mass produced?
And what about this long range AD missile called Sadid 630? Also Raad family? Deployed/mass produced?

Anyway, very good i have found this thread, it answers many questions:

https://defence.pk/threads/tabas-3r...uise-missile-seen-during-leader-visit.313503/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

MTN1917 said:


> IRGCASF paraded a possibly new air defense called "Sayyad" unfortunately due to bad filming of parade we only caught a glimpse of Sayyad radar.
> 
> Sayyad air defense system(not to be mistaken with sayyad missile)
> View attachment 337107



Thanks for the post.
I think the radar is probably used for the Talash air defence? I never heard of a separate system called sayyad unless they're referring to sayyad missiles which is probably the case as on the vehicle they talk about sayyad missile air defence. But the term "sayyad missile air defence" seems vague to me as sayyad-2 and 3 are used in different system to sayyad-4.

Could sayyad be final production name for Talash air defence?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

Some excellent pictures,the further development and refinements of the sam telars is very interesting,if these arent actually in production yet they must be very close to it,the radars also look great and its very gratifying to finally see the s300 tels and radar being paraded as well,tho its a pity there werent more pictures of the talash/rim66 sam tel as it would`ve been interesting to see if any changes had been made to it as well.


----------



## SOHEIL

Fafnir said:


> talash/rim66


----------



## Rukarl

Fafnir said:


> talash/rim66 sam



Talash is the name of an air defence system, composing of sayyad 2 and 3 missile. It has nothing to do with Rim66. If you're talking about sayyad-2 missile, that missile is much larger, is thicker has completely different lower fins. The only similarities is the longer fins. Such fins are found on many missile including the Russian system so it means nothing. Here is the 'Maitri' Short Range Surface-to-Air Missile by France, it also uses such long fins:






The Iranian version of rim-66 was called Mahrab that was made years ago and is deployed on some Iranian ships/boats.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Rukarl said:


> Talash is the name of an air defence system, composing of sayyad 2 and 3 missile. It has nothing to do with Rim66. If you're talking about sayyad-2 missile, that missile is much larger, is thicker has completely different lower fins. The only similarities is the longer fins. Such fins are found on many missile including the Russian system so it means nothing. Here is the 'Maitri' Short Range Surface-to-Air Missile by France, it also uses such long fins:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Iranian version of rim-66 was called Mahrab that was made years ago and is deployed on some Iranian ships/boats.



Come on, the Sayyad 2 has a similar diameter to the RIM-66. And the fins look exactly the same (the picture you posted has fins which are slightly different, like the long fin has a vertical short edge near the base of the missile, but the Sayyad and RIM-66 have sloping edges), especially the small fin.

However the Sayyad 2 has a longer airframe and likely entirely different internals to the RIM-66. Most certainly not a copy, but the airframe is based on the RIM-66, but completely modern underneath.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

AmirPatriot said:


> Come on, the Sayyad 2 has a similar diameter to the RIM-66. And the fins look exactly the same (the picture you posted has fins which are slightly different, like the long fin has a vertical short edge near the base of the missile, but the Sayyad and RIM-66 have sloping edges), especially the small fin.
> 
> However the Sayyad 2 has a longer airframe and likely entirely different internals to the RIM-66. Most certainly not a copy, but the airframe is based on the RIM-66, but completely modern underneath.



I understand that, I am saying it does not matter if their longer fin section is much similar or not, I posted to that pic to show such long fins are not rare and many missiles use them. Having one similar feature does not make them the same missile when everything else is in most cases is vastly different. As for similar diameter, that does meant not anything as most surface to air missile have similar diameters.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Truck carrier of Taer missiles:


----------



## Fafnir

Rukarl said:


> Talash is the name of an air defence system, composing of sayyad 2 and 3 missile. It has nothing to do with Rim66. If you're talking about sayyad-2 missile, that missile is much larger, is thicker has completely different lower fins. The only similarities is the longer fins. Such fins are found on many missile including the Russian system so it means nothing. Here is the 'Maitri' Short Range Surface-to-Air Missile by France, it also uses such long fins:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Iranian version of rim-66 was called Mahrab that was made years ago and is deployed on some Iranian ships/boats.


Yes,and the talash/sayyad 2 missile is quite clearly based on the rim66/mahrab,its certainly isnt "much larger" nor is it "thicker"[wider diameter] its just been lengthened in the front and perhaps very,very slightly at the rear and had the rear fins squared off,unless of course you`re going to try and argue that this is some completely brand new missile that just coincidentally happens to look physically almost exactly like a rim66 which iran coincidentally just happens to have in service.See for yourself the similarities appear to be pretty obvious: 




The maitri is a stalled off again/on again indian and french co-project and on the whole it has more differences than similarities with the rim66 and sayyad 2,tho interestingly the french navy also operate the rim66 on its cassard class frigates......so who knows what inspiration they might have got from them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Fafnir said:


> Yes,and the talash/sayyad 2 missile is quite clearly based on the rim66/mahrab,its certainly isnt "much larger" nor is it "thicker"[wider diameter] its just been lengthened in the front and perhaps very,very slightly at the rear and had the rear fins squared off,unless of course you`re going to try and argue that this is some completely brand new missile that just coincidentally happens to look physically almost exactly like a rim66 which iran coincidentally just happens to have in service.See for yourself the similarities appear to be pretty obvious:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The maitri is a stalled off again/on again indian and french co-project and on the whole it has more differences than similarities with the rim66 and sayyad 2,tho interestingly the french navy also operate the rim66 on its cassard class frigates......so who knows what inspiration they might have got from them.



You don't even know what Talash is and you're lecturing me on this topic? Talash is a name of an air defence system and not a missile.


Are you trolling or being serious? The sayyad-2 is longer and thicker (though not by much) diameter and has completely different lower fins.



This alone is enough to suggest they're different systems .The only similarities is the longer fins and even they're not exactly the same.
















You make no sense at all. You basically show one similarity and want to claim sayyad-2 is rim-66.
If you don't know much about the topic, then atleast spent a little time informing yourself.

Chinese missile also a rim-66 due to one similarity.






I am not claiming sayyad-2 has no influence from the SM, but to call it the rm-66/SM-1 is being extremely blind sighted.


----------



## MTN1917

Arminkh said:


> Are those the illuminators in front of the missile?


Those are engagement radars.



Rukarl said:


> Thanks for the post.
> I think the radar is probably used for the Talash air defence? I never heard of a separate system called sayyad unless they're referring to sayyad missiles which is probably the case as on the vehicle they talk about sayyad missile air defence. But the term "sayyad missile air defence" seems vague to me as sayyad-2 and 3 are used in different system to sayyad-4.
> 
> Could sayyad be final production name for Talash air defence?


Yes, the name "Sayyad air defense system" is confusing as we have Sayyad family of missiles which are used in systems like Talash and Bavar.

It is possible that this radar is also part of Talash systems as commander of IRGC ASF Hajizadeh stated that "Sayyad 2" participated in IRGC ASF parade.

After the radar several other components of systems were paraded but due to moronic TV directing, there was no footage of accompanying systems.

The system below that I mentioned as unknown has been correctly identified by PeeD as "Saegheh" ECM jammer.







More pics from S300(Tomb stone radar, 55K6E command post and transloader).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rukarl

MTN1917 said:


> Those are engagement radars.
> 
> 
> Yes, the name "Sayyad air defense system" is confusing as we have Sayyad family of missiles which are used in systems like Talash and Bavar.
> 
> It is possible that this radar is also part of Talash systems as commander of IRGC ASF Hajizadeh stated that "Sayyad 2" participated in IRGC ASF parade.
> 
> After the radar several other components of systems were paraded but due to moronic TV directing, there was no footage of accompanying systems.
> 
> The system below that I mentioned as unknown has been correctly identified by PeeD as "Saegheh" ECM jammer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More pics from S300(Tomb stone radar and 55K6E command post).
> View attachment 337661
> 
> View attachment 337663




These moronic journalist really make your blood boil. I remember on some occasions some new systems were about to be shown but the video suddenly jumped to some other random part.



MTN1917 said:


> The system below that I mentioned as unknown has been correctly identified by PeeD as "Saegheh" ECM jammer.



Interesting. Wish there was more info on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

MTN1917 said:


> More pics from S300(Tomb stone radar, 55K6E command post and transloader).



@VEVAK

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Do we work on these types of radars? I mean "Quantum radar" ....


----------



## MTN1917

According to IRIADF commander, Brigadier General Esmaeli Iran is going to operationally deploy "Talash" air defense system at central Iranian desert, this will be the first official deployment of "Talash" air defense.

"Mersad" air defense system will also be deployed at central Iran.

http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1...با-موشک-های-صیاد-2-و-3-در-مرکز-ایران-ویژگی-ها

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

MTN1917 said:


> According to IRIADF commander, Brigadier General Esmaeli Iran is going to operationally deploy "Talash" air defense system at central Iranian desert, this will be the first official deployment of "Talash" air defense.
> 
> "Mersad" air defense system will also be deployed at central Iran.
> 
> http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1...با-موشک-های-صیاد-2-و-3-در-مرکز-ایران-ویژگی-ها


So it says they are going to use Sayad-3 missile with Talash 3 instead of the old S-200 missiles.

My understanding was that Sayad-3 is the long range missile that is going to complement Bavar system.

So does it mean that both Talash 3 and Bavar 373 are using the same missiles? So the only difference between the two systems are their radars?

@Rukarl


----------



## MTN1917

Talash 3 was only a development phase of Talash system, Talash 3 no longer exists.

Talash system now uses both Sayyad 2 and sayyad 3.

Talash development phases:
Talash 1(Sayyad 2)>Talash 2(Sayyad2M)>Talash3(Sayyad2M and S200)>Talash(Sayyad2 and Sayyad3)

Also Bavar373 main missile is Sayyad4 and we have no indication todate that it uses Sayyad3 too(although it is possible).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*رد سامانه موشکی باور ۳۷۳ اعلام شد/"۱.۵ برابر" سامانه موشکیS۳۰۰ *

*http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1...باور-373-اعلام-شد-1-5-برابر-سامانه-موشکی-s300*​

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

yavar said:


> *رد سامانه موشکی باور ۳۷۳ اعلام شد/"۱.۵ برابر" سامانه موشکیS۳۰۰ *
> 
> *http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1395/07/10/1200914/برد-سامانه-موشکی-باور-373-اعلام-شد-1-5-برابر-سامانه-موشکی-s300*​


That means Bavar-373 has a range of 300 km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

That means target detection range 450km and missile range 300km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Any word on testing or genuine mass production. I suppose it must be tested before it can be manufactured further.


----------



## Arminkh

Stryker1982 said:


> Any word on testing or genuine mass production. I suppose it must be tested before it can be manufactured further.


It will be tested on a ballistic missile this year (Persian year ends in March). So we should see. If the test is successful, then we will all know about the success. If it is not, then probably it will be back to R&D to correct any problems with the system. It was already tested on drones about two years ago. But Iran's president has asked it to be tested on incoming ballistic missile.


----------



## Hindustani78

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-military-drills-idUSKBN12H0QO

Iranian forces launched air defense drills on Monday in the central province of Isfahan, Fars news agency reported, aiming to display its ability to safeguard the country's airspace.

The Islamic Republic of Iran's Air Force (IRIAF) is holding the three-day maneuvers in which fighter bombers, reconnaissance aircraft and home-built drones will take part.

The exercise "will unveil only parts of its capabilities to safeguard our country's airspace," Brigadier General Massoud Rouzkhosh was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA.

"The drill aims to counter any airspace incursion by the enemies," he added.

The air force, comprised largely of U.S.-made jets obtained before the 1979 revolution, is particularly weak compared to Iran's Gulf Arab rivals which have spent billions of dollars on Western fighter aircraft this year alone.

Iran unveiled a home-built drone this month that it said was capable of carrying bombs, in what appeared to be another copy of a U.S. reconnaissance drone that Iran captured five years ago.

(Reporting by Bozorgmehr Sharafedin; Editing by Dominic Evans)


----------



## Hack-Hook

Hindustani78 said:


> http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-military-drills-idUSKBN12H0QO
> 
> Iranian forces launched air defense drills on Monday in the central province of Isfahan, Fars news agency reported, aiming to display its ability to safeguard the country's airspace.
> 
> The Islamic Republic of Iran's Air Force (IRIAF) is holding the three-day maneuvers in which fighter bombers, reconnaissance aircraft and home-built drones will take part.
> 
> The exercise "will unveil only parts of its capabilities to safeguard our country's airspace," Brigadier General Massoud Rouzkhosh was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA.
> 
> "The drill aims to counter any airspace incursion by the enemies," he added.
> 
> The air force, comprised largely of U.S.-made jets obtained before the 1979 revolution, is particularly weak compared to Iran's Gulf Arab rivals which have spent billions of dollars on Western fighter aircraft this year alone.
> 
> Iran unveiled a home-built drone this month that it said was capable of carrying bombs, in what appeared to be another copy of a U.S. reconnaissance drone that Iran captured five years ago.
> 
> (Reporting by Bozorgmehr Sharafedin; Editing by Dominic Evans)


Is it an air defence drill , I thought its air force drill


----------



## MTN1917

Iran has unveiled 4 new electronic devices in Shiraz Electronic Industries, among them 2 new radars, Meraj-4 and Matal ul Fajr-3 radars.

Meraj-4 which is used in Bavar-373 AD system, is used for early warning, 3D tracking, is capable of tracking 200 targets and has a separate command post.

Matla ul fajr-3 radar is a 2D radar with a range of 500kms.

http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news

Matal ul fajr-3 on the far right and Meraj-4 at the far left.





Matla ul fajr-3 radar

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Faravahar

It seems Meraj-4 is the final production version of the "qamar" radar which had a range of 450 km. Question is, does meraj-4 have a range more than 450km?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Faravahar

You can see the Talash radar in video above.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ilia



Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## yavar

*Iran Fajr Tactical Air Defense Base پايگاه تاكتيكي پدافند هوايي فجر ايران*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hindustani78

http://tass.com/defense/916041

MOSCOW, December 1. /TASS/. Iran has made full payments to Russia for the deliveries of S-300 antiaircraft missile systems, Russian presidential aide for military and technical cooperation Vladimir Kozhin said on Thursday.

"We have just completed the deliveries of S-300 systems. The contract has been implemented in full and the Iranian side has made payments and withdrawn its lawsuit on the contract," the presidential aide said.

Russia signed a contract with Iran in 2007 for the delivery of S-300 air defense systems to the Islamic Republic. However, the contract’s fulfillment was suspended in 2010.

In April 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted Russia’s ban on the delivery of S-300 air defense systems to Iran and in November that year the contract came into force.

Russia’s Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation reported in October that Russia had completed the delivery of S-300 systems to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*آغاز رزمایش پدافند هوایی ارتش از فردا/ اس۳۰۰ به‌محض گسترش "تست" می‌شود *
https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...یی-ارتش-از-فردا-اس300-به-محض-گسترش-تست-می-شود







*Air Defense Exercise Planned in Iran’s Southern Provinces *
https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...exercise-planned-in-iran-s-southern-provinces

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*Iran "defenders of Velayat Skies 7" exercises long range Ofoq AD system رزمایش مدافعان آسمان ولایت۷*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

@yavar Is that Patriot looking thing Ofoq?


----------



## yavar

TruthHurtz said:


> @yavar Is that Patriot looking thing Ofoq?


our "Talash" systems whether they are medium range or long range they it got similarities in look to Patriot


----------



## TruthHurtz

yavar said:


> our "Talash" systems whether they are medium range or long range they it got similarities in look to Patriot



Is Ofoq the radar system then?


----------



## VEVAK

TruthHurtz said:


> Is Ofoq the radar system then?



No it's a SAM!!!!!!!!! Just wait till tomorrow


----------



## yavar

VEVAK said:


> No it's a SAM!!!!!!!!! Just wait till tomorrow


no 9th Dey 


Iran "defenders of Velayat Skies 7" exercises phase 1 رزمایش مدافعان آسمان ولایت۷

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*سامانه موشکی "یا زهرا ۳"/ انهدام پهپاد Iran "Ya-Zahra 3" AD missile system / demolition drone*






*Iran "defenders of Velayat Skies 7" exercises phase 1 رزمایش مدافعان آسمان ولایت۷*






 
*سامانه پدافند هوایی مرصاد Iran "Mersad" radar station, command post & missile air defense system*





1970s American hawk air defense system

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*"موشک صیاد ۳" برای اولین بار در رزمایش پدافند هوایی با موفقیت شلیک شد*





 موشکی که امروز از سامانه تلاش شلیک شد، صیاد 3 بوده و این برای اولین بار است که این موشک تست عملیاتی می‌شود. پیش از این، سامانه موشکی اس 200 در سامانه موشکی تلاش برای هدف قراردادن اهداف ارتفاع بالا و برد بالا مورد استفاده قرار می‌گرفت اما از سال گذشته با به ثمر نشستن پروژه موشک پدافندی صیاد 3، این موشک به سامانه موشکی تلاش الحاق و سامانه موشکی اس 200 از بخش موشکی سامانه تلاش حذف شد.
هر یک گردان از سامانه تلاش از 3 پرتابگر موشک 4 تایی بهره می‌برد
موشک صیاد 3، یک موشک برد بلند و ارتفاع بالا است که به گفته امیر فرج پور سخنگوی رزمایش پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت 7 به خبرنگار اعزامی تسنیم، این موشک تا حدود 150 کیلومتر برد دارد و می‌تواند اهداف را در فواصل بالا رهگیری و به محض ورود هدف به فاصله 150 کیلومتری، با موشک صیاد 3 آن را هدف قرار دهد.​


http://tn.ai/1280383

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*سیستم تلاش و موشک صیاد۲ Iran Sayyad 2 air defense missile*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran Sayyad 3 AD long-range missile vertical launch 150KM سامانه موشکی تلاش و موشک برد بلند صیاد۳*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

yavar said:


> *Iran Sayyad 3 AD long-range missile vertical launch 150KM سامانه موشکی تلاش و موشک برد بلند صیاد۳*


Brother, this is the Sayyad 2/Talash.







If you look at the surroundings, they are very similar to this photo.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ilia

Sayyad 2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

AmirPatriot said:


> Brother, this is the Sayyad 2/Talash.
> .


if the photo is same as video then you 100% right

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rukarl

Are the war games over? pas in sayyad-3 va ofogh chi shod? mage gharar nabood neshooneshoon bedan?


----------



## mohsen

yavar said:


> if the photo is same as video then you 100& right


higher quality of that clip, Sayad2:
http://cdn.isna.ir/d/2016/12/28/0/57408460.m4v
matches the photo:


















and no picture of Sayyad 3 missile.

Shalamcheh missile launch, Sayyad 2 missile launch, Karrar UAV launch and shot down footage:
http://media.farsnews.com/media/Uploaded/Files/Video/1395/10/08/13951008000821_480P.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Ababil 2 as target drone:
 



 نسخه اصلی



 نسخه اصلی



 نسخه اصلی



 نسخه اصلی



 نسخه اصلی



 نسخه اصلی

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

we want B-373 missile launch!
looks like B-373 is still not ready...


----------



## Blue In Green

How many drones were used as targets and how many were destroyed?

Also what is the maximum numher of targets that can be tracked with this system?


----------



## husseinibnali

In this press tv article it says Ofoq airborne fire control radar!

Whats that?!

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/12/28/503790/Iran-Army-IRGC-Defenders-of-Velayat-Skies


----------



## mohsen

husseinibnali said:


> In this press tv article it says Ofoq airborne fire control radar!
> 
> Whats that?!
> 
> http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/12/28/503790/Iran-Army-IRGC-Defenders-of-Velayat-Skies


hasn't unveiled yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

I think the Ofoq can be seen in this photo:






This should be the replacement of the square pair illumination radar of the S-200. That huge static system was split in two as can be seen in the photo. Why using two radar dishes on two different trucks? Well as a FMCW system the transmitting and receiving dishes need to be separated by space or a physical divider like on the square pair. The Iranian solution eliminates the biggest weak point of the S-200, namely its static illumination radar that is prone to ARM attacks.
One other problem of the S-200 is its low agility of its mechanically steered illumination radar. The more modern smaller Iranian solution should hence have a good locking capability, even against agile fighter targets.
This overall S-200 system upgrade called Talash with its Ofoq mobile illumination radar has also a medium range missile, the Sayyad-2. A mobile long range survailance radar such as the 500km Matla ol Fajr 3 VHF-band radar could then be used as a mobile replacement for the static tall king radar of the S-200 making all its components except its long range SAM mobile.
What is missing is the large long range data-link dish of the square pair for this system explanation of mine.


----------



## Rukarl

PeeD said:


> I think the Ofoq can be seen in this photo:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This should be the replacement of the square pair illumination radar of the S-200. That huge static system was split in two as can be seen in the photo. Why using two radar dishes on two different trucks? Well as a FMCW system the transmitting and receiving dishes need to be separated by space or a physical divider like on the square pair. The Iranian solution eliminates the biggest weak point of the S-200, namely its static illumination radar that is prone to ARM attacks.
> One other problem of the S-200 is its low agility of its mechanically steered illumination radar. The more modern smaller Iranian solution should hence have a good locking capability, even against agile fighter targets.
> This overall S-200 system upgrade called Talash with its Ofoq mobile illumination radar has also a medium range missile, the Sayyad-2. A mobile long range survailance radar such as the 500km Matla ol Fajr 3 VHF-band radar could then be used as a mobile replacement for the static tall king radar of the S-200 making all its components except its long range SAM mobile.
> What is missing is the large long range data-link dish of the square pair for this system explanation of mine.



I thought the removed s-200 and replaced it with sayyad-3 missile. I thought that is what the final Talash system was. Why are they still using this big s-200 junk?


----------



## VEVAK

Draco.IMF said:


> we want B-373 missile launch!
> looks like B-373 is still not ready...



Apparently Iran's president has asked not to make the Bavar 373 tests public until it is capable of intercepting Ballistic Missiles. So they want the 1st public demonstration to be of a Ballistic Missile interception.


----------



## Fafnir

VEVAK said:


> Apparently Iran's president has asked not to make the Bavar 373 tests public until it is capable of intercepting Ballistic Missiles. So they want the 1st public demonstration to be of a Ballistic Missile interception.


Seems a bit strange,after all the main threat that the west and its gulfie vassals pose to iran is via their airpower not their negligible ballistic missile forces,altho tactical missiles like the atacms could pose some limited threat,but then again it seems that these days all the new sams have to have some measure of abm capability whether its actually needed or not


----------



## Draco.IMF

VEVAK said:


> Apparently Iran's president has asked not to make the Bavar 373 tests public until it is capable of intercepting Ballistic Missiles. So they want the 1st public demonstration to be of a Ballistic Missile interception.



so the conclusion is, Iran is yet not able to intercept ballistic missiles?


----------



## Fafnir

Draco.IMF said:


> so the conclusion is, Iran is yet not able to intercept ballistic missiles?


Their probably still working on it,after all the b373 was designed first and foremost to be an anti aircraft sam system not an abm system,it would also depend on how serious they want to get with b373s abm capabilities,are they going to have a dedicated abm missile like the patriots pac3 or will they go for dedicated missiles and specialised abm radars like the s300vm/sa23 or will they just keep it simple and use the standard b373 sam,the simple fact is we still dont know,hell we havent even seen the b373 sam being test fired yet.


----------



## VEVAK

Fafnir said:


> Their probably still working on it,after all the b373 was designed first and foremost to be an anti aircraft sam system not an abm system,it would also depend on how serious they want to get with b373s abm capabilities,are they going to have a dedicated abm missile like the patriots pac3 or will they go for dedicated missiles and specialised abm radars like the s300vm/sa23 or will they just keep it simple and use the standard b373 sam,the simple fact is we still dont know,hell we havent even seen the b373 sam being test fired yet.



Regardless that's what the head of Iran's Air Defense force announced publicly! They been asked that the 1st public presentation of the Bavar-373 be against a Ballistic Missile.... I'll post the link if I can find it....


----------



## AmirPatriot

VEVAK said:


> They been asked that the 1st public presentation of the Bavar-373 be against a Ballistic Missile.... I'll post the link if I can find it....


@ me when you do. I remember Rouhani saying the Bavar-373 will be tested on BMs, but I don't remember him saying that will be the first public test.


----------



## mohsen

Actually Esmaili said we don't care about Rohani's orders. So that's it.


----------



## Draco.IMF

very disappointed they didnt show the RAAD Air Defence systems....not massproduced yet?


----------



## OldTwilight

Draco.IMF said:


> very disappointed they didnt show the RAAD Air Defence systems....not massproduced yet?


Its belong to IRGC


----------



## Kiarash

OldTwilight said:


> Its belong to IRGC



The wargame involved both forces I believe


----------



## OldTwilight

Kiarash said:


> The wargame involved both forces I believe


Not really , they talk about unity but they act otherwise ....


----------



## AmirPatriot

*Iran Test-Fires High-Altitude Missile with Homegrown Air Defense System*

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) - The Iranian Air Defense on Wednesday carried out the first operational test of ‘Sayyad-3’ missiles paired with ‘Talash’ homegrown missile system, during a large-scale war game underway in southern parts of the country.*

It was the first time that Sayyad-3 missiles were launched by Talash system to hit high-altitude targets.

*Capable of intercepting targets within a range of 150 kilometers and in high altitudes*, Sayyad-3 has been paired with Talash missile system, which also employs Sayyad-2 missiles against targets at medium altitudes.

The air defense system is also equipped with a locally-manufactured fire control radar, dubbed Ofoq.

Iran’s Air Defense began the large-scale military exercise, codenamed Defenders of Velayat Skies 7, in the country’s southern regions on Monday.

Involving more than 17,000 military forces, the war game covers an area of 496,000 square kilometers mainly the provinces of Hormozgan, Bushehr and Khuzestan.

The Air Defense has employed a broad range of equipment, including tactical radars, mobile watch posts, and ground-based and air-based eavesdropping systems in the maneuver.
*
https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...ude-missile-with-homegrown-air-defense-system*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hindustani78

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201701041049271317-iran-test-fires-talash-system/
Days before the arrival of 2017, Iran’s air force was busy testing its homemade Talash air defense system as part of an exercise dubbed ‘Defenders of Velayat Skies 7,’ which some see as a military demonstration to warn potential adversaries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and even the US, to stay away. 

The tests began with the launch of Iranian-made Sayyad-2 surface-to-air missiles in the southern region of Iran near Bushehr. Tasnim News Agency, run by the Islamic Ideology Dissemination Organization, reported that the tests included the first launch of a Sayyad-3, which boasts a longer range than the Sayyad-2. The Sayyad-2 is a medium-range, high-altitude missile that Iranian defense officials originally planned to bolster the firepower of Iran’s frigates. The dry-run of the Iranian-made Ofoq fire control radar, which calculates the path for missiles to hit targets, added to a swelling of local pride in wake of the successful launch.

Weapons testing near the Hormozgan province could prove more worrying for China, the US, and Europe, which rely on oil transported through the Strait of Hormuz. Indeed, some 20 percent of the world’s oil flows through the ever-important waterway per day. In December 2011, an Iranian naval commander said closing the strait would be "easier than drinking a glass of water." Approximately 75 percent of oil aboard the cargo ships passing through the strait is headed for Asia, according to expert estimates.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yantong1980

Good job Iran! Time for Iran to acquired better air defense system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

Hello guys
anybody can share info about sevom khordad air defense system ?????


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> Not really , they talk about unity but they act otherwise ....



IRGC Air Defense systems are mainly mobile systems mainly for the purposes of defending armored divisions and missile battalions. They have everything from AAA, MANPAD's, Tor1M1, RAAD,....
And they do work together! Shooting down of the Israeli UAV was real life joint cooperation between the two!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

beautiful video and song related to Iran Air Defense


----------



## MTN1917

Mashreghnews has published a new pic which shows 6 new radar products, with at least three of them being directly related to Bavar-373.

Shiraz Electronic Industries poster showing six new products






Najm 802 acquisition and engagement radar









Meraj 4 long range surveillance radar





Bavar 373 engagement radar









Bavar 373 acquisition and engagement radar

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MTN1917

Matla ul fajr 3 tactical early warning and surveillance radar

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

I'd like to see that Meraj 4 radar mounted on a Zoljanah truck for better mobility.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

im so curious how effectiv this system will be...


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I'd like to see that Meraj 4 radar mounted on a Zoljanah truck for better mobility.



I'm not sure if this would bring a great benefit for the IADS performance. The way a long range system such as the Bavar would work is to have a permanent situational awareness by systems such as the Meraj-4 in S-band and Matla ol Far-3 in VHF band. So in case of threat systems such as these two would emit almost permanently and thus expose their location to advanced passive ELINT systems (even if they have LPI features).

Therefore the enemy will know at least the rough location of this long range early warning systems, hence they need protection of short range systems as well a countermeasures. Emission control is not their task, its the task of the lower tier radar systems of the Bavar. So these lower tier systems which form the separate Bavar batteries will get their early warning information from those higher tier systems wich a number such as 4 Bavar batteries protect in their center. Operating in the periphery of the long range early warning systems unter emission contol these only start to emit if a target has been identified to operate in the engagement range of the batterie, they lock the target and shot their missile and go offline. These systems need great mobility because they get identified by the enemy which is closer to them and might have even the capability to attack them directly in the time they are emitting.

So its these systems, the single batteries that need to shoot and scoot in short time such as 5 minutes to survive in a threat environment. They need off-road capability to set up ambushes and confidently position around their first tier early warning systems which are in a secure and protected center position. Systems such as the Meraj will move too from time to time if another system takes over their surveillance task, but this is only to avoid strikes against weapons such as long range cruise missiles which would need to survive the Bavar batteries in the periphery and anti-PGM SAMs such as Ya-Zahra and CIWS like systems such as the Mesbah.

Hence it might be a wise and more cost effective decision which they made. A robust, advanced and cost effective systems makes a successful system.

Thanks for the photos MTN

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

AmirPatriot said:


> I'd like to see that Meraj 4 radar mounted on a Zoljanah truck for better mobility.



Zoljanah barayeh Ya Ali cruise missiles & or Zolfaghar missile & future versions of them! At least that would make more sense name wise!
I know you know this! but for the others: 
Zoljanah was the name of Imam Ali's horse & Zolfaghar was his sword!



Draco.IMF said:


> im so curious how effectiv this system will be...



Which system????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

VEVAK said:


> Which system????



B-373

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

VEVAK said:


> Zoljanah barayeh Ya Ali cruise missiles & or Zolfaghar missile & future versions of them!


It seems overkill to me.






This can already carry 2 missiles, which for a SRBM with a range of up to 700 km is good enough. Any more than that and you will complicate matters since the Fateh/Zolfaghar are not in launch canisters so mounting them on top of each other isn't an option.

The Zoljanah is purpose built for the job. It's too large, expensive and complex to be used in other general context. For that, I think the Zafar is more suited.



PeeD said:


> I'm not sure if this would bring a great benefit for the IADS performance. The way a long range system such as the Bavar would work is to have a permanent situational awareness by systems such as the Meraj-4 in S-band and Matla ol Far-3 in VHF band. So in case of threat systems such as these two would emit almost permanently and thus expose their location to advanced passive ELINT systems (even if they have LPI features).
> 
> Therefore the enemy will know at least the rough location of this long range early warning systems, hence they need protection of short range systems as well a countermeasures. Emission control is not their task, its the task of the lower tier radar systems of the Bavar. So these lower tier systems which form the separate Bavar batteries will get their early warning information from those higher tier systems wich a number such as 4 Bavar batteries protect in their center. Operating in the periphery of the long range early warning systems unter emission contol these only start to emit if a target has been identified to operate in the engagement range of the batterie, they lock the target and shot their missile and go offline. These systems need great mobility because they get identified by the enemy which is closer to them and might have even the capability to attack them directly in the time they are emitting.
> 
> So its these systems, the single batteries that need to shoot and scoot in short time such as 5 minutes to survive in a threat environment. They need off-road capability to set up ambushes and confidently position around their first tier early warning systems which are in a secure and protected center position. Systems such as the Meraj will move too from time to time if another system takes over their surveillance task, but this is only to avoid strikes against weapons such as long range cruise missiles which would need to survive the Bavar batteries in the periphery and anti-PGM SAMs such as Ya-Zahra and CIWS like systems such as the Mesbah.
> 
> Hence it might be a wise and more cost effective decision which they made. A robust, advanced and cost effective systems makes a successful system.
> 
> Thanks for the photos MTN


Very good explanation, thank you!

Then how come the Russian 64N6 and 96L6 have such excellent mobility?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot

This goes back to Soviet doctrine in my opinion. The 64N6 would not need that degree of off-road capability but the Soviets made that design choice because they had vast state resources (almost unlimited) for such critical programs. Secondary in the Siberan tundra and marchlands of east europe this off-road capability would guarantee that the vehicle would never encounter problems in very wet conditions, get stuck and killed.

Just like containerized missiles are not really worth the cost for Iranian ballistic missiles due to the dry whether conditions in Iran and a hot launch system provides better reliability for the Bavar compared to a cold launch system (at least for Iran which has no 35 year old operational experience with such a system). A off-road design choice for the Bavar early warning radars is apparently considered as not worth the extra resources. It would look fancier, sure but it would not be a sober and wise decision, the fact that Bavars designers choose their own less fancier design choices is a very good sign.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Lets hope B-373 is compareable with the S300 PMU-2 (russian version, not the less capable export version!)


----------



## VEVAK

AmirPatriot said:


> It seems overkill to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This can already carry 2 missiles, which for a SRBM with a range of up to 700 km is good enough. Any more than that and you will complicate matters since the Fateh/Zolfaghar are not in launch canisters so mounting them on top of each other isn't an option.
> 
> The Zoljanah is purpose built for the job. It's too large, expensive and complex to be used in other general context. For that, I think the Zafar is more suited.
> 
> Very good explanation, thank you!
> 
> Then how come the Russian 64N6 and 96L6 have such excellent mobility?




That's a mockup it's not even a real missile + that's the mockup of the Fatteh-313 class that's shorter than the Zolfaghar class

same here





and here






These are all mockups of the Fatteh-313 not the real Zolfaghar Missile or even a 1:1 mockup of it!

Plus I'm just saying name wise it would make more sense!

You can't bring real solid fueled ballistic missile to these parades even without a live warhead a small accident could cause a massive explosion and you have too many high ranking officials to allow that!
Liquid fueled without a warhead is fine
Solid fueled are built with the fuel inside so you can't use real ones


----------



## OldTwilight

all for show ... where was these system in past days !? 
at least they could use Messbah 2 System ... 

I think someone brand Messbah System as useless , take the budget for his own project ( just stealling the money ) and then decide an slave solder with 30 years old Zu-23 is enough for Tehran ... 

this is reality ...


----------



## AmirPatriot

VEVAK said:


> That's a mockup it's not even a real missile + that's the mockup of the Fatteh-313 class that's shorter than the Zolfaghar class
> 
> same here
> View attachment 368895
> 
> 
> and here
> 
> View attachment 368896
> 
> 
> These are all mockups of the Fatteh-313 not the real Zolfaghar Missile or even a 1:1 mockup of it!
> 
> Plus I'm just saying name wise it would make more sense!
> 
> You can't bring real solid fueled ballistic missile to these parades even without a live warhead a small accident could cause a massive explosion and you have too many high ranking officials to allow that!
> Liquid fueled without a warhead is fine
> Solid fueled are built with the fuel inside so you can't use real ones


Maybe, but mounting the launching mechanism on a Zafar 8×8 would make more sense IMHO.


----------



## SOHEIL

OldTwilight said:


> در مورد اون تایپیک ریز پهپادها یکی به اون کاربران میلیتاری بگه که توپ های ضد هوایی سعیر برای مقابله باهاشون مناسبند ...
> 
> نکته اینجاست که ما باید بتونیم از همین ریزگردها برای حمله به ناوهای آمریکایی ها استفاده کنیم ...
> 
> راه ها مقابله هم اینه که بتونی مثل فیلم استار ترک 2016 ، بین ارتباط این پهپادها اخلال ایجاد کنی ...
> 
> در نهایت می رسیم به همون بمب اتمی که باید می داشتیمیش و هر زمان که دیدیم اوضاع بده با ترکوندنش توی مدار لئو می زدیم زیر میز بازی ...
> 
> البته عزیزان از زدن یک کواد کوپتر هم عاجز بودن
> 
> حتی به اندازه ژنرال ضیاء پاکستان هم عرضه نداشتن و به خاطر قدرت طلبی سلاحی که می تونست خیلی از تهدیدات علیه ما رو بی اثر کنه رو دادن رفت ... سلاحیی که تک تک مردم ایران بابتش سال ها هزینه دادن و زجر کشیدن و زجر می کشند ...



حرام است


----------



## Muhammed45

OldTwilight said:


> در مورد اون تایپیک ریز پهپادها یکی به اون کاربران میلیتاری بگه که توپ های ضد هوایی سعیر برای مقابله باهاشون مناسبند ...
> 
> نکته اینجاست که ما باید بتونیم از همین ریزگردها برای حمله به ناوهای آمریکایی ها استفاده کنیم ...
> 
> راه ها مقابله هم اینه که بتونی مثل فیلم استار ترک 2016 ، بین ارتباط این پهپادها اخلال ایجاد کنی ...
> 
> در نهایت می رسیم به همون بمب اتمی که باید می داشتیمیش و هر زمان که دیدیم اوضاع بده با ترکوندنش توی مدار لئو می زدیم زیر میز بازی ...
> 
> البته عزیزان از زدن یک کواد کوپتر هم عاجز بودن
> 
> حتی به اندازه ژنرال ضیاء پاکستان هم عرضه نداشتن و به خاطر قدرت طلبی سلاحی که می تونست خیلی از تهدیدات علیه ما رو بی اثر کنه رو دادن رفت ... سلاحیی که تک تک مردم ایران بابتش سال ها هزینه دادن و زجر کشیدن و زجر می کشند ...


Google this :::
"Nuclear weapon is a big hoax"
We will defeat the grandeur of nuclear weapons. Seyyed Ali Kamenei
We have a better hidden technology brother. Better than fake NUKEs


----------



## Draco.IMF

mohammad45 said:


> Google this :::
> "Nuclear weapon is a big hoax"
> We will defeat the grandeur of nuclear weapons. Seyyed Ali Kamenei
> We have a better hidden technology brother. Better than fake NUKEs



which technology?


----------



## VEVAK

OldTwilight said:


> all for show ... where was these system in past days !?
> at least they could use Messbah 2 System ...
> 
> I think someone brand Messbah System as useless , take the budget for his own project ( just stealling the money ) and then decide an slave solder with 30 years old Zu-23 is enough for Tehran ...
> 
> this is reality ...



Just because they didn't show them it doesn't mean they weren't there! This was a live exercise of a wide area not a weapons showing & these areas are protected classified locations so you can't just send a crew to every location!
They showed the Sayyad-2, S-200, Shalamcheh launches! That's plenty!
As I said before they want the 1st public showing of the Bavar-373 to be of a Ballistic Missile interception!

This government is trying hard NOT to create tensions so the plan for now is not to show off their achievements constantly but just because they don't show them off it doesn't mean they aren't working on them! 1st stage booster of the Simorgh was clearly tested but they didn't show it off! Karrar Tank, Kowsar-88 jet trainer, Sina-4, Fatteh Sub, Sahand,...


They have increased Iran's defense spending to upwards of ~ $20 Billion USD it's far from enough especially when your paying almost $6Billion on paychecks + Benefits but still it's an increase despite low oil prices & fall in currency

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Draco.IMF said:


> which technology?


EMP! & Weapons based on & or using Nanotechnology! 
Imagine weapons that dispersing into 3,000 smaller pieces each weighing no more than 250 grams at an altitude of 10 miles above a city! each peace containing 200 grams of purified liquid Nitroglycerin with a protective layer that keeps it stabilized & slowly dissolves upon hitting the atmosphere using nanotechnology & a charge the ignites it once the protective layer is gone & it hits the ground!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitroglycerin
The reason nitroglycerin is not used today in it's most explosive form is because of it's sensitivity a simple shake or room temperature could set it off
And what you see below is not even a purified form!
http://www.wimp.com/the-power-of-nitroglycerin/ 
Now imagine nitro was something that was invented long before Nanotechnology even existed!!!

Hell even 1000 X 1kg of HMX (produced by Iran today) dispersed in 2 square kilometers at the hart of a city = 1000 katyusha rockets hitting the hart of a city at the same time it's not going to flatten the city but will totally decimate it!

And of course Iran is working on a non nuclear EMP device who wouldn't be!!!!!!!

Now imagine if those clusters were carrying chemical, biological or a new Nanotechnology based explosive! imagine weapons specifically made not to target humans but your crops or your water supply!
Israeli's & Americans know this! So Iran has a none nuclear deterrent against nukes that will make nukes look like mercy kill!
The problem the U.S. has with Iran has nothing to do with nukes! Nukes are just the most recent excuse!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

A quick analysis of MTNs photos

So now the names for each of the Bavars radars are mentioned. Hence let me further explain what I think about the Bavars radar systems as I did before i this thread.

One of the Bavar battery radars is called engagement radar and the other accusation and engagement radar. Both work in the same bandwidth, both are phased arrays and as said earlier apparently active ones. So why using two such radars in the Bavar battery and not just one like in the S-300PM/400, Patriot and all the others?

I speculate that the reason is that the Bavar has a higher emphasis to work effectively against VLO, stealth targets while using SARH guided long range SAMs.

If you want to use a long range SARH guided missile against a stealth target at max. range you will have a hard time to track the target at those ranges in S- to X-band for which their VLO features are best optimized. It will even have a hard time to detect the target.
A somewhat complex but feasible solution is the following one which fits the Bavars displayed systems exactly.

Long range surveillance radar data is used as the highest tier source of information this can be by large static systems such as the IRGC's Ghadir or the IRIADF OTH radar which is in development or already operational. This is passed down to lower tier long range surveillance systems such as the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 or Nebo-SVU.
Iran has no own mobile Nebo-SVU equivalent, a mobile VHF AESA with space time processing, digital beamforming and most importantly for our case sufficiently accurate 3D coordinate information. But with the static Fath-14 we know that they are working on what would become a Nebo-SVU equivalent.

High tier system such as Ghadir/OTH radars can only do early warning of the rough area where the target should be. The first system of the greater Bavar system which could detect a stealth target is successfully would be a Nevo-SVU like system, potentially using its AESA beamforming capability to search in a limited portion of the airspace with greater concentration of RF energy to archive greater dynamic range. The features of the Nebo-SVU I described above made it the first VHF-band radar with accurate enough resolution to successfully guide a SARH SAM towards it with a good chance for the SAM seeker to pick up the target a terminal phase. This theoretical operation was made famous by Carlo Kopp for Australian Airpower for the S-300PM/400.

Now lets come back to those two Iranian Bavar battery radars: 

One is a apparently a AESA wich is enough for following tasks: 360° conventional radar search, sector search using electronic scanning, digital beamforming to track and illuminate a target (needs to be CW/FMCW), track the missile if necessary and create a datalink beam to provide guidance updates to the SAM (if sufficiently advanced). The general functions described are also performed by the S-300/400s Tombstone/Gravestone radars and thus in theory this single radar would be sufficient for the Bavar battery operation. Because its called engagement radar we should expect a CW(FMCW illumination capability.

The other dedicated engagement radar has no search function, is apparently a AESA too and have digital beamforming capability to concentrate CW/FMCW illumination in a smaller portion of the airspace than PESAs such as the engagement radars of S-300/400 and Patriot. This feature would give it probably a similar illumination intensity at the target as the S-300/400 while operating at a much lower emitting power as well as smaller aperture size.

To put this together I think there is a special mode of operation which is used against stealth targets or targets very far away: A Nebo-SVU like radar has detected a stealth target at extended ranges such as 250km using beamforming as described above to archive better range (by knowing the rough portion of airspace where the target should be by higher tier early warning systems). 
This information is passed to a Bavar battery. The SAM is launched with those coordinates feed into its INS. The search and engagment radar of the Bavar starts to sporadically emitting in order to track the SAMs position and feed it with guidance updates via a dedicated data-link beam produced by the beamformer. At this point this Bavar radar does not see the stealth target, it only uses the coordinated provided to it by the Nebo-SVU-like radar.
Coming closer terminal range the dedicated engagement/illumination radar is activated to illuminate the portion of airspace where the Nebo-SVU-like radar tracks the target. Also this radar sees no target and tracks nothing.
Of course at one point the SAM get close enough to the target to pick up the RF energy reflected by the target and the inaccuracy coordinate info provided by the Nebo-SVU-like system is no longer necessary. A SAGG/TVM like terminal SARH guidance kicks in, does the necessary trajectory corrections and possibly sends back what its seeker detects via data-link to do cross-processing with the information provided by the Nebo-SVU-like or other sensors.

Hence at the moment I think the Bavars search and engagement radar is the main battery radar used for large targets and at lower ranges than the max. SAM range (possibly for use with lower range SAMs of the Bavar), it also a secondary search function is necessary. 
The dedicated engagement radar is a illumination radar possibly not even possessing receiving capabilities. A illumination radar with no receiving system would be a bad decision for system redundancy but could be a wise one for cost effectiveness and knowing that against stealth and very distance targets no tracking would be possible anyway. 

This is my explanation for this unusual arrangement of two such radars. It would make a lot sense for a system designed against stealthy opponents or designed for very long range engagement.

A few notes: The engagement-only radar would certainly have a receive function for tracking, for redundancy purposes its "a must", its provides the battery with the capability to to remain operational even if one of the two battery engagement radars has been killed.

The Meraj-4 takes the place of the Big Bird in the S-300/400, a large ~6000 element PESA S-Band search radar (but its anti-stealth capability could be reduced compared to the Big Bird due to the higher frequency).

The Najam 802 is not proven to be related to the Bavar, but compared to the larger Meraj-4 it is apparently a AESA system with beam forming and more sophisticated capabilities (foremost beam concentration to get a track of a distend/stealth target). It resembles the Russian Gamma-S which s also part of the Nebo-M multiband system.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
11


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> A quick analysis of MTNs photos
> 
> So now the names for each of the Bavars radars are mentioned. Hence let me further explain what I think about the Bavars radar systems as I did before i this thread.
> 
> One of the Bavar battery radars is called engagement radar and the other accusation and engagement radar. Both work in the same bandwidth, both are phased arrays and as said earlier apparently active ones. So why using two such radars in the Bavar battery and not just one like in the S-300PM/400, Patriot and all the others?
> 
> I speculate that the reason is that the Bavar has a higher emphasis to work effectively against VLO, stealth targets while using SARH guided long range SAMs.
> 
> If you want to use a long range SARH guided missile against a stealth target at max. range you will have a hard time to track the target at those ranges in S- to X-band for which their VLO features are best optimized. It will even have a hard time to detect the target.
> A somewhat complex but feasible solution is the following one which fits the Bavars displayed systems exactly.
> 
> Long range surveillance radar data is used as the highest tier source of information this can be by large static systems such as the IRGC's Ghadir or the IRIADF OTH radar which is in development or already operational. This is passed down to lower tier long range surveillance systems such as the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 or Nebo-SVU.
> Iran has no own mobile Nebo-SVU equivalent, a mobile VHF AESA with space time processing, digital beamforming and most importantly for our case sufficiently accurate 3D coordinate information. But with the static Fath-14 we know that they are working on what would become a Nebo-SVU equivalent.
> 
> High tier system such as Ghadir/OTH radars can only do early warning of the rough area where the target should be. The first system of the greater Bavar system which could detect a stealth target is successfully would be a Nevo-SVU like system, potentially using its AESA beamforming capability to search in a limited portion of the airspace with greater concentration of RF energy to archive greater dynamic range. The features of the Nebo-SVU I described above made it the first VHF-band radar with accurate enough resolution to successfully guide a SARH SAM towards it with a good chance for the SAM seeker to pick up the target a terminal phase. This theoretical operation was made famous by Carlo Kopp for Australian Airpower for the S-300PM/400.
> 
> Now lets come back to those two Iranian Bavar battery radars:
> 
> One is a apparently a AESA wich is enough for following tasks: 360° conventional radar search, sector search using electronic scanning, digital beamforming to track and illuminate a target (needs to be CW/FMCW), track the missile if necessary and create a datalink beam to provide guidance updates to the SAM (if sufficiently advanced). The general functions described are also performed by the S-300/400s Tombstone/Gravestone radars and thus in theory this single radar would be sufficient for the Bavar battery operation. Because its called engagement radar we should expect a CW(FMCW illumination capability.
> 
> The other dedicated engagement radar has no search function, is apparently a AESA too and have digital beamforming capability to concentrate CW/FMCW illumination in a smaller portion of the airspace than PESAs such as the engagement radars of S-300/400 and Patriot. This feature would give it probably a similar illumination intensity at the target as the S-300/400 while operating at a much lower emitting power as well as smaller aperture size.
> 
> To put this together I think there is a special mode of operation which is used against stealth targets or targets very far away: A Nebo-SVU like radar has detected a stealth target at extended ranges such as 250km using beamforming as described above to archive better range (by knowing the rough portion of airspace where the target should be by higher tier early warning systems).
> This information is passed to a Bavar battery. The SAM is launched with those coordinates feed into its INS. The search and engagment radar of the Bavar starts to sporadically emitting in order to track the SAMs position and feed it with guidance updates via a dedicated data-link beam produced by the beamformer. At this point this Bavar radar does not see the stealth target, it only uses the coordinated provided to it by the Nebo-SVU-like radar.
> Coming closer terminal range the dedicated engagement/illumination radar is activated to illuminate the portion of airspace where the Nebo-SVU-like radar tracks the target. Also this radar sees no target and tracks nothing.
> Of course at one point the SAM get close enough to the target to pick up the RF energy reflected by the target and the inaccuracy coordinate info provided by the Nebo-SVU-like system is no longer necessary. A SAGG/TVM like terminal SARH guidance kicks in, does the necessary trajectory corrections and possibly sends back what its seeker detects via data-link to do cross-processing with the information provided by the Nebo-SVU-like or other sensors.
> 
> Hence at the moment I think the Bavars search and engagement radar is the main battery radar used for large targets and at lower ranges than the max. SAM range (possibly for use with lower range SAMs of the Bavar), it also a secondary search function is necessary.
> The dedicated engagement radar is a illumination radar possibly not even possessing receiving capabilities. A illumination radar with no receiving system would be a bad decision for system redundancy but could be a wise one for cost effectiveness and knowing that against stealth and very distance targets no tracking would be possible anyway.
> 
> This is my explanation for this unusual arrangement of two such radars. It would make a lot sense for a system designed against stealthy opponents or designed for very long range engagement.
> 
> A few notes: The engagement-only radar would certainly have a receive function for tracking, for redundancy purposes its "a must", its provides the battery with the capability to to remain operational even if one of the two battery engagement radars has been killed.
> 
> The Meraj-4 takes the place of the Big Bird in the S-300/400, a large ~6000 element PESA S-Band search radar (but its anti-stealth capability could be reduced compared to the Big Bird due to the higher frequency).
> 
> The Najam 802 is not proven to be related to the Bavar, but compared to the larger Meraj-4 it is apparently a AESA system with beam forming and more sophisticated capabilities (foremost beam concentration to get a track of a distend/stealth target). It resembles the Russian Gamma-S which s also part of the Nebo-M multiband system.


Truly outstanding post sir... 

Just a few quick questions:

1. If this is a complex solution, how could it be improved/applied differently?

2. How do we know the radars depicted are AESA?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot

A less complex but also probably less robust solution and more expensive is to use a simple ARH seeker equipped SAM with one search-only radar, like the the Aster and others. The Iranian solution would be a good one if it works that way, all systems which would be designed to counter stealth opponents would be more complex.

Two different radars on two trucks looks complex but another point is that we have a problem in practice with my described solution:

The Bavars SAM seeker would almost certainly be in X-band. But AESA technology for X-band is still very new, expansive and hard to master. In my description above both Bavar battery radars would have to be X-band AESAs to work that way. Iran has displayed AESA systems up to S-band, with the Hafez for example.
So it would be a more likely theory that the acquisition and engagement radar is in fact a S-band system with no actual "engagement" capability, means the ability to illuminate a target. It could be a AESA beamforming radar like the Hafez, used for emergency battery search capability, missile up-link communication and missile tracking during engagement. It could additionally be optimized to form a high energy pencil beam to track a distant or stealth target, but with no illumination capability to guide the Bavars SARH SAM seeker autonomously. In emergency it could work alone by using the Bavars missile up-link to guide it in a much less robust and accurate command guidance mode.

The necessary engagement radar able to illuminate a target would be the "engagement radar" of the Bavar. It looks like a AESA system, but due to the reasons mentioned above it would be a quite huge achievement to build a rather large X-band AESA for tracking and illumination. Rather high power levels are necessary and Iran is not known to possess such state of the art semi conductor capabilities. A X-band system explains the smaller aperture size of it and a AESA solution with lower power than a S-300 like PESA could archive a comparably high illumination power by more precise pencil beam forming.
We could dismiss it being a AESA and just looking like one from the outside, a high power direct feed PESA would be muh easier to build. Could it be a reduced AESA with no receiving capability as explained in the previous post, in order to make it easier to build? No such system is known and I'm not sure if this would be technically feasible, but I dont exclude the possibility that only by taking out the receiver function they were able to create a high power AESA Illuminator.

One question would be why using two trucks if both radars could be mounted on a single one judging from the size. Its for system redundancy and because both radars work in different S- and X-bands.

So why do these radars look like AESAs?
-A horn or lens feed system is missing (like on Patriot, Big bird, Tombstone PESAs)
-A waveguide is missing on the front (the horizontal channels on the aperture face, like on Meraj-4 and Bashir)
-The clean face of the radar aperture continuous 100% of surface area and shape in total depth of the aperture and the total depth of the aperture is not rather thin compared to PESA designs but thick.

The Bavars radars have all those traits, hence they are almost certainly AESAs even if there is a slim possibility of a just unusual looking PESA.

Some might ask what the main advantage of a AESA would be in this context.

Lets take the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 and Najam 802 as example. These 3 could form something like a Iranian Nebo-M system, even if lacking a third L-band component.
As PESAs the Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would make use of their large emitting power and aperture size to do continuous volume search in VHF and S-band. Signal analysis of the two would make it possible to determine whether its a stealth target or a conventional one. In a stealth case the Meraj-4 would see nothing but the Matla ol Fajr-3 would. Here is where a advanced AESA like the Najam 802 could do following: Its aperture size and emitting power is smaller than its S-band colleague the Meraj-4, hence it would normally have no chance to see the stealth target. It would use its AESA given precise beam forming capabilities to do a tight sector search in which a small pencil beam scans the airspace portion where the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 has detected a potential stealth target. Hence even if operating in the less stealth effective S-band, it could pick up the target visible by the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 and do the necessary target analyzing and more importantly provide much more accurate S-band grade target coordinate data to Bavar batteries. Signal analysis in such a case could even classify the target, whether its a missile, decoy, fighter and so on. Additionally it would be able to keep track of the target in case of heavy jamming, where volume search PESAs Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would already be jammed.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
10


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> A less complex but also probably less robust solution and more expensive is to use a simple ARH seeker equipped SAM with one search-only radar, like the the Aster and others. The Iranian solution would be a good one if it works that way, all systems which would be designed to counter stealth opponents would be more complex.
> 
> Two different radars on two trucks looks complex but another point is that we have a problem in practice with my described solution:
> 
> The Bavars SAM seeker would almost certainly be in X-band. But AESA technology for X-band is still very new, expansive and hard to master. In my description above both Bavar battery radars would have to be X-band AESAs to work that way. Iran has displayed AESA systems up to S-band, with the Hafez for example.
> So it would be a more likely theory that the acquisition and engagement radar is in fact a S-band system with no actual "engagement" capability, means the ability to illuminate a target. It could be a AESA beamforming radar like the Hafez, used for emergency battery search capability, missile up-link communication and missile tracking during engagement. It could additionally be optimized to form a high energy pencil beam to track a distant or stealth target, but with no illumination capability to guide the Bavars SARH SAM seeker autonomously. In emergency it could work alone by using the Bavars missile up-link to guide it in a much less robust and accurate command guidance mode.
> 
> The necessary engagement radar able to illuminate a target would be the "engagement radar" of the Bavar. It looks like a AESA system, but due to the reasons mentioned above it would be a quite huge achievement to build a rather large X-band AESA for tracking and illumination. Rather high power levels are necessary and Iran is not known to possess such state of the art semi conductor capabilities. A X-band system explains the smaller aperture size of it and a AESA solution with lower power than a S-300 like PESA could archive a comparably high illumination power by more precise pencil beam forming.
> We could dismiss it being a AESA and just looking like one from the outside, a high power direct feed PESA would be muh easier to build. Could it be a reduced AESA with no receiving capability as explained in the previous post, in order to make it easier to build? No such system is known and I'm not sure if this would be technically feasible, but I dont exclude the possibility that only by taking out the receiver function they were able to create a high power AESA Illuminator.
> 
> One question would be why using two trucks if both radars could be mounted on a single one judging from the size. Its for system redundancy and because both radars work in different S- and X-bands.
> 
> So why do these radars look like AESAs?
> -A horn or lens feed system is missing (like on Patriot, Big bird, Tombstone PESAs)
> -A waveguide is missing on the front (the horizontal channels on the aperture face, like on Meraj-4 and Bashir)
> -The clean face of the radar aperture continuous 100% of surface area and shape in total depth of the aperture and the total depth of the aperture is not rather thin compared to PESA designs but thick.
> 
> The Bavars radars have all those traits, hence they are almost certainly AESAs even if there is a slim possibility of a just unusual looking PESA.
> 
> Some might ask what the main advantage of a AESA would be in this context.
> 
> Lets take the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 and Najam 802 as example. These 3 could form something like a Iranian Nebo-M system, even if lacking a third L-band component.
> As PESAs the Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would make use of their large emitting power and aperture size to do continuous volume search in VHF and S-band. Signal analysis of the two would make it possible to determine whether its a stealth target or a conventional one. In a stealth case the Meraj-4 would see nothing but the Matla ol Fajr-3 would. Here is where a advanced AESA like the Najam 802 could do following: Its aperture size and emitting power is smaller than its S-band colleague the Meraj-4, hence it would normally have no chance to see the stealth target. It would use its AESA given precise beam forming capabilities to do a tight sector search in which a small pencil beam scans the airspace portion where the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 has detected a potential stealth target. Hence even if operating in the less stealth effective S-band, it could pick up the target visible by the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 and do the necessary target analyzing and more importantly provide much more accurate S-band grade target coordinate data to Bavar batteries. Signal analysis in such a case could even classify the target, whether its a missile, decoy, fighter and so on. Additionally it would be able to keep track of the target in case of heavy jamming, where volume search PESAs Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would already be jammed.














Fantastic post PeeD... keep up the good work

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Khahesh mikoam Amirpatriot.

Let me continue:

What sense does it make to select a X-band AESA as engagement/illumination radar? Why not PESA like everyone else? I gave a answer in the previous post, but lets get into the details:

PESA elements are up to several times cheaper than AESA T/R modules. The S-300PM's Tombstone illumination radar uses some 10.000 PESA elements which gives it a large aperture size. HQ-9's illumination radar, still uses some 3000-5000 elements.
Bavars illumination radar has a smaller aperture size than those two, it should have something around 2000 elements. They might still be just direct feed PESA elements, but for the previously stated reasons I thinks its a AESA system.

With a PESA system you could likely archive higher emission power output per element at much lower price and even the S-500 is said to have a PESA illumination radar.

So you have smaller aperture size (half of HQ-9 and 1/4 of S-300PM), lower emission power and likely higher cost. Problems with manufacturing AESA T/R modules at useful prices might make it even necessary to buy them from China while PESA phase shifters and transmitters would be in the reach of Iranian industry.

The answer can be only the following if we take the already displayed engineering solutions of the Bavar as proof that the team behind it is very capable.

I'm not a radar expert to judge if it is possible to overcome a just 25% aperture size with likely just half the transmitter power per element by the flexibility offered by AESA technology. This flexibility could theoretically allow to form a very tight main lobe, a radar beam that is very confined at the target, concentrating the RF energy at a small spot at i.e 300km distance. A spot which would be 5-10 times smaller than the Tombstones, to overcome its lower overall power. If such a aperture gain would be possible by a sophisticated AESA design we would have the answer why Iran selected this engineering solution. You would get the same illumination power on-target for terminal missile guidance as the brute force Tombstone.
This has not been done before as far as I know and I have not enough knowledge on antenna and aperture behavior and whether AESA elements could enable such a highly precise pencilbeam forming.

Fact is: For a Aster like solution with ARH seeker SAM a AESA radar like the other Bavar radar, the search an engagement radar, would be sufficient. So we have a SARH SAM with the Bavar, likely a TVM/SAGG system.
For a illuminator everyone these days goes for PESAs, Chinese HQ-9 and KS-1, North Korean S-300P variant, Taiwan, Russia with S-400 and -500 etc.
A AESA illuminator would only be a benefit in the above scenario.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Khahesh mikoam Amirpatriot.
> 
> Let me continue:
> 
> What sense does it make to select a X-band AESA as engagement/illumination radar? Why not PESA like everyone else? I gave a answer in the previous post, but lets get into the details:
> 
> PESA elements are up to several times cheaper than AESA T/R modules. The S-300PM's Tombstone illumination radar uses some 10.000 PESA elements which gives it a large aperture size. HQ-9's illumination radar, still uses some 3000-5000 elements.
> Bavars illumination radar has a smaller aperture size than those two, it should have something around 2000 elements. They might still be just direct feed PESA elements, but for the previously stated reasons I thinks its a AESA system.
> 
> With a PESA system you could likely archive higher emission power output per element at much lower price and even the S-500 is said to have a PESA illumination radar.
> 
> So you have smaller aperture size (half of HQ-9 and 1/4 of S-300PM), lower emission power and likely higher cost. Problems with manufacturing AESA T/R modules at useful prices might make it even necessary to buy them from China while PESA phase shifters and transmitters would be in the reach of Iranian industry.
> 
> The answer can be only the following if we take the already displayed engineering solutions of the Bavar as proof that the team behind it is very capable.
> 
> I'm not a radar expert to judge if it is possible to overcome a just 25% aperture size with likely just half the transmitter power per element by the flexibility offered by AESA technology. This flexibility could theoretically allow to form a very tight main lobe, a radar beam that is very confined at the target, concentrating the RF energy at a small spot at i.e 300km distance. A spot which would be 5-10 times smaller than the Tombstones, to overcome its lower overall power. If such a aperture gain would be possible by a sophisticated AESA design we would have the answer why Iran selected this engineering solution. You would get the same illumination power on-target for terminal missile guidance as the brute force Tombstone.
> This has not been done before as far as I know and I have not enough knowledge on antenna and aperture behavior and whether AESA elements could enable such a highly precise pencilbeam forming.
> 
> Fact is: For a Aster like solution with ARH seeker SAM a AESA radar like the other Bavar radar, the search an engagement radar, would be sufficient. So we have a SARH SAM with the Bavar, likely a TVM/SAGG system.
> For a illuminator everyone these days goes for PESAs, Chinese HQ-9 and KS-1, North Korean S-300P variant, Taiwan, Russia with S-400 and -500 etc.
> A AESA illuminator would only be a benefit in the above scenario.



@PeeD

whats your opinion/guess about the capabilities of B-373
is it compareable with the russian version of S300-PMU2 or is it inferior?
once mass produced will it be a "pain in the a.." for the zionists? will it be a "game changer"?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

The Bavar is quite unusual and thus hard to classify and predict.


What I can do is putting up two scenarios as worst and best case.


I start with the worst case summing up the key system characteristics:


- Designed to only engage atmospheric aerodynamic targets, not ballistic missiles and other exo-atmospheric objects entering the atmosphere at high speed.


- No SAM TVC system for higher maneuverability, high altitude maneuverability and possible limited exo-atmospheric interception capability. Reason for this being the above stated aerodynamic-target-only design.


- ARH-seeker (AIM-54 design heritage) equipped SAM for long range engagements or worse: The engagement radar is just a direct back-feed low power PESA. With the displayed small aperture size such a low power non space-feed PESA would have very limited and weak illumination capability, reducing range to at best 100km and providing the SARH non-SAGG/non-TVM seeker with only weak return signal which could hardly detectable with a self defense x-band jammer on the target aircraft. A command-guidance-only would be even worse but as we have seen the Illuminator radar this theory can be excluded.


- No missile up-link for passive SAM guidance up to terminal phase and SAGG/TVM purposes. No autopilot with INS for the SAM to use initial passive operation and optimized flight trajectory for improved long range kinematics. This would also mean that like HAWK and S-200, the illumination radar would be active from the start of the missile, making it easier to locate and attack. This would also mean that only one SAM could be guided at a time, making it a single engagement/channel system such as the HAWK and S-200 etc. The vertical container launched missile proves that at least some sort of autopilot and data-link communication is in place.


- Improvement in range of the Sayyad-2 to the Sayyad-4 is from 50km to 100km, hence 100% and thus considered enough and a huge improvement and so making it as much a long range SAM as earlier PAC-2 variants or the Patriot are. This would fit to the above stated small low power PESA illuminator. One reason would be that a SARH missile is somewhat heavier than a SAGG/TVM guided one and more expansive, making it a less economic design.


- Overall low effectiveness against VLO stealth targets: Low x-band illumination power, not having the brute force necessary to provide the SARH SAM with useful reflected energy. No non-SARH guidance due to lack of missile up- and down-link as well as missing INS-autopilot system able to operate passive with IADS information from VHF/UHF/HF-OTH coordinate data of detected stealth targets.


-Search and engagement radar being a simple low power PESA search radar with ~150km range against fighter targets. A separate part of the array is used to provide S-75 like command guidance to the SAM in case of jammed SARH guidance, thus making it a engagement radar as the name says.


-Meraj-4 being just a weak solution for a Big Bird-like IADS level, upper tier 360° volume search system with smaller single side aperture with fewer and lower power PESA elements. Not to talk about the lack of the advanced analysis and ECCM features of the Big Bird.

________________________________________________________________

So much for the worst case, not the best case scenario:


- System design for use against aerodynamic VLO stealth targets as well as high speed and exo-atmospheric ballistic missile targets up to MRBM-velocity.


- Novel engagement illumination radar using AESA elements and advanced methods to archive a pencil beam with very small width and high, making up for the smaller aperture size and lower emitting power of AESA modules compared to S-400 Gravestone like high power, large aperture brute force solutions. Thus providing enough brute force illumination power on target in X-band to illuminate VLO targets designed to reflect and absorb exactly those x-band waves. This power would be so high that even at long range, the max. SAM engagement range, this RF energy on target being enough to provide the terminal SARH seeker of the SAM with and firm track to home on the target. Russians trust the brute force illumination power of the S-400 X-band Gravestone radar to be able to illuminate US stealth designs to guide their current max. range SAM to its limit envelope of 250km. The engagement radar would have a secondary search function for emergency autonomous operation.


- The long range SAM of the Bavar being a TVC equipped design with SARH, SAGG guidance and secure, robust missile up- and down-link. A potent INS-autopilot would enable it to fly energy optimized trajectory and passive for up to the terminal phase of the engagement by relying on up-link provided target location updates from several IADS sensors. Range wise a 200km+ SAM would be possible. TVC would provide it with high maneuverability and some limited exo-atmospheric and high altitude intercept capabilities.
A very long range SAM variant which would fly a ballistic trajectory with a AIM-54 heritage ARH seeker with HOJ mode would be a anti-tanker, -AEW, Jammer and -ISR-JSTARs component (a concept speculated for the S-400). As well a shorter range SAM components.


- Overall LPI design with short emitter on-target times for the two very mobile shoot-and-scoot battery level radars. Making use of the AESA technology and a C4I IADS multi-sensor systems to operate in a very passive manner in strict emission control regime. This drastically improves the battery level surviveability.


-The search and engagement radar being a 300km against fighter class battery search radar S-band AESA with advanced beamforming capabilities, providing missile up- and down-link as well as missile tracking and redundant robust command guidance system. It would seldom work in search mode, only in case of disruption of connection to the IADS level upper tier systems or battery self defense in case of a PGM attack. However its the system that makes each Bavar battery a autonomous system able to operate alone if necessary. Albeit the long range anti-VLO stealth capabilities of a Bavar battery would be low in such a IADS-disconnected operation. The Cheeseboard radar does the search task of this Iranian radar in Russian S-300PM and S-400 batterys.


- The Meraj-4 being the battle management radar, like the S-300/400 Big Bird. Performance wise it would be a single faced Big Bird (possibly with higher rotation speed to compensate) with similar 3000+ S-band element count and overall aperture size, making use of never technology to archive higher emitting power per element. Its hard to beat the Big Bird in its class but the Meraj-4 could be very close and it could have similar analysis, fusion and ECCM capabilities. The Nebo-M radar system is not the upper tier volume search radar of the S-400 but would make a good replacement for the Big Bird. In the Nebo-M the Gamma-S would take over the task of the Big Bird for S-band search operation although being weaker than the huge big bird.
For the Bavar they could use the VHF-band Matla-ol-Fajr-3 to fuse with the Meraj-4 to form a Nebo-M like multi-band system or a more advanced mobile Fath-14 variant/Nebo-SVU. There is no immediate need for a third UHF band component except if advanced triangulation methods would be applied where a third radar is needed (Najam 802 being a possible AESA candidate for it). Such a system with the necessary sensor fusion involving passive ELINT and EO/UV/IR sensors beside the radars, would offer a huge analysis capability with very high ECCM capabilities and able to identify the target and sort out decoys.



So much for the cases, expect something in between.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

Thank you for another great post @PeeD.



PeeD said:


> not ballistic missiles



Well President Rouhani has ordered it to be tested on a ballistic missile target. Though whether it is an exo-atmospheric or terminal defence is the question (I suspect the latter).



PeeD said:


> No SAM TVC system for higher maneuverability



Maybe. Certainly no officials have alluded to this capability (which I'm sure they would love to brag about if we did have it). There has been one image of the exhaust of the Sayyad-4 showing no sign of TVC though this could be a mockup/prototype.








PeeD said:


> reducing range to at best 100km



No way... the range of the missiles themselves is expected to be more than that.



PeeD said:


> Improvement in range of the Sayyad-2 to the Sayyad-4 is from 50km to 100km



Well speculation goes that the Sayyad-2 has a 75 km range and the Sayyad-3 is quoted by news agencies to have a 150 km range so I expect the Sayyad-4 is more than these put together...



PeeD said:


> exo-atmospheric ballistic missile target



IMHO it seems unlikely. The Bavar-373 has always been pitched as an anti-aircraft system, not an ABM.



PeeD said:


> Range wise a 200km+ SAM would be possible



Official military quotes seem to suggest the Sayyad-4 missile has a 300 km range.



PeeD said:


> Its hard to beat the Big Bird in its class



Why is this? Large number of elements? ECCM capability? Power?

I hope you don't think I'm getting defensive... I just think that some of the "worse case" and "best case" scenarios are too extreme as they divert from some things the Iranian defence establishment has said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> Thank you for another great post @PeeD.
> 
> Maybe. Certainly no officials have alluded to this capability (which I'm sure they would love to brag about if we did have it). There has been one image of the exhaust of the Sayyad-4 showing no sign of TVC though this could be a mockup/prototype.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Also if the TVC vanes are coupled with the aerodynamic control surfaces then we wouldnt be able to see them from this angle.As for the official pronouncements on the system these have been pretty thin on any concrete details of the system and its capabilities


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

The task of such a worst and best case scenario comparison is to create those two extremes.
For example Rohani might have ordered it to be tested against a ballistic missile, however under right test conditions also a MIM-23 HAWK could be tested against a TBM and successfully intercept it.

The Bavar might be as useful against TBMs as the S-400 is, primarily designed as anti-aircraft systems. Very high altitude or limited exo-atmospheric capability make TVC necessary, especially if you want to intercept a ballistic missile at ~40km. As you rightly say we cant judge from the parade mock-up if the final variant wont have TVC or whether there isn't a Sayyad-5 component (smaller and ABM optimized) with TVC for TBM type targets. And as for range, yes even 300km might be possible, I just said 200km+ because for a normal SAM with no special ballistic trajectory system, 200km is the upper range for a missile of that size.

Now to the Big Bird. Its just a very sophisticated radar of high emitting power and large aperture size. Its from the 70's and has been incrementally improved. It has a very sophisticated analysis system and advanced algorithms. Russians even opted for its use in the S-400 over much newer systems like the Gamma-D, also because of its decade long sophistication.

__________________________________________________________

Now let me move from system design characteristics to the operational employment and tactics against VLO stealth targets.

Worst case:

It would operate like the early Patriot variant or the KS-1 system. The search and engagement radar would be more or less useless against a F-117 type aircraft, detecting it at less then 20km. They would use IADS Nebo-SVU information to determine the potential target location. The engagement radar would put its mainlobe beam into that direction and try to get a return. It could get a return at 50km range, one that would be hardy sufficient to cue to SAMs SARH seeker to the target. Hence the SAM would be launched in command guidance mode like the KS-1 with the option to accuire the target with the SAMs SARH seeker in terminal phase. The system could also be used in command-guidance-mode-only against stealth targets and in a very worse case scenario this could be the Bavars only guidance mode bringing it to the same league as the early S-300P and the KS-1.

Best case:

A sophisticated IADS based kill chain would be used. A OTH radar system would detect the stealth targets rough position 200km outside Irans border. A Ghadir type high power VHF early warning radar would search for the target once its inside the line of sight of the system. ELINT systems known as "passive radars" would try to pick up emissions from the target, classify it or even locate it and Ghadir radar would also further analyze the target.

Forward deployed to the early warning radar systems (200km) would be a volume search mobile early warning site consisting of the Meraj-4, Najm 802 and Matla ol Fajr 3/Nebo-SVU (or more advanced Fath-14 based Iranian VHF AESAs). Those systems would further classify the target, make band comparisons to sort out ECM and decoy targets, possibly use triangulation methods, prioritize and maybe even identify targets (via radar analysis data, received emitter data and possibly EO/IR sensor data) and pass over target data for engagement to Bavar batteries. Those target coordinates could be be precised by possible 3D S-band AESA Najm 802 and 3D VHF-band AESAs such as Nebo-SVU/mobile-Fath-14. These volume search IADS systems would be mobile and re-deploy every few hours and need about an hour to set up again.

The further forward deployed Bavar batteries (100km) would then use precision target coordinates to cue the Bavar engagement radar to search in the airspace box where the upper tier systems have detected the target. The extrem tight beam of the X-band AESA would get a target return at extended 100km+ range against a F-22 type target. Even if no return is received the engagement radar could start to paint the airspace box where the target has been detected due to precision IADS based target coordinates, so the illumination power on target in terminal phase would be sufficient for the SARH seeker to pick up the target and get a firm track. Such a operation could extend the Bavar anti-stealth engagement range to 150km+.
But in the case of conventional operation where a track by the engagement radar is successfully proven at first, the SAM is launched in passive mode where the engagement radar stops illuminating the target. This is done via target data from upper tier IADS elements and data-link and track of missile via the S-band search and engagement radar. The system only starts to emit again in the terminal phase where the SARH SAGG seeker system of the SAM is close enough to acquire the stealth target. Missile downlink would make a SAGG signal analysis of IADS data, engagement radar data as well as SAM seeker data possible to make a data analysis in order to increase robustness and avoid self defence ECM to protect the aircraft against the attack. The mobile Bavar batteries would redeploy after each emitting for target attack. With 5 minutes shoot and scoot and high off-road capability they would set traps in the periphery of the IADS volume search systems. 

Bavar batteries and other IADS elements would be protected by CIWS like AAA and short range anti-PGM SAMs. Even further forward deployed to Bavar batteries would be systems like the medium range Talash with Sayyad-2 missiles, HAWK, Raad etc. So IADS would first order to use those medium range missiles against conventional and no very high flying targets, the Bavars would only get activated for attack if the other lower tier SAM systems fail to down the targets or the IADS wishes to intercept high value targets already far away from Irans borders at long range.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

Does the Iranian S-300 PMU-2 missiles have TVC?
if so this technolog will be reverse engineered for sure,....if Iran does not have TVC technology, which I doubt, they should have it.....

Qiam-1 ballistic missile has thrust vectoring, so Iran should be capable to implement them into air defence missiles...why not...


----------



## Fafnir

Draco.IMF said:


> Does the Iranian S-300 PMU-2 missiles have TVC?
> if so this technolog will be reverse engineered for sure,....if Iran does not have TVC technology, which I doubt, they should have it.....
> 
> Qiam-1 ballistic missile has thrust vectoring, so Iran should be capable to implement them into air defence missiles...why not...


Its quite possible the bavar 373 sams do have tvc,but without a proper look at the rear of the missile you cant really tell.The s300s that iran received do have tvc and iran has had previous experience with tvc for its larger ssms.Heres a pic of a coupled tvc system from an early hq9 sam.The bavar sam if it has tvc would probably look very similar to this,tho another less likely option would be a gas dynamic system like that used on the s300vm/sa23,this taps gas from the exhaust which is then re-injected into the exhaust stream.


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> A less complex but also probably less robust solution and more expensive is to use a simple ARH seeker equipped SAM with one search-only radar, like the the Aster and others. The Iranian solution would be a good one if it works that way, all systems which would be designed to counter stealth opponents would be more complex.
> 
> Two different radars on two trucks looks complex but another point is that we have a problem in practice with my described solution:
> 
> The Bavars SAM seeker would almost certainly be in X-band. But AESA technology for X-band is still very new, expansive and hard to master. In my description above both Bavar battery radars would have to be X-band AESAs to work that way. Iran has displayed AESA systems up to S-band, with the Hafez for example.
> So it would be a more likely theory that the acquisition and engagement radar is in fact a S-band system with no actual "engagement" capability, means the ability to illuminate a target. It could be a AESA beamforming radar like the Hafez, used for emergency battery search capability, missile up-link communication and missile tracking during engagement. It could additionally be optimized to form a high energy pencil beam to track a distant or stealth target, but with no illumination capability to guide the Bavars SARH SAM seeker autonomously. In emergency it could work alone by using the Bavars missile up-link to guide it in a much less robust and accurate command guidance mode.
> 
> The necessary engagement radar able to illuminate a target would be the "engagement radar" of the Bavar. It looks like a AESA system, but due to the reasons mentioned above it would be a quite huge achievement to build a rather large X-band AESA for tracking and illumination. Rather high power levels are necessary and Iran is not known to possess such state of the art semi conductor capabilities. A X-band system explains the smaller aperture size of it and a AESA solution with lower power than a S-300 like PESA could archive a comparably high illumination power by more precise pencil beam forming.
> We could dismiss it being a AESA and just looking like one from the outside, a high power direct feed PESA would be muh easier to build. Could it be a reduced AESA with no receiving capability as explained in the previous post, in order to make it easier to build? No such system is known and I'm not sure if this would be technically feasible, but I dont exclude the possibility that only by taking out the receiver function they were able to create a high power AESA Illuminator.
> 
> One question would be why using two trucks if both radars could be mounted on a single one judging from the size. Its for system redundancy and because both radars work in different S- and X-bands.
> 
> So why do these radars look like AESAs?
> -A horn or lens feed system is missing (like on Patriot, Big bird, Tombstone PESAs)
> -A waveguide is missing on the front (the horizontal channels on the aperture face, like on Meraj-4 and Bashir)
> -The clean face of the radar aperture continuous 100% of surface area and shape in total depth of the aperture and the total depth of the aperture is not rather thin compared to PESA designs but thick.
> 
> The Bavars radars have all those traits, hence they are almost certainly AESAs even if there is a slim possibility of a just unusual looking PESA.
> 
> Some might ask what the main advantage of a AESA would be in this context.
> 
> Lets take the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 and Najam 802 as example. These 3 could form something like a Iranian Nebo-M system, even if lacking a third L-band component.
> As PESAs the Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would make use of their large emitting power and aperture size to do continuous volume search in VHF and S-band. Signal analysis of the two would make it possible to determine whether its a stealth target or a conventional one. In a stealth case the Meraj-4 would see nothing but the Matla ol Fajr-3 would. Here is where a advanced AESA like the Najam 802 could do following: Its aperture size and emitting power is smaller than its S-band colleague the Meraj-4, hence it would normally have no chance to see the stealth target. It would use its AESA given precise beam forming capabilities to do a tight sector search in which a small pencil beam scans the airspace portion where the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 has detected a potential stealth target. Hence even if operating in the less stealth effective S-band, it could pick up the target visible by the Matla-ol-Fajr-3 and do the necessary target analyzing and more importantly provide much more accurate S-band grade target coordinate data to Bavar batteries. Signal analysis in such a case could even classify the target, whether its a missile, decoy, fighter and so on. Additionally it would be able to keep track of the target in case of heavy jamming, where volume search PESAs Meraj-4 and Matla ol Fajr-3 would already be jammed.


I learned a lot. Thanks Man!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Thank you for your valuable contributions @PeeD. Unfortunately my replies don't do your post justice as I am not so familiar with the technicals as you are... If you don't mind I will invite @eagle2007 to also contribute to this thread since he is probably much more familiar than I am.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

You are welcome AmirPatriot and eagle2007 too (if he is not from the CIA!)

Regarding the missile of the Bavar, it is clearly designed to meet the kinematic benchmark set by the S-300PMU2, both are 7m+ SAMs.

Regarding TVC: It is only really useful against ballistic missiles and that only under following conditions:

A TVC system only works if exhaust gas is still ejected from the nozzle. This requires a rather complex dual pulse solid fuel motor. Even more: For 200km long range SAMs the second pulse must have a duration of tens of seconds.

I'm not even sure if lastest 200km rated S-300PM2 missiles meet that requirement. Technically its more likely that even the S-300PM only uses the TVC system for initial trajectory alignment right after the start and for the first 40km which is is able to intercept high speed re-entry vehicles of MRBMs. I doubt whether there is enough gas pressure left after 200km travel to have beneficial effects on the TVC system. It makes sense to have TVC against ballistic missiles, more so if the interception takes place at 40km which would set the interception altitude very high, so high that aerodynamic control via fins would not be sufficient to pull the necessary Gs up there. I called this high altitude interception capability of the S-300 limited exo-atmospheric interception capability in the previous posts, but this is very limited and not comparable to the i.e SM-3 which should have all axis exo-atmospheric control.

Against manned fighter type targets TVC might be even a unnecessary/uneconomical design element. With the large warheads, vertical attack aspect, high speeds and max. target maneuvers of 15G at best, aerodynamic control via fins are almost certainly enough. American MIM-104 Patriot does not use TVC and is even used against TBMs and Russians also omitted TVC for the S-300V (only used at start phase before stage separation). So The Bavar and Sayyad-4 should have no penalties of PK against manned fighter type targets and still be effective against BMs.

Its possible that the Sayyad-3 has a sort of TVC and is used in the Patriot PAC-3 role against BMs, it would be a wise decision given that the possibly 200km+ kinematic capability of the Sayyad-4 would be a overkill for 40km max. range upper endo-atmospheric ABM operation.

The Bavar design team went for many US-pattern designs solutions with the Bavar. The heritage of the missiles is from the SM-1. So for the Sayyad-4 operation also input from the AIM-54 could have been used, i.e the vertical dive on target attack, which ensures a high PK. This would be Independent from other SAMs not in Irans possession, with designs at hand to study.
So the Bavars Sayyad-4 looks like a Iranian solution with missile layout similar to the S-300PM but with SM-1 design heritage and possibly AIM-54 influences to archive highly effective long range anti-fighter performance. It might have skipped some of the extras like the TVC system but likely due to different objectives (more anti-fighter) and good economic considerations. As it is almost certainly a multi-missile system, specialized objectives and roles like ABM operation could be possibly passed to the Sayyad-3.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> and eagle2007 too (if he is not from the CIA!)



With the sort of knowledge he has I'm surprised he isn't...



PeeD said:


> Its possible that the Sayyad-3 has a sort of TVC and is used in the Patriot PAC-3 role against BMs



Another thing we had not thought about. Although it has been quoted to have a 150 km range. On the other hand, the launch canisters shown at the official unveiling were most likely Sayyad-3 canisters, and Rouhani did say the B-373 would be tested on a Ballistic Missile...



PeeD said:


> The Bavar design team went for many US-pattern designs solutions with the Bavar. The heritage of the missiles is from the SM-1.



I dunno... the Sayyad-2 certainly has this;






But the Sayyad-3 and 4 don't look like it at all.


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> With the sort of knowledge he has I'm surprised he isn't...
> 
> 
> 
> Another thing we had not thought about. Although it has been quoted to have a 150 km range. On the other hand, the launch canisters shown at the official unveiling were most likely Sayyad-3 canisters, and Rouhani did say the B-373 would be tested on a Ballistic Missile...
> 
> 
> 
> I dunno... the Sayyad-2 certainly has this;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the Sayyad-3 and 4 don't look like it at all.


Agreed,the sayyad 2 is very clearly based on the rim66/sm1,however the sayyad 3+4 appear to be very different from not only the rim66/sm1 but also from each other.I would have said that the sayyad 4 looks to be far more likely to have been either heavily inspired by,or perhaps even copied[?] from,the s300 5v55k/48n6e interceptors as the bi-conical nose section on it is very obvious and the cable duct is also very similar as well,tho the rear control surfaces are quite different.The sayyad 3 reminds me of the patriots mim104 interceptor tho once again the rear control surfaces are different.


----------



## PeeD

As said in the previous post there is no doubt that the general arrangement, layout and size of the Sayyad-4 is modeled on the S-300s 48N6E (which btw, is a indication that a SAGG/TVM guidance is used instead of independent SARH). But the detail design elements have a SM-1 heritage in my opinion, the Sayyad-2 design team also worked on the dash 3 and 4. The Sayyad-2 school is the basis, the Sayyad-4 is very different from the Sayyad-2 and SM-1, but has the same heritage, nothing negative there.
It would be bad if the Iranian team got a S-300PM round somehow and just copied it to a own variant. Here a design team which learned some 15 years ago from the SM-1 design, copied it and then went to built a different variant, the Sayyad-2 and now has sufficient skills to design a S-300PM layout missile if ordered to do so. No one criticizes the team which created the lastest SM-3 block because the design heritage is from the SM-1 school.

Some additional Bavar details: One integral benefit against VLO/stealth targets for SARH SAGG/TVM guided missiles is that they work in bi static mode. This means that the RF illumination by the engagement radar will be reflected by the stealth design to a different direction to avoid detection. But as the receiver of the system in a SAGG/TVM SAM is at the missiles seeker, it will receive the illumination RF signal from a different aspect. A SAM that use a energy efficient trajectory and performs a dive attack on the target has much better chances to receive RF reflection signals from a stealth aircraft and home on it. A ARH seeker equipped SAM on the other hand would not have such a benefit and send and receive RF signals at a angle to the target which is optimized to reflect RF signals to a different direction. Due to this effect, it may often happen that a engagement radar which illuminates a target will not receive RF signals back to establish a track but if it had a SAGG/TVM SAM near the target it would be able to establish a bi-static track of the target. 

Here is where a new stealth optimized SAM system could benefit from recently archived high accuracy/resolution levels of digital 3D AESA VHF-band search radars. If system position systems are accurate enough a such a VHF-band radar would provide accurate enough target coordinate data for the engagement radar to point is tight mainlobe beam to the estimated target area. The engagement radar would have no track of the target but get continuously updated by the VHF-band radar to point its mainlobe on target. It would first see the target via its bi static SAM seeker in the terminal phase. Its possible that systems like the S-300PM have already such a "blind mode" against stealth targets implemented. However I don't know if practical results of such a mode would be robust enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Iran IRGC Aerospace Division "Defenders of the Velayat Skies" drill رزمایش "مدافعان حریم ولایت" سپاه

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> Iran IRGC Aerospace Division "Defenders of the Velayat Skies" drill رزمایش "مدافعان حریم ولایت" سپاه



finally they are showing new stuff, nice video...
i can see raad air defence family and Sayyad 2
maybe we will see B-373 soon? lets see...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> finally they are showing new stuff, nice video...
> .












look at difference between two . clearly you can see improvement and miniaturization








Draco.IMF said:


> maybe we will see B-373 soon? lets see...


it is political decision which the government doesn't want to take

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> it is political decision which the government doesn't want to take



totally illogically

B-373 is an air defence system which is not an offensive weapon, its an defensive weapon.
So Iran was ready to test a ballistic missile some days ago, which is an offensive weapon, but it doesnt show B-373, which is defensive? naaaaah, thats not logical
they dont show it because its not ready yet....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

yavar said:


> it is political decision which the government doesn't want to take


That makes no sense,please elaborate on that statement.


----------



## VEVAK

IRGC SAM's target & hit Ground-Ground Missiles & Air Launched bombs for the 1st time

The type of Ground to Ground missile that was intercepted was not disclosed!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 374436
> 
> IRGC SAM's target & hit Ground-Ground Missiles & Air Launched bombs for the 1st time
> 
> The type of Ground to Ground missile that was intercepted was not disclosed!


I'm especially impressed by the hitting of the bombs! (small targets)

This was not expected and demonstrates proficient short range systems!

The hitting of the ground to ground missile could mean a cruise or ballistic missile... the latter would be significantly more impressive... Let's await further details.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

well, I will believe it as soon as they show it....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Major step up if this news is true. Congratulations Iran!


----------



## ilia



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## ilia



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ilia



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

Sayyad-2 (Talesh) missiles used also on Raad air defence system?
Raad AD System is using normally Taer-2 missiles
what is going on here?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scimitar19

Draco.IMF said:


> Sayyad-2 (Talesh) missiles used also on Raad air defence system?
> Raad AD System is using normally Taer-2 missiles
> what is going on here?


casual mind fucking games from IRGC air defence division
but I believe these missiles can be mounted on any vehicle as long as that vehicle supports the tonnage and weight of missile


----------



## yavar

Iran IRGC Aerospace Division "Defenders of the Velayat Skies" drill رزمایش "مدافعان حریم ولایت" سپاه

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD clearer images of the Najm 802...


----------



## eagle2007

AmirPatriot & PeeD,

My apologies for being late to the party, hadn't been around for a couple days and apparently I missed out. 

As to the question of my employment, while I won't say what I actually do for a living, I can say that working for the CIA ain't it, for a lot of reasons (for one, the CIA not wanting their employees poking around places like this and "talking shop").

My "expertise" is mostly based on the simple fact that I am a HUGE military tech nerd. This ranges from my ever-growing collection of military books (just bought several new editions today, including a Jane's Weapon Systems 1982-1983) and hands-on experience with military hardware (ranging from museum pieces to functional stuff). 

Specifically concerning air defenses, my knowledge is purely amateur and I yield to PeeD in this department as his knowledge on the topic is far beyond mine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

You are welcome to take part in the technical discussion of the Bavar eagle2007, its just open source stuff I talk about and the CIA part was a joke.

Anyway Amirpatriot, yes the Najm802 is good visible here and now its clear that its a IRGC system. I'm 90% sure not due to the array depth, that its a AESA.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mark Pyruz

Observed from Iran media imagery, IRGC-ASF 'Defenders of the Velayat Skies' exercise 2017:

- IRGC-ASF Sayyad-2 ("Hunter-2") transporter erector launcher.
- Sayyad type mid-range, high altitude solid-fuel missiles, apparently mounted on erector triple-launcher setup.
- IRGC-ASF 3rd Khordad transporter erector launcher and radar (TELAR) with 3x Taer-2B ("Bird-2") surface to air missiles, part of the Raad ("Thunder") air defense system.
- IRGC Tabas transporter erector launcher and radar (TELAR) with 3x Taer-2A ("Bird-2") surface to air missiles, part of the Raad ("Thunder") air defense system.
- Transporter erector launcher vehicle, part of the Raad ("Thunder") air defense system
- Najm-802 ("Star-802") active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.
- IRGC-ASF Sukhoi Su-22M type Fitter K fighter bombers, appearing recently refurbished. (Perhaps these operated as aggressor aircraft for air defense target acquisition purposes.)
- Mil Mi-171 "Hip" transport helicopter (unusual white paintwork for IRGC-ASF).
- Matla-ul-Fajr ("Breaking Dawn") type 3D VHF early-warning radar.
- Kasta 2E2 type surveillance radar.
- Ghadir ("Almighty") type OTH 360° 3D radar, part of the Sepehr ("Sky") radar system.

(Corrections, additions encouraged)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jahidus2005

here we go as u guys hearing on the news , zionist tryin to drag america into another war with iran Allah forbid , but if that happen Allah forbid , destroy the zionist first , cz they been lobbying to USA to drag America into war with iran , but truely wish nothing happens , but problem is now we got crazy president sitting down on world most powerful country , MAy God help the innocent humans on earth


----------



## SubWater



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

ilia said:


>


which radar is that?





And that one in another video, looks quit similar one to Nazim-802 (following pic)




The first one have dual antenna while the second has only single as far as i can observe and its quit similar to nazim 802..
may be the antenna in the second pic is the unfold state of the first one..
kinda confused.
@PeeD can u explain...?


----------



## yavar

Iran domestically designed&built Sayyad-2 medium range air defense missile system دفاع هوایی صیاد-۲

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

iran made misaq 3 manpad

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

ashool said:


> iran made misaq 3 manpad


That's huge
After long time we will see new manpad
any new info or picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ashool

YES and the new system and weapon show main showing are in 22 bahman li;ly

info no only pic right now


----------



## Russel

SubWater said:


> That's huge
> After long time we will see new manpad
> any new info or picture.


Very interesting development if it is longer in range and higher in altitude than any existing manpad in the world. It seems longer than existing manpads. 
Can anyone explain the holes around the neck of the missiles?
If it is a 10+ km range with similar altitude then it's a significant development. It will puss the plane to operate at higher altitude making harder to hit target visually. Considering unconventional doctrine of Iranian military, this is a doomsday weapon when you don't have other longer range non-manpad SAMs which are destroyed by superior enemy. Perfect weapon for gurrella weapon assuming above assumptions of the range and altitude are correct. It did not get much attention in the forum but I think it's a significant development. My assumption!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Its a interesting evolved variant of the Stinger/QW-... design heritage. Some kind of laser based pass-by proximity fuse system seems to be used together with a 360° EO/IR system. No QW series such as the QW-18 and QW-19 use such a advanced system. Range and other kinematics should remain the same as the other Misaq and Stinger family systems. However its anti IR decoy performance could be much higher and the new proximity fuse system could be for optimized anti cruise missile or UAV performance.

@Optimus prime

Yes its just folded and unfolded Najm802.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TopCat

SubWater said:


>


Are they decoy?
None of them showed actually the full flight till the target are destroyed.



yavar said:


> Iran IRGC Aerospace Division "Defenders of the Velayat Skies" drill رزمایش "مدافعان حریم ولایت" سپاه



Same thing


----------



## Arminkh

Russel said:


> Can anyone explain the holes around the neck of the missiles?


Those are 360 degree proximity laser sensors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

An interesting read:

_By: Paul Bucala and Genevieve Casagrande (Institute for Study of War)_

Iranian military cooperation with Russia in Syria is dramatically increasing Tehran’s ability to plan and conduct complex conventional operations. Iranians are learning by seeing and by doing, and are consciously trying to capture lessons-learned in Syria for use throughout their military and para-military forces. Iran is fielding a conventional force capability to complement and in some cases supplant its reliance on asymmetric means of combat. Russia is assisting Iran’s military leadership conduct this effort. It is introducing Iran and its proxies to signature Russian campaign-design concepts such as cauldron battles, multiple simultaneous and successive operations, and frontal aviation in Syria. These concepts are the fruit of almost a century of advanced Soviet and Russian thought and hard-won experience in conventional military operations. This knowledge-transfer can help the Iranian military advance its understanding of conventional war far more rapidly than it might otherwise be able to do. It can help Iran become a formidable conventional military power in the Middle East in relatively short order, permanently changing the balance of power and the security environment in the region.

The Iranian military is using the Syrian conflict as a learning environment for its forces. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)’s Imam Hossein University (IHU), which is home to the IRGC’s advanced military education programs, has deployed students to Syria almost certainly as part of an internal study and educational program for Iranian officers. Iranian officers recognize the benefits of experiencing Russian military operations. One Iranian major general, for example, praised Russia’s use of the Shahid Nojeh Air Base in Iran’s Hamedan province for exposing Iranian Air Force personnel to “[Russian] planes and the way they were operated.” Iran has also recently conducted exercises specifically to capture and practice lessons learned from Syria.

Conventional Military Planning

Close cooperation between Russian and Iranian military personnel at the operational and tactical levels enables this knowledge transfer between the two militaries. Senior Russian and Iranian officers engaged in operational planning are in frequent contact in joint operations rooms. On the ground, at least some Russian special forces cooperate closely within Iranian-backed proxy forces, such asLebanese Hezbollah, likely putting them in close contact with IRGC officers who also partner with, and in some cases command, those forces. Iranian troops are probably supporting targeting for Russian air strikes, although Iranian forces are likely not serving as forward air controllers for Russian aircraft. Moreover, the Russian-Iranian security axis in Syria is able to coordinate efforts across multiple fronts. Russia will surge airstrikes in northern Syria so that Iran and the Syrian regime can focus their own efforts near the capital, for example.

Iran and its local proxy forces including Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias demonstrated their ability to use signature Russian doctrinal approaches in their successful campaign against the opposition in Aleppo City with support from Russian airstrikes and advisors. Pro-regime forces supported by Hezbollah, Afghan, and Iraqi Shi’a militia fighters led by regular IRGC Ground Forces and Quds Force operatives began launching simultaneous and successive operations against opposition-held districts in and around Aleppo City beginning as early as October 2015. Pro-regime and Iranian-backed forces continued to use simultaneous and successive operations to envelop opposition-held Aleppo City and tighten their siege throughout late 2016. Iran and pro-regime forces had not demonstrated the capability to conduct operations of this type on the Syrian battlefield prior to the Russian intervention in September 2015.

Iran, Russia, and the Syrian regime recaptured Aleppo City from the opposition as the result of a three-phased campaign plan to siege and collapse opposition-held districts of the city that demonstrated Russian campaign design. Pro-regime forces supported by Russia and Iran first severed the opposition-held ground line of communication north of Aleppo City on February 3 and subsequently completed the siege by severing the final opposition-held ground line of communication northwest of Aleppo City on July 28. Russia, Iran, and the Syrian regime collapsed the opposition-held pocket through an aggressive air and ground campaign in Aleppo City, forcing the surrender and full withdrawal of the opposition on December 13 and 22 respectively. This type of envelopment is a signature of Russian cauldron battles seen in operations in eastern Ukraine, and was not employed at this scale in Syria prior to the Russian intervention in September 2015.

Russia has also introduced Iran to frontal aviation (the use of strike aircraft assigned to ground forces to provide a mix of close air support and battlefield air interdiction operations that are hallmarks of Soviet operational art). Russia regularly conducts airstrikes against multiple opposition frontlines to fix opposition forces along multiple axes and hinder the movement of reinforcements, facilitating advances by pro-regime forces supported by Iran and Iranian proxy forces. Iranian-backed fighters are probably directly engaged in supporting Russian airstrikes by supplying intelligence to Russian forces, possibly in cooperation to Russian Special Forces active on the ground in Syria. Iranian forces enabled pro-regime forces on the ground to exploit Russian airpower over the course of the 15-month campaign to recapture Aleppo, particularly during the February operation to relieve the siege of Nubl and al Zahra north of Aleppo. Iranian forces suffered over 50 casualties during the first half of February, the majority of which likely participated in this operation.

Conventional Capabilities

Iranian military planners have probably learned from the success of the Russian air campaign to prioritize the development of a close air support capability that would allow Iran to replicate the effects of Russian air support with proxy forces in other theaters. Iranian military planners are more than willing to use Russian airpower to enable pro-regime gains, but they would almost certainly prefer to possess such a capability themselves. The IRGC Ground Forces created a new air assault unit in late February 2016, possibly influenced by observing Russian Special Forces operations around Aleppo earlier that year. Iran has also asked Russia to sell it an entire fleet of advanced Su-30 fighter-bombers (roughly equivalent in capability with the US F-15E Strike Eagle). Such a capability would significantly reduce Tehran’s reliance on Russian (and, in Iraq, American) fixed-wing aviation to support its ground operations.

The Syrian campaign has also allowed Iranian military officials to observe methods of integrating surface-to-surface and surface-to-air-missile capabilities into conventional military operations. Russia has demonstrated the utility of pairing long-range missile capabilities with air defense systems in order to showcase regional power projection and constrain U.S. freedom of maneuver in the theater. This knowledge transfer is significant considering that Iranian military officials have signaled their intention to boost the conventional applications of their formidable missile arsenal. With the Russian delivery of the advanced S-300 air defense system to Iran in October 2016, Iran can now begin to deploy its increasingly-advanced ballistic missile systems with advanced air-defense systems to create an offensive-defensive strike complex similar to what the Russians have established in Syria.

Implications

The knowledge transfer between Iran and Russia presents the U.S. with a more capable Iran that remains hostile to the U.S. and its allies in the region. This transfer of Russian capabilities represents the latest high-water mark in Iran’s effort to increase its own conventional military capabilities. Iranian conventional military capabilities will continue to increase rapidly as long as Russian and Iranian forces continue to operate alongside each other in Syria simply by learning the best practices for developing, deploying, and using such forces in combat. Russia is poised to teach Iran additional methods of warfare as it prepares for the next phase of the pro-regime campaign in Syria. The expansion of Iranian maneuver and combined force capabilities will not be limited to Syria, however. Iran will likely export these capabilities to other theaters such as Iraq. The U.S. and its regional partners must recognize that the deep Russo-Iranian military cooperation in Syria is in itself a major threat to the balance of power within the Middle East.


----------



## Nosferatu

Guys, do you have more info about this platform?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Nosferatu said:


> Guys, do you have more info about this platform?


This is Fajr 5C guided artillery rocket. Judging bu the name it should have the same specs as Fajr 5 unguided artillery rocket plus that fact that it is guided and more precise: 333mm diameter, 915kg weight, 90kg warhead, 6.48m length and range of 75km. 

Judging by the location of the fins, it is stipulated that the warhead is detached in the terminal phase and hits the target. So all in all it is a small replica of Fateh-110 high precision ballistic missile.

Palestinians used the unguided version against Israel in their latest war.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

There is a discussion whether the Misagh-3 is a QW-18 copy.

I think its not. Its clear that its not the baseline QW-18 due to the advanced sensor configuration. However the QW-19 is even more different but has a single 360° sensor arrangement similar to the Misagh-3 (this might indicate a Chinese contribution).
Some think the marking "DC-18" at the top indicates that its some variant of the QW-18, but at lower sections we see markings which seems to be "BC-16" and "FG-25". Hence this is not a proof that its a advanced QW-18 variant.

Using vast Chinese experience with its many MANPAD variants would be useful for Iran. But after 11 years from Misagh-2 to -3, the team could have worked on a own improved variant. We will have to see, the Chinese could present a identical QW variant in the future, but if not, Iran seems to have the most complex fuse (or possible seeker assistance) system ever seen on a MANPAD (3 seperate 360° covering systems beside the seeker which should be IR/UV or IIR/UV by now).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> There is a discussion whether the Misagh-3 is a QW-18 copy.
> 
> I think its not. Its clear that its not the baseline QW-18 due to the advanced sensor configuration. However the QW-19 is even more different but has a single 360° sensor arrangement similar to the Misagh-3 (this might indicate a Chinese contribution).
> Some think the marking "DC-18" at the top indicates that its some variant of the QW-18, but at lower sections we see markings which seems to be "BC-16" and "FG-25". Hence this is not a proof that its a advanced QW-18 variant.
> 
> Using vast Chinese experience with its many MANPAD variants would be useful for Iran. But after 11 years from Misagh-2 to -3, the team could have worked on a own improved variant. We will have to see, the Chinese could present a identical QW variant in the future, but if not, Iran seems to have the most complex fuse (or possible seeker assistance) system ever seen on a MANPAD (3 seperate 360° covering systems beside the seeker which should be IR/UV or IIR/UV by now).



AFAIK Chines copied them from russian IGLA Manpad,....so all are derivates from IGLA


----------



## arashkamangir

WordsMatter said:


> An interesting read:
> 
> _By: Paul Bucala and Genevieve Casagrande (Institute for Study of War)_
> 
> Iranian military cooperation with Russia in Syria is dramatically increasing Tehran’s ability to plan and conduct complex conventional operations. Iranians are learning by seeing and by doing, and are consciously trying to capture lessons-learned in Syria for use throughout their military and para-military forces. Iran is fielding a conventional force capability to complement and in some cases supplant its reliance on asymmetric means of combat. Russia is assisting Iran’s military leadership conduct this effort. It is introducing Iran and its proxies to signature Russian campaign-design concepts such as cauldron battles, multiple simultaneous and successive operations, and frontal aviation in Syria. These concepts are the fruit of almost a century of advanced Soviet and Russian thought and hard-won experience in conventional military operations. This knowledge-transfer can help the Iranian military advance its understanding of conventional war far more rapidly than it might otherwise be able to do. It can help Iran become a formidable conventional military power in the Middle East in relatively short order, permanently changing the balance of power and the security environment in the region.
> 
> The Iranian military is using the Syrian conflict as a learning environment for its forces. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)’s Imam Hossein University (IHU), which is home to the IRGC’s advanced military education programs, has deployed students to Syria almost certainly as part of an internal study and educational program for Iranian officers. Iranian officers recognize the benefits of experiencing Russian military operations. One Iranian major general, for example, praised Russia’s use of the Shahid Nojeh Air Base in Iran’s Hamedan province for exposing Iranian Air Force personnel to “[Russian] planes and the way they were operated.” Iran has also recently conducted exercises specifically to capture and practice lessons learned from Syria.
> 
> Conventional Military Planning
> 
> Close cooperation between Russian and Iranian military personnel at the operational and tactical levels enables this knowledge transfer between the two militaries. Senior Russian and Iranian officers engaged in operational planning are in frequent contact in joint operations rooms. On the ground, at least some Russian special forces cooperate closely within Iranian-backed proxy forces, such asLebanese Hezbollah, likely putting them in close contact with IRGC officers who also partner with, and in some cases command, those forces. Iranian troops are probably supporting targeting for Russian air strikes, although Iranian forces are likely not serving as forward air controllers for Russian aircraft. Moreover, the Russian-Iranian security axis in Syria is able to coordinate efforts across multiple fronts. Russia will surge airstrikes in northern Syria so that Iran and the Syrian regime can focus their own efforts near the capital, for example.
> 
> Iran and its local proxy forces including Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias demonstrated their ability to use signature Russian doctrinal approaches in their successful campaign against the opposition in Aleppo City with support from Russian airstrikes and advisors. Pro-regime forces supported by Hezbollah, Afghan, and Iraqi Shi’a militia fighters led by regular IRGC Ground Forces and Quds Force operatives began launching simultaneous and successive operations against opposition-held districts in and around Aleppo City beginning as early as October 2015. Pro-regime and Iranian-backed forces continued to use simultaneous and successive operations to envelop opposition-held Aleppo City and tighten their siege throughout late 2016. Iran and pro-regime forces had not demonstrated the capability to conduct operations of this type on the Syrian battlefield prior to the Russian intervention in September 2015.
> 
> Iran, Russia, and the Syrian regime recaptured Aleppo City from the opposition as the result of a three-phased campaign plan to siege and collapse opposition-held districts of the city that demonstrated Russian campaign design. Pro-regime forces supported by Russia and Iran first severed the opposition-held ground line of communication north of Aleppo City on February 3 and subsequently completed the siege by severing the final opposition-held ground line of communication northwest of Aleppo City on July 28. Russia, Iran, and the Syrian regime collapsed the opposition-held pocket through an aggressive air and ground campaign in Aleppo City, forcing the surrender and full withdrawal of the opposition on December 13 and 22 respectively. This type of envelopment is a signature of Russian cauldron battles seen in operations in eastern Ukraine, and was not employed at this scale in Syria prior to the Russian intervention in September 2015.
> 
> Russia has also introduced Iran to frontal aviation (the use of strike aircraft assigned to ground forces to provide a mix of close air support and battlefield air interdiction operations that are hallmarks of Soviet operational art). Russia regularly conducts airstrikes against multiple opposition frontlines to fix opposition forces along multiple axes and hinder the movement of reinforcements, facilitating advances by pro-regime forces supported by Iran and Iranian proxy forces. Iranian-backed fighters are probably directly engaged in supporting Russian airstrikes by supplying intelligence to Russian forces, possibly in cooperation to Russian Special Forces active on the ground in Syria. Iranian forces enabled pro-regime forces on the ground to exploit Russian airpower over the course of the 15-month campaign to recapture Aleppo, particularly during the February operation to relieve the siege of Nubl and al Zahra north of Aleppo. Iranian forces suffered over 50 casualties during the first half of February, the majority of which likely participated in this operation.
> 
> Conventional Capabilities
> 
> Iranian military planners have probably learned from the success of the Russian air campaign to prioritize the development of a close air support capability that would allow Iran to replicate the effects of Russian air support with proxy forces in other theaters. Iranian military planners are more than willing to use Russian airpower to enable pro-regime gains, but they would almost certainly prefer to possess such a capability themselves. The IRGC Ground Forces created a new air assault unit in late February 2016, possibly influenced by observing Russian Special Forces operations around Aleppo earlier that year. Iran has also asked Russia to sell it an entire fleet of advanced Su-30 fighter-bombers (roughly equivalent in capability with the US F-15E Strike Eagle). Such a capability would significantly reduce Tehran’s reliance on Russian (and, in Iraq, American) fixed-wing aviation to support its ground operations.
> 
> The Syrian campaign has also allowed Iranian military officials to observe methods of integrating surface-to-surface and surface-to-air-missile capabilities into conventional military operations. Russia has demonstrated the utility of pairing long-range missile capabilities with air defense systems in order to showcase regional power projection and constrain U.S. freedom of maneuver in the theater. This knowledge transfer is significant considering that Iranian military officials have signaled their intention to boost the conventional applications of their formidable missile arsenal. With the Russian delivery of the advanced S-300 air defense system to Iran in October 2016, Iran can now begin to deploy its increasingly-advanced ballistic missile systems with advanced air-defense systems to create an offensive-defensive strike complex similar to what the Russians have established in Syria.
> 
> Implications
> 
> The knowledge transfer between Iran and Russia presents the U.S. with a more capable Iran that remains hostile to the U.S. and its allies in the region. This transfer of Russian capabilities represents the latest high-water mark in Iran’s effort to increase its own conventional military capabilities. Iranian conventional military capabilities will continue to increase rapidly as long as Russian and Iranian forces continue to operate alongside each other in Syria simply by learning the best practices for developing, deploying, and using such forces in combat. Russia is poised to teach Iran additional methods of warfare as it prepares for the next phase of the pro-regime campaign in Syria. The expansion of Iranian maneuver and combined force capabilities will not be limited to Syria, however. Iran will likely export these capabilities to other theaters such as Iraq. The U.S. and its regional partners must recognize that the deep Russo-Iranian military cooperation in Syria is in itself a major threat to the balance of power within the Middle East.



Please provide citation link.
Thanks


----------



## PeeD

@Draco.IMF

I agree that the QW/Misagh (-QW-12, -QW-19) are very similar to the SA-16 (Igla) from the outside, but it is a hybrid which uses FIM-92 technology. Iran wanted to make use of the Stingers it captured during the late 80s and I think the joined experienced Chinese to create a Stinger variant, the Misagh. Admitted, the rolling airframe steering system hints to SA-7/14/16, however the seeker design probably and the ejection motor certainly is that of the Stinger.

Btw. the Russian Verba MANPAD (beside the QW-19 and QW-12) has a similar 360° EO/IR sensor arrangement, although the Misagh-3's is more complex.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WordsMatter

arashkamangir said:


> Please provide citation link.
> Thanks



@arashkamangir I am afraid I do not have enough privilege to post a link. But you can google ISW and find the study at Institute for Study of War.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

WordsMatter said:


> @arashkamangir I am afraid I do not have enough privilege to post a link. But you can google ISW and find the study at Institute for Study of War.



Ah I just saw it on top of your post. Cheers mate.


----------



## PeeD

One of the most interesting announcements from the IRGC-ASF wargame was the claim for ranges.

75km for 3rd Khordads Taer-2B missile,

75km for Sayyad-2M

60km for Tabas' Taer-2A

While 2012 when the Raad system was unveiled, the range was claimed to be 50km and the Sayyad-2 was claimed to have the same range. All those ranges seem to be too high as the similar 2010 vintage Buk-M2 and HQ-16 have ranges of 40-45km. Something seems to be not right there, maybe a counter to the Buk-M3's 70km range?

No I don't think so.

I think those range differences are due to two factors.

- Engagement radars for illumination have improved with the Tabas planar array and 3rd Khordad AESA (yes like the Bavar illumination radar this radar seems to be a X-band AESA too, while Buk-M2 is PESA).

- Robust data-link system allows continuous course updates which in combination with a good INS-autopilot system enable to switch from a P-Nav system to a optimized long range trajectory (same thing was done to create the SM-2 out of the SM-1). The Buk-M1-2 and M2 also has a data-link system, but here its about a advanced system with real-time trajectory calculation and updates which makes a illumination only necessary in terminal phase.

The latter point is responsible for the large 50% range increase for the Sayyad-2M from the prototype 50km range LOBL Sayyad-2 without data-link/autopilot. Back then the Talash-3 system (IRGC-only?) had been just tested and possibly no engagement radar with 75km illumination range and was available. The change of Taer-2A to Taer-2B seems to be the addition of the Sayyad-2M heritage data-link/autopilot system. The huge range increase of Buk-M2 to -M2 is also due to this change.

The first point would be responsible for the range increase of 50 to 60km for the Taer-2A P-Nav guided SARH missile which first used the truck based engagement radar of the Raad-1 system and later got the Tabas engagement system with longer illumination range. However 10-15km range (kinematic-only) increase over Buk-M2 and HQ-16 would be huge and only possible if more advanced missile technology than that of Chinese and even Russians was used.

Those range performances are state of the art for missiles of those classes. Simplified a Sayyad-2 battery can protect a circle of 150km and a 3rd Khordad battery can hunt enemy aircraft at the frontline in a 150km range circle.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> One of the most interesting announcements from the IRGC-ASF wargame was the claim for ranges.
> 
> 75km for 3rd Khordads Taer-2B missile,
> 
> 75km for Sayyad-2M
> 
> 60km for Tabas' Taer-2A
> 
> While 2012 when the Raad system was unveiled, the range was claimed to be 50km and the Sayyad-2 was claimed to have the same range. All those ranges seem to be too high as the similar 2010 vintage Buk-M2 and HQ-16 have ranges of 40-45km. Something seems to be not right there, maybe a counter to the Buk-M3's 70km range?
> 
> No I don't think so.
> 
> I think those range differences are due to two factors.
> 
> - Engagement radars for illumination have improved with the Tabas planar array and 3rd Khordad AESA (yes like the Bavar illumination radar this radar seems to be a X-band AESA too, while Buk-M2 is PESA).
> 
> - Robust data-link system allows continuous course updates which in combination with a good INS-autopilot system enable to switch from a P-Nav system to a optimized long range trajectory (same thing was done to create the SM-2 out of the SM-1). The Buk-M1-2 and M2 also has a data-link system, but here its about a advanced system with real-time trajectory calculation and updates which makes a illumination only necessary in terminal phase.
> 
> The latter point is responsible for the large 50% range increase for the Sayyad-2M from the prototype 50km range LOBL Sayyad-2 without data-link/autopilot. Back then the Talash-3 system (IRGC-only?) had been just tested and possibly no engagement radar with 75km illumination range and was available. The change of Taer-2A to Taer-2B seems to be the addition of the Sayyad-2M heritage data-link/autopilot system. The huge range increase of Buk-M2 to -M2 is also due to this change.
> 
> The first point would be responsible for the range increase of 50 to 60km for the Taer-2A P-Nav guided SARH missile which first used the truck based engagement radar of the Raad-1 system and later got the Tabas engagement system with longer illumination range. However 10-15km range (kinematic-only) increase over Buk-M2 and HQ-16 would be huge and only possible if more advanced missile technology than that of Chinese and even Russians was used.
> 
> Those range performances are state of the art for missiles of those classes. Simplified a Sayyad-2 battery can protect a circle of 150km and a 3rd Khordad battery can hunt enemy aircraft at the frontline in a 150km range circle.



Excellent analysis as always PeeD.

I do have a question though... Considering it's size, isn't the Sayyad-2M still a bit short on range (maybe 100 km would be state of the art)? Or is it still good as it is likely to have a high speed considering it's SM-1 heritage, and it lacks a solid rocket booster?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Faravahar

Man I can't wait till we see sayyad-3 and the longer range missile for ra'ad, sadid-630. But having said that, even the sayyad-2 and taer system are badass

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

Thanks. Yes given that the later SM-2 of similar size, without boost stage could reach nearly 120km one could say that 75km for the Sayyad-2M is sill not state of the art.

However, the SM-2 had the huge Aegis for target illumination. If the new radar shown during the last parade is indeed the Talash-3 system, a large aperture X-band AESA for the IRGC Sayyad-2, it is possible that a extrem long range trajectory regime with a near ballistic flight path is implemented to the Sayyad-2 (with possible hardware changes to the aerodynamic steering system). But whether the missile is light enough and the booster strong enough to reach such high performance, remains open.
Also subsystems like batteries must be advanced enough to enable such range increases.

For the 3rd Khordad, a 120km Taer-2 variant would possibly make no sense because the illumination power of the AESA radar, more so against VLO/stealth targets, would not be sufficient.

Some more hints about those 3 missiles: Buk-M3 is the first one of the large Buk family to use TVC and the rather short ranged HQ-16 (very similar in layout to Sayyad-2M) also has a TVC system. The purpose in such medium range missiles is anti ballistic missile capability (high level atmospheric intercept). At the outer edges of the envelope, the TVC system would certainly be inactive. But its due to the TVC system that the Buk-M3 is credited with 35km max. altitude. Hence Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 are optimized against aerodynamic targets and less effective against BMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Some points on the IRGC-ASF Sayyad-2 system:

It was shown with the Najm 802 as battery surveillance radar system. A long range large aperture AESA for a medium range 75km SAM system? A clear overkill.

The camo of the IRGC-ASF Najm 802 is similar to what was described as "Talash" system/radar in the 2016 parade:







It seems those two radars are the components of the IRGC Sayyad-2 system.

What sense does it make to have those two if both are S-band AESAs, one just larger than the other?
It would make sense if the Talash (3?) radar is a X-band AESA for target illumination and array integrated missile up-link. The problem here is that this would be a huge AESA, twice the size of the Bavar engagement/illumination radar, element count could be easily over 10.000. It would be again a huge overkill for a medium range SAM and make only sense for a SAM system significantly longer ranged than the Bavar 373 up to S-400.

Hence at this point the "Talash" radar seems to be a smaller S-band cousin of the Najm 802 used for battery level surveillance, while the Najm 802 is used at division level. This also means that the IRGC-ASF's engagement/illumination radar of its Sayyad-2 system has not yet been shown (could be identical to that of the IRIADF).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

any chance to get S-400?


----------



## Faravahar

Draco.IMF said:


> any chance to get S-400?



Why on earth would Iran waste money on the S-400 when its own long range systems are months away from mass production?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

شلیک سامانه پدافند هوایی سوم خرداد Iran test firing IRGC "Third Khordad" air defense system

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

*فیلم تست سامانه اس-۳۰۰ در کویر سمنان Iran images S-300PUM2 long range systems Test in Semnan*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

Can someone tell me how many batteries did Iran buy (as on how many launchers are set up) I'm not to keen on how air defenses are set up. 

What is a regiment and battery, or battalion.


----------



## AmirPatriot

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Can someone tell me how many batteries did Iran buy (as on how many launchers are set up) I'm not to keen on how air defenses are set up.
> 
> What is a regiment and battery, or battalion.



Iran got 4 battalions.

The S-300 is a long-range surface-to-air missile system, and can engage aircraft, cruise missiles and theater ballistic missiles. *One S-300 battery usually consists of an engagement radar, a low-altitude radar, and up to eight transporter erector launchers (TEL) with four launch tubes each*. Each tube carries one surface-to-air missile. _*A battalion comprises up to six batteries*_ in addition to a command/fire and control post, as well as an extra target acquisition radar unit.

http://thediplomat.com/2016/05/russia-supplied-s-300-air-defense-battalion-to-iran/

Note the word "up to".


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> Iran got 4 battalions.
> 
> The S-300 is a long-range surface-to-air missile system, and can engage aircraft, cruise missiles and theater ballistic missiles. *One S-300 battery usually consists of an engagement radar, a low-altitude radar, and up to eight transporter erector launchers (TEL) with four launch tubes each*. Each tube carries one surface-to-air missile. _*A battalion comprises up to six batteries*_ in addition to a command/fire and control post, as well as an extra target acquisition radar unit.
> 
> http://thediplomat.com/2016/05/russia-supplied-s-300-air-defense-battalion-to-iran/
> 
> Note the word "up to".



Ah, thank you so much. Still though, seems a little bit lacking in numbers, I'm guessing when the legit unveiling of bavar-373 comes out, we can get a better picture of how iran plans to complement these s-300s with other domestic Iranian systems. 

4 battalions? I was hoping for around 10 or 13.


----------



## AmirPatriot

BlueInGreen2 said:


> seems a little bit lacking in numbers





1 battalion = up to 6 batteries = up to 48 TELs = up to 192 missiles.

For *ONE *battalion.

Of course, Iran doesn't have that number, it specifically said "up to", but I don't think we are short in numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> 1 battalion = up to 6 batteries = up to 48 TELs = up to 192 missiles.
> 
> For *ONE *battalion.
> 
> Of course, Iran doesn't have that number, it specifically said "up to", but I don't think we are short in numbers.



Oh, my math was off lol I did say I wasn't keen on air defense


----------



## sepasgozar

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Oh, my math was off lol I did say I wasn't keen on air defense


By what means were these battalions transported to Iran from Russia? Just drove in and the rest air shipped?

Excuse me if my question is irrelevant or inapproriate. First post after lurking for a looong time. Used to be quite active on the Iranmillitaryforum

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

sepasgozar said:


> By what means were these battalions transported to Iran from Russia? Just drove in and the rest air shipped?
> 
> Excuse me if my question is irrelevant or inapproriate. First post after lurking for a looong time. Used to be quite active on the Iranmillitaryforum


Most of them were transported by trucks. There were pictures all over Twitter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> Most of them were transported by trucks. There were pictures all over Twitter.


Well, shipped through the Caspian Sea (probably) and then moved through Iran on trucks...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hindustani78

"The S-300 is a system on another level, a long-range system which is developed and reliable. What the Iranians are doing is developmental work and the production of prototypes. Nobody knows the real characteristics of this complex yet, including the Iranian media. I wouldn't expect this complex to enter into service with the Iranian army in the next few years," Murakhovsky said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Hindustani78 said:


> "The S-300 is a system on another level, a long-range system which is developed and reliable. What the Iranians are doing is developmental work and the production of prototypes. Nobody knows the real characteristics of this complex yet, including the Iranian media. I wouldn't expect this complex to enter into service with the Iranian army in the next few years," Murakhovsky said.


It was secretly tested during last month AD war game. Parts of it (short and medium range batteries) are already deployed and functional under different names like Talash. What has not been publicize is the long range missile (Sayyad 4) launch and its capabilities. Don't expect the whole system to become operational in one shot. Bavar 373 is a combination of many sub systems many of which are already operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Iran Khatam Al-Anbia air defense "Damavand" exercise, S300 PUM2 قرارگاه خاتم الانبیا رزمایش دماوند

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

yavar said:


> Iran Khatam Al-Anbia air defense "Damavand" exercise, S300 PUM2 قرارگاه خاتم الانبیا رزمایش دماوند



I want Bavar 373.


----------



## Muhammed45

yavar said:


> Iran Khatam Al-Anbia air defense "Damavand" exercise, S300 PUM2 قرارگاه خاتم الانبیا رزمایش دماوند


It was test-fired on ballistic missile, target was destroyed successfully. Congratulations brothers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MTN1917

From the video it is clear that the system Iran received is S-300PMU2(or a derivative of it).

5P85TE2 TEL

















64N6E2 Big Bird Acquisition Radar





96L6E acquisition radar





30N6E2 Tomb Stone engagement radar(at the far right)





Talash TEL and its reload rounds

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

MTN1917 said:


> 96L6E acquisition radar


Also used in the S-400!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

AmirPatriot said:


> Also used in the S-400!


And i think i saw the communication relay of S-350-vityaz !!!!














Am i right Amir?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohammad45 said:


> Am i right Amir?


I don't know... maybe @eagle2007 or @PeeD knows?


----------



## PeeD

This communicaton link is used for all new Russian radar and SAM systems, S-400, S-350, S-300PMU2, Nebo-M complex.

I saw it for the first time with the S-350 too. It has a very tall antenna and it communicates with the Tombstone radars of each battery omnidirectional.

The 96L6E is shown for the first time, I first thought Iranian PMU2s skipped it. In the battalion structure a Big Bird would provide two 96L6E with early warning data and each would direct two batteries with Tombstone radars to their targets.

Wonder if the missiles have been used against a BM. The apparently short range engagement would point to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kiarash



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Iran Gen Ismaili: Bavar 373 will be operational soon سردار اسماعیلی: باور۳۷۳ عملیاتی خواهد شد


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Wonder if the missiles have been used against a BM. The apparently short range engagement would point to it.


General Esmaili confirmed they had successfully intercepted a ballistic missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Wonder if it was Zelzal-2 long range battlefield rocket (would mimic the performance of SCUD-B) of the IRIAF/IRIGF. Potent BMs are in service with IRGC-ASF, don't know if they participated.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

This is very good news. No doubt the equations in the pentagon are being modified yet again. Very nice work!

Can't wait to see Bavar-373 operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

*Iran Gen Ismaili: Bavar 373 will be operational soon*

"soon" is a very widespreaded term of iranian military.....few years also possible...

lets be realistic, i think B-373 is technologically minimum a decade behind the S-300PMU-2

S-300 PMU2 is very potent! it took russia decades...


----------



## arashkamangir

Draco.IMF said:


> *Iran Gen Ismaili: Bavar 373 will be operational soon*
> 
> "soon" is a very widespreaded term of iranian military.....few years also possible...
> 
> lets be realistic, i think B-373 is technologically minimum a decade behind the S-300PMU-2
> 
> S-300 PMU2 is very potent! it took russia decades...



@Draco.IMF stop talking out of your ***.


----------



## Bored Neutrino

So, we received something in-between S-300 PMU2 and S-400!and they're calling it S-300 IRNow we know why there were so many round of talks before contact signing.In the end Russia actually did us some good favors by not delivering PMU1 back in 2010. It pushed our Bavar R&D to an unprecedented level plus now these better than PMU2 version.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hindustani78

Srinagar March 04, 2017 23:37 IST
Updated: March 04, 2017 23:38 IST 







In this April 17, 2016 file photo, a long-range S-300 missile system is displayed in Tehran by Iran’s army during a parade marking National Army Day. Russia delivered the S-300 system to Iran in 2016, nearly 10 years after the initial contract had been signed. Iran signed the $800-million contract to buy the S-300 missile system in 2007, but Russia suspended their delivery three years later due to strong objections from the U.S. and Israel. | Photo Credit:  AP 

http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...anmade-air-defence-system/article17407765.ece

* With a range of up to 200 km, the S-300 is capable of simultaneously tracking and striking multiple targets. *


Iran successfully test-fired a sophisticated Russian-made air defence system, the official IRNA news agency reported on Saturday.

The report said the test of the S-300 system came during a recent military exercise named Damvand, the name of Iran’s highest mountain.

It said the test targeted various flying objects, including missiles. With a range of up to 200 kilometres (125 miles) the S-300 is capable of simultaneously tracking and striking multiple targets.



State TV aired footage of the missiles launching from the back of trucks. It said the test was carried out in Iran’s central desert.

*Part of $800-million deal*

Russia delivered the S-300 system to Iran in 2016, nearly 10 years after the initial contract had been signed. Iran signed the $800-million contract to buy the S-300 missile system in 2007, but Russia suspended their delivery three years later because of strong objections from the United States and Israel.

In 2016, a landmark nuclear deal between Iran and world powers went into practice under which Iran limited its nuclear activities in return for the lifting of sanctions.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> lets be realistic, i think B-373 is technologically minimum a decade behind the S-300PMU-2


There is no evidence to suggest this. Quite the contrary. The S-300 does not have AESA radars while Bavar-373 does. The Bavar-373 has a longer range of 300 km. Jamming resistance is an unknown though.


----------



## Bored Neutrino

AmirPatriot said:


> There is no evidence to suggest this. Quite the contrary. The S-300 does not have AESA radars while Bavar-373 does. The Bavar-373 has a longer range of 300 km. Jamming resistance is an unknown though.


On top of that our Engineers now have access to this PMU2+. Bavar will only gonna get better in future iterations..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Bored Neutrino said:


> On top of that our Engineers now have access to this PMU2+. Bavar will only gonna get better in future iterations..


First we'd have to see what deficiencies there are in the first place compared to the S-300. As of now we haven't even seen a launch.

If I had to make guesses - not assertions - I'd say the Russian system is probably superior in missile speed and jamming resistance.


----------



## mohsen

Draco.IMF said:


> *Iran Gen Ismaili: Bavar 373 will be operational soon*
> 
> "soon" is a very widespreaded term of iranian military.....few years also possible...
> 
> lets be realistic, i think B-373 is technologically minimum a decade behind the S-300PMU-2
> 
> S-300 PMU2 is very potent! it took russia decades...


defense minister said out of 5 level tests, 3 levels have completed, fourth level test which was supposed to be completed in Esfand postponed due to technical problems, nonetheless he did give a specific schedule for the final operating tests before the 3 khordad 96 (24 may 2017).

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/...د-شد-تست-نهایی-سامانه-باور373-تا-سوم-خرداد-96

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

150 S-300PMU2 battalions  


No one gets in or out


----------



## AmirPatriot

BlueInGreen2 said:


> 150 S-300PMU2 battalions

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


>



Just imagine the enemy jet pilots seeing a wall of missiles coming at them lol 

But seriously though. This will give a bit of a breather for Iran.


----------



## AmirPatriot

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Just imagine the enemy jet pilots seeing a wall of missiles coming at them lol
> 
> But seriously though. This will give a bit of a breather for Iran.


150 battalions would bankrupt the country  hardly much of a breather. I'd prefer the Bavar-373 to made in large numbers though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> 150 battalions would bankrupt the country  hardly much of a breather. I'd prefer the Bavar-373 to made in large numbers though.



Oh lol, I should have mentioned I was referring to the 4 battalions that would grant the breather.

But yes, most definitely it is imparitive for Iran to produce and field a greater number of bavar 373 to fill the gaps that the s-300pmu2 cannot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Hopefully this doesn't come off as a unnecessary question but I just needed some clarification.

This system Iran got from the Russians is indeed the s-300pmu2 which varies only slightly from the s-400?

Also this system bares little to no resemblance as far as hardware and software goes to the s-300's that Greece has which Israel uses to train against?

Basically what I wanted to confirm that these are tailor fit to Iran and have the ability to track and engage stealth air craft like the f-35? As well as the sleuth of other targets.


----------



## Hindustani78

*




*
*The Russia-made S-300 missile system has been successfully tested by Iran. The Islamic Republic's military conducted launches of missiles on simulated enemy's targets.*
*https://sputniknews.com/military/201703051051279310-iran-s300-tests-russia/*

On Saturday, Iran successfully test-fired the S-300 surface-to-air missile systems supplied by Russia.

The video footage shows that the S-300 system targeted an air target.

The system is capable of hitting even the smallest aerial objects as well as cruise missiles, making it lethal for any potential enemy, he added, noting that the S-300 will now ensure Iran's secure air defenses alongside Iran's short-range Mersad and long-range Talaash air defense systems.

Iranian experts conducted a number of tests of the Russian missile systems.* The tests included all phases, namely, detection, identification, interception and target shooting. *

The drills took place at the Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base, where Iran's Air Defense Force is headquartered.

*The contract to deliver five Russian S-300 systems to Iran was signed in 2007. *It was suspended after the adoption of UN Security Council sanctions on Iran in mid-2010. In April 2015, Russia resumed the talks on the S-300 deliveries following an interim agreement on the Iranian nuclear program.

In December 2016, Iran's ambassador in Moscow Mehdi Sanayee said that Russia had finished executing the contract on supplying Iran with divisions of S-300 missile systems to Iran.

According to media reports, Russian-made S-300 air defense systems delivered to Iran will become operational by late March 2017.

The export modification of the S-300 system is able to shoot down ballistic missiles of short and medium range. The range of the system is *200 kilometers; it can simultaneously launch 12 missiles on 6 targets* with a time interval of 3-5 seconds.


----------



## Bored Neutrino

I'm loving Talash's new paint job












BlueInGreen2 said:


> Hopefully this doesn't come off as a unnecessary question but I just needed some clarification.
> 
> This system Iran got from the Russians is indeed the s-300pmu2 which varies only slightly from the s-400?
> 
> Also this system bares little to no resemblance as far as hardware and software goes to the s-300's that Greece has which Israel uses to train against?
> 
> Basically what I wanted to confirm that these are tailor fit to Iran and have the ability to track and engage stealth air craft like the f-35? As well as the sleuth of other targets.


S-300 IR

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

BlueInGreen2 said:


> This system Iran got from the Russians is indeed the s-300pmu2 which varies only slightly from the s-400?



It is the PMU2, but the PMU2 doesn't exactly differ "slightly" to the S-400. Some components are shared but the S-400 is more advanced on almost all fronts.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Also this system bares little to no resemblance as far as hardware and software goes to the s-300's that Greece has which Israel uses to train against?



Greece allowed Israel use of the PMU1 (the version we wanted to get in 2007). All hardware of the PMU2 - apart from the Lemz 96L6E radar - is based on the PMU1. But all of this hardware is improved on the PMU1. The computers are faster and more resistant to Electronic Warfare, the radars and missiles all have better performance in all areas. 



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Basically what I wanted to confirm that these are tailor fit to Iran and have the ability to track and engage stealth air craft like the f-35? As well as the sleuth of other targets.



The S-300PMU2 has some basic components that are needed. There are a minimum set of missiles and radars that you must have for the system to be functional. The Lemz 96L6E is an optional radar (which Iran chose, thankfully). I expect Iran would tailor order this system according to it's requirements, so it would have a certain number and combination of missiles and radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

There where conflicting reports on the frequency band of the 96L6 in the past and I thought it was a S-band PESA. Now its cleat that it is a UHF-band radar. Especially at engagement ranges of 100-200km it should have better stealth detection capability than the X-band Tombstone engagement radar.

A good multiband sensor fusion is present with the S-band Big Bird, X-band Tombstone and UHF-band 96L6. A VHF band asset would be better but now it makes sense why Iran got the 96L6.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Abraham Assael, CEO of the Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies in Herzliya and a former brigadier- general in Israel:
"Tehran developing its own advanced missile defense system comes as no surprise.
The Iranians are well-advanced in their technology. In the last decade or two we can say that they developed a lot, especially in the field of rockets,” he said, adding that while it takes time to develop a complicated system, *the Iranians are very capable of developing a very advanced system, even more so than the S-300*"

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Ir...s-test-of-Russian-S-300-missile-system-483270

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

نمونه برتر اس ٣٠٠ را ساخته‌‌‌ایم و می‌سازیم/مقابل هر تهدیدی می‌ایستیم
http://s6.uplod.ir/i/00869/odmnewcvx7yy.jpg
امیر سرلشکر عطاالله صالحی فرمانده کل ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران : امروز در همه زمینه‌ها مانند ساخت تجهیزات وارد عمل شده ایم و خود آن‌ها را تولید می‌کنیم و شاید هم ادواتی، چون سامانه اس ۳۰۰ از خارج بخریم، اما نمونه برتر ان را ساختیم و می‌سازیم. در دریا هم عزت داریم و برنامه داریم به همه جهات دنیا برویم.
سرلشکر صالحی در بخش پایانی سخنانش خاطر نشان کرد: بنده به جرات ادعا می‌کنم که این توان را داریم تا در کنار برادرانمان در همه نیروهای مسلح در برابر هر اندیشه تهدید امیزی بایستیم.​


http://www.yjc.ir/fa/news/6009881/نمونه-برتر-اس-٣٠٠-را-ساخته‌‌‌ایم-و-می‌سازیممقابل-هر-تهدیدی-می‌ایستیم

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Iran "Tabas" mobile air defense system سیستم دفاع هوایی طبس

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hindustani78




----------



## yavar

رمزگشایی از پیام‌های مهم اولین شلیک اس 300/ رادار جنجالی روس‌ها هم در ایران رؤیت شد +عکس​http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/697...های-مهم-اولین-شلیک-اس-300-رادار-جنجالی-روس-ها


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> رمزگشایی از پیام‌های مهم اولین شلیک اس 300/ رادار جنجالی روس‌ها هم در ایران رؤیت شد +عکس​http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/697691/رمزگشایی-از-پیام-های-مهم-اولین-شلیک-اس-300-رادار-جنجالی-روس-ها



google translator not enough for me, please add some words in enlgish so we know whats going on here, thanks


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> google translator not enough for me, please add some words in enlgish so we know whats going on here, thanks



Mashreghnews analysis of the 96L6E radar seen in the recent S-300 test firings.



Parsipride said:


> Karrar is either a reversed engineer T90 that Iran got her hands on in Syria , they some how got the blue prints , or the Russians gave Iran the blueprints in some back door deal.



Absolutely no proof of any of these whatsoever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hossiiee

Could someone summarize the layers of air defence systems starting with the longest range defence systems to the shortest range systems ?


----------



## SubWater

Hello guys
waiting for main military project of Iran in coming days, It's clear they want to get all of possible credit before presidential election and B-373 is main military project of Rohani government with most budget and attention by them and MR president directly in front of camera order to test it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HadiHot8

SubWater said:


> Hello guys
> waiting for main military project of Iran in coming days, It's clear they want to get all of possible credit before presidential election and B-373 is main military project of Rohani government with most budget and attention by them and MR president directly in front of camera order to test it.


I hope you are right please be right!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

Sayyad-3C missile officially shown for the first time

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MTN1917

Does anyone has any idea about this?





Looks similar to a hawk S-200 basterd.

This is from Kermanshah.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Its a S-200 mock-up, but I wonder why, as there is no S-200 unit there.


----------



## MTN1917

PeeD said:


> Its a S-200 mock-up, but I wonder why, as there is no S-200 unit there.


Correction, According to jamejam pic is from Mashhad


----------



## yavar

MTN1917 said:


> Does anyone has any idea about this?
> View attachment 391341
> 
> .


S200 for mobile launcher maybe . we had that project


----------



## TrueIranDoc

This is all very interesting!


----------



## Endurance

MTN1917 said:


> Does anyone has any idea about this?
> View attachment 391341
> 
> 
> Looks similar to a hawk S-200 basterd.
> 
> This is from Kermanshah.



It doesn't look like the S-200 missile. Maybe its a new missile develepod from S-200 because rocket boosters same as the S-200 missile boosters.

Mobile S-200 Launcher from Kazakhstan Army Parade


----------



## eagle2007

Endurance,

That's just a transport truck, not a launcher. The trailer the truck is towing is identical to one's Iran parades every year. 

To date, no publicly known mobile S-200 launcher was/has ever been built, most likely due to the large size of the missiles and it's equally immobile associate radar units. It's impossible to design one but apparently the Soviets never thought it was a practical option.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SubWater

Hello Guys
Am I right ???
Is this part of B-373 Video for first time ????(probably part of it)

download video in blew link.
http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/739309/تصاویر-منتشر-نشده-از-اقتدار-سپاه

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

New video of latest IRGC air defense war game, very unique images of 3rth khordad and Sayyad2 air defense systems and missiles, footage of the impact moment captured by the camera on the target:
http://media.farsnews.com/media/Uploaded/Files/Video/1396/03/29/13960329001019_360P.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> New video of latest IRGC air defense war game, very unique images of 3rth khordad and Sayyad2 air defense systems and missiles, footage of the impact moment captured by the camera on the target:
> http://media.farsnews.com/media/Uploaded/Files/Video/1396/03/29/13960329001019_360P.mp4


Higher quality (up to 1080p) video here if anyone wants.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/video-iranian-defender-of-shrine-military-exercise.502512/

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



cmon dont be like Soheil, put a description into this pic...
or should we guess? a big donut-machine?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> cmon dont be like Soheil, put a description into this pic...
> or should we guess? a big donut-machine?


it just IRGC Saad-2C and 3rd Khordad, Tabas air defence systems with radars and command centers, communications systems from 2016 drill

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

The final test of B-373 should be done some weeks ago, any news about it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Fafnir

Our indian friend Trishul is back with his second part on irans air defenses,it makes for some shall we say "interesting" reading.My favorite part was about the bavar -373 which you can read below:
*"As for the much-touted Bavar-373 air-defence system, it is in reality a trilateral industrial cooperation project involving China, North Korea and Iran that had commenced way back in 2004. While CETC Int’l of China has developed and supplied the Qamar active phased-array engagement radar and the YLC-2V ‘Meraj’ 3-D S-band early warning radar, the Sayyad-3 LR-SAM is a re-engineered HQ-9 missile produced by North Korea for its Pon’gae-5/KN-06 LR-SAM system). The complete Bavar-373 system will be ready for service-induction by 2020"*
Yes...well..lol!
Anyway read the rest,if nothing else its good for a chuckle
http://trishul-trident.blogspot.co.nz/2017/06/islamic-republic-of-irans-rma-analysed-2.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Fafnir said:


> Our indian friend Trishul is back with his second part on irans air defenses,it makes for some shall we say "interesting" reading.My favorite part was about the bavar -373 which you can read below:
> *"As for the much-touted Bavar-373 air-defence system, it is in reality a trilateral industrial cooperation project involving China, North Korea and Iran that had commenced way back in 2004. While CETC Int’l of China has developed and supplied the Qamar active phased-array engagement radar and the YLC-2V ‘Meraj’ 3-D S-band early warning radar, the Sayyad-3 LR-SAM is a re-engineered HQ-9 missile produced by North Korea for its Pon’gae-5/KN-06 LR-SAM system). The complete Bavar-373 system will be ready for service-induction by 2020"*
> Yes...well..lol!
> Anyway read the rest,if nothing else its good for a chuckle
> http://trishul-trident.blogspot.co.nz/2017/06/islamic-republic-of-irans-rma-analysed-2.html



He's actually wrong in interesting and new ways of wrong. It's somewhat refreshing.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Certainly Babak helped him, I know his disinformative way of thinking. Outright silly that he thinks Raad-2 is the Buk...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> He's actually wrong in interesting and new ways of wrong. It's somewhat refreshing.


Lol,thats a good way of looking at it.Do you think he just makes it up out of thin air or does he actually base it on something..?,I mean how on earth did he come to that so called "conclusion" on bavar-373?,its just totally fu#king nuts.
By the way I saw your reply tweet to babak taghvaee and his before and after pictures,well said,the first bunch of "soldiers" looked like they were a group of greco-roman reenactors.



PeeD said:


> Certainly Babak helped him, I know his disinformative way of thinking. Outright silly that he thinks Raad-2 is the Buk...


Hes about as fu#king nuts too with his hatred of the iri and his nutty conspiracy theories,and yet hes a published writer/aviation journalist for gods sake,well supposedly anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Fafnir said:


> By the way I saw your reply tweet to babak taghvaee and his before and after pictures,well said,the first bunch of "soldiers" looked like they were a group of greco-roman reenactors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

Fafnir said:


> Our indian friend Trishul is back with his second part on irans air defenses,it makes for some shall we say "interesting" reading.My favorite part was about the bavar -373 which you can read below:...
> http://trishul-trident.blogspot.co.nz/2017/06/islamic-republic-of-irans-rma-analysed-2.html



There almost the whole text is ridiculous. Especialy funny part as Iranian SM-1 missiles were transferred to Russia and China and on their basis were created "Buk-M1E" and LY-80..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

@Oscar do you want to continue the discussion here regarding Iran only operating s-300 and "Hawk derivatives"?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Bavar 373 will join Iran's integrated air defense system next year:

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/745743/باور-373-سال-آینده-وارد-شبکه-پدافند-می-شود

General Esmaili, in the Intellect and Literacy conference said, the fact that people are following up on S-300 and Bavar 373 is a sign of our population maturity. It is their right to know and they are proud of these achievements.

S300 is no fully operational.

Bavar 373 will go through its final test end of this year and implemented into Iran's Integrated AD system next year.

Now people say a lot of things about Iran shouldn't over promise and show early developments. But I think it is a great dynamic where you create anticipation in public and then public pressure will actually push you to achieve what you have promised.

It is known technik in personal development too. for example, when you want to lose weight, it is recommended you tell everyone you know. The fact that they will see you and ask you if they don't see improvement will cause pressure on you to achieve what you promised.

Gen Esmaili better deliver on his promise or the public opinion will not let him rest next year.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

Arminkh said:


> Bavar 373 will join Iran's integrated air defense system next year:
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/745743/باور-373-سال-آینده-وارد-شبکه-پدافند-می-شود
> 
> General Esmaili, in the Intellect and Literacy conference said, the fact that people are following up on S-300 and Bavar 373 is a sign of our population maturity. It is their right to know and they are proud of these achievements.
> 
> S300 is no fully operational.
> 
> Bavar 373 will go through its final test end of this year and implemented into Iran's Integrated AD system next year.
> 
> Now people say a lot of things about Iran shouldn't over promise and show early developments. But I think it is a great dynamic where you create anticipation in public and then public pressure will actually push you to achieve what you have promised.
> 
> It is known technik in personal development too. for example, when you want to lose weight, it is recommended you tell everyone you know. The fact that they will see you and ask you if they don't see improvement will cause pressure on you to achieve what you promised.
> 
> Gen Esmaili better deliver on his promise or the public opinion will not let him rest next year.



lol, this "final test" should be done last month already,...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

Draco.IMF said:


> lol, this "final test" should be done last month already,...


Yes, you are right but I think delay is acceptable for country in size of Iran.
We are waiting like you for years to see final fruit of this long journey.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

Sayyad-2C

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MMM-E

do you have national SAM System ?


----------



## AmirPatriot

Berkant said:


> do you have national SAM System ?



We have many domestic SAM and radar systems, covering short, medium, and long range. These are integrated into an IADS (Integrated Air Defence System). You need to specify what type of SAM as SAM development is very active and wide ranging.


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


> Sayyad-2C
> 
> View attachment 409050



range?


----------



## SOHEIL

Berkant said:


> do you have national SAM System ?



Yes ... Indigenous systems


----------



## SOHEIL

@Berkant

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

*Iran Konarak Air defense base, Martyr Hamid Bordbar پايگاه پدافند هوايي كنارك شهيد حميد بردبار ايران*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

yavar said:


> *Iran Konarak Air defense base, Martyr Hamid Bordbar پايگاه پدافند هوايي كنارك شهيد حميد بردبار ايران*


Haven't those AA guns been automated? Why are they still manned?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Arminkh said:


> Haven't those AA guns been automated? Why are they still manned?


you can turn auto mode off and use it as manually

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

yavar said:


> you can turn auto mode off and use it as manually


Is it for training then?


----------



## ayibarishi

May i ask?

Thats my opinion. I think in ambargo times, Iran can take some blueprints and sourcecodes from Russia specially on the BUK and S-300 air defence systems. (Which variant and missiles is another question.) But Iran can be made homemade, good, localized versions on them. But i wonder this:

User is satisfied with that or not? (Iranian air defence command) 
Is Iran plan to export SAM and Radar systems? Or they want to keep itself and make a suprise in future?

Thanks...


----------



## Muhammed45

ayibarishi said:


> May i ask?
> 
> Thats my opinion. I think in ambargo times, Iran can take some blueprints and sourcecodes from Russia specially on the BUK and S-300 air defence systems. (Which variant and missiles is another question.) But Iran can be made homemade, good, localized versions on them. But i wonder this:
> 
> User is satisfied with that or not? (Iranian air defence command)
> Is Iran plan to export SAM and Radar systems? Or they want to keep itself and make a suprise in future?
> 
> Thanks...


Currently we have no export partners for ADs but it's possible in the future.
During the sanctions, Russia gave the codes of Tor-M1 air defense systems to Israel, don't know what received as exchange. But We had to change it's codes and successfully did it. Now i can surely tell you that the BUK and Tor-M1 are using complete Iranian codes and we don't need Russian help in that field.
Also during the international embargo, we developed this AD system with no foreign aid. It's sub systems have similarity to it's American rivals, like the acquisition radar but other parts like engagement radars are similar to the Russian systems. Apparently our scientists ,with spending 10 years time, have chosen the best versions of sub systems for it :::












It's engaging range is 1.5X S-300-PMU2.
I am sure after finalizing and hot tests for this hot-launch AD and developing it's naval versions, we can find foreign partners for it's expo versions. The best point and most important difference from S-300 is it's hot-launch availability, which requires high tech Super-Alloys in canisters to bear the high temperature Gas output from rocket engine.
I want to know about Hisar-O buddy, do you have any information about it's progress?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ayibarishi

Thank you for information brother. 

In Turkey we have a word like this: The way of the clever minds is one. (Aklın yolu birdir.) Then we do the same process like İran. Little behind and little different of course. 

I don't have a detailed information about Hisar-O. But leaked informations and signs says it's going well even it's become little late. We make Radar systems and most of that entered serice. We offer missile radar seeker for Poland local air defence projects. Many think look like good but we don't have a complete local AD system basen on a radar technolohy yet. They say it's entered service like 2020-21. Or they want to hide somethinks.

Best Regards...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

Anti drone missile
Ghaem-M




http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/751795/رونمایی-جهانی-از-اولین-موشک-ضدپهپاد-ایرانی-کابوس-داعشی-ها-هم

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

SubWater said:


> Anti drone missile
> Ghaem-M
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/751795/رونمایی-جهانی-از-اولین-موشک-ضدپهپاد-ایرانی-کابوس-داعشی-ها-هم


Its advantages is only wire/laser guidance that can not be detected by choppers and drones? 
And i've got a Q what is the average of drones' speed?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

raptor22 said:


> Its advantages is only wire/laser guidance that can not be detected by choppers and drones?
> And i've got a Q what is the average of drones' speed?


I think it is anti helicopter system mostly
it depends to drone and its engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

It looks like they taken a tow and fitted a brand new front end to it and the two rows of apertures almost look like they could be laser proximity fuses which would make it unlikely to be an antitank weapon.Whatever it is its very interesting.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

This can probably be launched from a standard TOW tube and maybe motorised TOW units like Safir jeeps could carry it to use when needs arise.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Navigator

Ghaem-M it's upgraded version of Ghaem missile, that was showed in 2010 for modernized Toophan AT system






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/888005210982973442
Original Qaem missile and modernized Toophan launcher

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mse21

new air defense system! which we heard the name last year
sayyad 3
mass production started.
were is my bavar!
range 120 km
alt 27 km
active and half active + IR seeker!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran DIO mass delivery LR Sayyad-3C Air Defense missiles خط‌ تولید موشک برد بلند صیاد۳ پدافندهوایی

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar

*Iran Sayyad-3C long-range air-defense missiles test ازمایش تست موشک برد بلند پدافندهوایی صیاد۳-سی*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran DIO mass delivery LR Sayyad-3C Air Defense missiles خط‌ تولید موشک برد بلند صیاد۳ پدافندهوایی*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

is Sayyad-3 able to shoot down Ballistic missiles?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Readerdefence

yavar said:


> *Iran DIO mass delivery LR Sayyad-3C Air Defense missiles خط‌ تولید موشک برد بلند صیاد۳ پدافندهوایی*


Hi any specifications please 
Thx


----------



## yavar

Readerdefence said:


> Hi any specifications please
> Thx


if you go to video on you tube and look in dealis part video you can see all info

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Readerdefence

yavar said:


> if you go to video on you tube and look in dealis part video you can see all info


Thx for the information

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Iran desperately needs to increase the range of its systems. Its hawk system dominates most of the air defense architecture. The S-200's are to old to be reliable in modern air defense, and domestic systems 3rd khordad is to short range but that's fair, I'm assuming it's meant to compliment larger systems sort of like Russian Tor. Talash 2 also too short in range with Sayyad 2 (Hopefully Sayyad 3 will change that). Iran needs tons of 200 km+ range to prevent the use of long range stand off weapons of bombers and cover its airspace like the S-200/300, increase area denial capacity, and stop or atleast mitigate a saturation strike of stand off weapons like cruise missiles for enough time and cover for massive saturation missile strikes on enemy airbases, anti-shipping and critical infrastructure (if the enemy is regional) and essentially end any war in a matter of days by knocking out enemy capacity to wage it. Also, increased range allows protection of naval ships in the Persian gulf, as Iranian airforce cannot be relied upon for protecting Iranian vessels and airspace in the Persian gulf, they are practically sitting ducks in there. I only hope the Bavar is capable of providing that support.


----------



## yavar

*سامانه موشکی باور۳۷۳ تولید شده/ قابلیت‌های این سامانه را افزایش داده‌ایم*


*وزیر پیشنهادی دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح در دیدار با نمایندگان فراکسیون ولایی مجلس شورای اسلامی برنامه‌های خود برای تصدی پست وزارت دفاع را تشریح کرد.*
وی توجه به ‌حوزه‌های موشکی‌، هوایی، دریایی، پدافند هوایی و رزم زمینی را از اولویت‌های وزارت دفاع دانست و گفت: در حال حاضر قابلیت‌ها و ظرفیت تولید قدرت بازدارندگی در وزارت دفاع افزایش یافته است.
سرتیپ حاتمی با اعلام اینکه مراحل تولید سامانه پدافندی ‌باور373 ‌انجام شده و قابلیت‌های آن افزایش یافته است،
 http://tn.ai/1487038

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

basir




sky




samie or shenavande




samet
https://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/d/2017/08/28/0/2032923.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD Gen Esmaili: Samiya, Basir, Smet-1 سمیع، بصیر، سما و صامت۱ پدافندی هوایی*





نشست خبری امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء درباره سامانه‌های سمیع، بصیر، سما و صامت ۱ پدافندی هوایی
http://tn.ai/1504076

Press conference brigadier General Amir Farzad Esmaili, head of the Air Defense Base Khatam Al-anbia, on the Samiya, Basir, Samae and Smet-1 Air Defense systems

Iran Unveils New Air Defense Gear
In a ceremony in Tehran, Air Defense Commander Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili unveiled the four systems, dubbed Sama, Samee’, Baseer, and Samet-1.
Sama, used for detecting aerial targets and controlling air traffic, is the first of its kind made in a West Asian country. It automatically receives data from flights crossing the Iranian airspace and defines the flight path in a short span.
The homegrown system would be used to assist the Iranian Civil Aviation Organization in air traffic control and obviate the need for importing foreign equipment.
Another system, Baseer, monitors and transfers data from radar and navigation systems to the command and control center, replacing six data analysis and transfer systems.
Utilization of Baseer would the need for 54 forces on each working shift.
The next achievement, Samee’, is a mobile system for the collection of radar and navigation data, which can be mounted on manned or unmanned aerial vehicles.
And Samet-1 is an automation system coordinating the air defense sites that collect data
http://tn.ai/1504282

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD systems Sama, Samee’, Baseer, Samet-1سمیع، بصیر، سما,صامت۱ پدافندهوایی*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

Draco.IMF said:


>


Wow, once again IRI has built something unique... When are these people are going to stop BSing and treat their audience with respect? He says this system is unique, like no other country has it?! really?


----------



## Draco.IMF

WordsMatter said:


> Wow, once again IRI has built something unique... When are these people are going to stop BSing and treat their audience with respect? He says this system is unique, like no other country has it?! really?



*“All warfare is based on deception.”*

*- Sun Tzu*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WordsMatter

Draco.IMF said:


> *“All warfare is based on deception.”*
> 
> *- Sun Tzu*


Yes but not this kind... I think he meant credible misinformation but this is just out-right comical and ridiculous. Not even the Chinese or the Russians speak this BS language when they release a new system.


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


> Yes but not this kind... I think he meant credible misinformation but this is just out-right comical and ridiculous. Not even the Chinese or the Russians speak this BS language when they release a new system.


go first eat you watermelon first and after that wash your hand false flag its for your country soudi who have nothing is sooooooooooooooo hard buy or *make or if you cant make buy butttt painnnn killerrrr plz*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

ashool said:


> go first eat you watermelon first and after that wash your hand false flag its for your country soudi who have nothing is sooooooooooooooo hard buy or *make or if you cant make buy butttt painnnn killerrrr plz*


Wow very deep insight... Good to know that you can't even actually compose a sentence. And you are an expert on this forum?!


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


> Wow, once again IRI has built something unique... When are these people are going to stop BSing and treat their audience with respect? He says this system is unique, like no other country has it?! really?


i see you too go eat you water melon its better for you until expert some think unique


----------



## yavar

امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء: سامانه عروج گیرنده پرتابل راذاری و ۸۰٪ سامانه باور ۳۷۳ تکمیل شده

امیر سرتیپ فرزاد اسماعیلی فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم الانبیاء (ص) چهارشنبه شب در برنامه «من طهران» شبکه خبری العالم تصریح کرد که سامانه عروج اطلاعات هر پرنده‌ای را در آسمان دریافت می‌کند و مهم‌ترین ویژگی آن این است که انرژی مورد نیاز یک سال خود را فراهم می‌کند.
این نخستین بار است که از این سامانه پرده‌برداری می‌کنیم و این سامانه از فن‌آوری روز برخوردار است.
فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم الانبیاء (ص) گفت: ما توانسته ایم چند سامانه از جمله سامانه سیمع، بصیر و عروج را طراحی کنیم.
امیر سرتیپ اسماعیلی با اشاره به اینکه هدف از تحریم علیه ایران تضعیف کشور است، تاکید کرد: پیامی که با سامانه راداری عروج به دشمن می‌دهیم این است که ما بیداریم.
http://fa.alalam.ir/news/3040176/ام...ی-با-العالم-از-ساخت-سامانه-راداری-عروج-خبرداد

Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD Gen Esmaili: Aroj portable radar receiver system and Bavar 373 80% in compilation



https://imgur.com/Ebjs5Dd


----------



## Draco.IMF

Bavar-373 is to 80% ready?
Surely they are combining S-300 PMU-2 technology and putting some of it into B-373

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> Surely they are combining S-300 PMU-2 technology and putting some of it into B-373


Nope.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

AmirPatriot said:


> Nope.



Can you please reason your "No"?
You dont think Iran will study S-300 PMU-2 and implement some of its technology in future Bavar versions?
Of course they will, they will do it 100%
I dont say everything, I say some technology.
Iran needs, for example, anti ballistic missile technology, wich, the S-300 PMU-2 missile, has.
They will, for sure, study the missile, copy the warhead (electronics/computer/radar....) and implement it to next generation Bavar-missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> You dont think Iran will study S-300 PMU-2 and implement some of its technology in future Bavar versions?



Yes I do, but that's not what you said.

You said Iran would implement parts of S-300 into the current B-373. To which I say no, because Iran has already finished R&D of the B-373 and is now in the testing phase. We aren't going to wait any longer, we have to make these things like hot bread.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

AmirPatriot said:


> We aren't going to wait any longer, we have to make these things like hot bread.



you are right, but with S-300 PMU-2 delivered, and Sayyad-2/3 already working Iran has now little more clearance

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> Surely they are combining S-300 PMU-2 technology and putting some of it into B-373


Yes

* امیر سپهری‌راد در گفت‌وگوی تفصیلی با تسنیم: تحقیقات اس۳۰۰ روی آغاز شده
*​







 http://tn.ai/1502663 



AmirPatriot said:


> Iran has already finished R&D of the B-373 and is now in the testing phase.


*Iran Bavar-373 long range Air Defense System سامانه پدافند هوایی موشکی باور۳۷۳*







https://imgur.com/a/Pevhs




https://imgur.com/zozf24q

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> Yes
> 
> * امیر سپهری‌راد در گفت‌وگوی تفصیلی با تسنیم: تحقیقات اس۳۰۰ روی آغاز شده*​


​is it clever openly to admit that Iran is already researching on the missiles?
As far as i know Putin requested Iran not to reverse engineer the system and Iranian agreed.
I am happy that Iran is making good progress to it, but I think russia gave Iran a heavily downgraded system, so even if Iran make a sucessfull copy it will "only" be 50-60% as effective as the russian version, but its better having something than nothing, right?


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam al-Anbia air defense airborne UAV unitsآشیانه پهپادهای پدافند هوایی خاتم الانبیاء*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hindustani78

Agence France Presse | *Published — *Saturday 2 September 2017






http://www.arabnews.com/node/1154756/middle-east


TEHRAN: Iran’s new defense minister said Saturday the priority was to boost the country’s missile program and export weapons to shore up neighboring allies.

“In combat fields, especially in missiles, we have a specific plan to boost Iran’s missile power,” said General Amir Hatami, who was appointed defense minister earlier this month, in a speech carried by the ISNA news agency.
“God willing, the combat capabilities of Iran’s ballistic and cruise missiles will increase in this term,” he added.
Hatami also said Iran would look to export weapons “to prevent war and conflict.”

“Wherever a country becomes weak, others become encouraged to raid it... Wherever necessary, we will export weapons to increase the security of the region and countries, to prevent wars,” he said.

Hatami is the first defense minister to be selected from the regular army, rather than the elite Revolutionary Guards, in more than two decades.

Analysts say this reflects an increasing convergence between the two military arms as Iran increases its involvement in regional conflicts such as Syria and Iraq, which have been the Guard’s exclusive purview since the 1979 Islamic revolution.


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIB1 "Negah Yek" interview with Gen Esmaeili Khatam Al-anbia ADنگ یك امیر اسماعیلی پدافند*





*Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD detection, radio exchange warning, intruder U-2 spy plane اخطار پدافند یو-۲*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD, detection, radio exchange warning to intruder U.S RQ-4 spy UAV اخطار پدافند*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> *Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD, detection, radio exchange warning to intruder U.S RQ-4 spy UAV اخطار پدافند*



they should have downed it, like RQ-170, Iran would had access to good technology...
but it wasnt in Iran airspace right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> they should have downed it, like RQ-170, Iran would had access to good technology...
> but it wasnt in Iran airspace right?


Its not exactly a routine operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam Al-anbia AD Gen Esmaeili: Bavar-373 successful missile test, operational 2018 باور-۳۷۳*




 Khatam Al-anbia air defense base Gen Esmaeili: Bavar-373 long range air defense system contacted it,s successful missile test and system operational by March 2018



Draco.IMF said:


> but it wasnt in Iran airspace right?


yes
it never entered in the lock on it and give warning before it reaches Iran airspace


----------



## yavar

*Iran IRIB1 documentary Khatam Al-anbia AD: S300,Bavar-373,futureقرارگاه پدافند هوایی اس-۳۰۰ باور-۳۷*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> *Iran IRIB1 documentary Khatam Al-anbia AD: S300,Bavar-373,futureقرارگاه پدافند هوایی اس-۳۰۰ باور-۳۷*



what is he talking about B-373? just short, you dont have to translate everything, the most important ones
this missile behind air defence minister, which is red encircled, is this launch of an B-373 missile?


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> what is he talking about B-373? just short, you dont have to translate everything, the most important ones
> this missile behind air defence minister, which is red encircled, is this launch of an B-373 missile?



Nothing specific, though he did say it should be operational by March 2018.


----------



## Draco.IMF

iran should finally show its Pantsir-S1 Air Defence Systems they got through Syria, its not a secret anymore..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Here some conclusions about one of my favorite IRGC systems, the Raad/3rd Khordad/Tabas.

- The size and footprint of the system is great. It is small enough to be misidentified as ordinary trucks.
- The battery layout also offers a small footprint: One TELAR with one slave TEL. Two truck size vehicles as well as one Toyota for protection and another Toyota for LOS communication --> two trucks and two cars.
- The 3rd Khordad is the upper end PESA/AESA multichannel (4) system, suited to counter multiple attacks and with longer range than the Tabas radar.
- The Tabas is the lower end twisted cassegrain radar equipped single channel system. It should be very cost effective, because it basically uses a enlarged ground variant of the original Mig-29 radar. Upgraded with missile up-link (newer variants), it could have limited multi-target capability but would still have lower range and jamming performance than the 3rd Khordad.

For those reasons I would structure a battery with a single, center, 3rd Khordad system and its slave TEL and 3 Tabas systems around it with their respective slave TELs. The individual sites would be separated up to 10s of km from each other.
The battery level radar would either be a Kavosh/Kasta + Matla ol Fajr-1 (multi-band) or a single Bashir/JY-11 (smaller footprint). Additional to those and for very high altitude engagements, upper tier IADS target data would be available.

Now some might ask whether the Tabas would really be that much cheaper than the 3rd Khordad. If the 3rd Khordad is a AESA, yes a Tabas would be maybe just 1/4 of the cost, if a PESA the gap gets smaller. An AESA 3rd Khordad could make sense if it uses LPI modes and with low sidelobes. Additionally it would act as the independent search sensor when necessary with several times longer on-line time than the Tabas and here the higher reliability of a AESA becomes important.

The Raad family has come a long way. The designers wanted to be very smart initially and avoid a complex jacking system by use of a pneumatic leveler that would set it down very low. This didn't work well enough during testing, the pneumatic leveling system was kept and a complex jacking system similar to the wheeled Tor and Buk-M2 was added. But at the end they had a real smart idea and simplified the jacking system which is a better solution than what the experienced Russians/Belorussians came up with.
Then they started armoring the system against shrapnel, first the radars remained unarmored, now the whole system is armored (except the critical missiles of course).

Where Amour makes more sense and what I'm waiting for is the logical next step: a Raad truck based Tor-M1 copy. It is ideal for that purpose.
However miniaturizing needs to be done for the subsystems to fit it on the smaller chassis.
Compared to the Crotale/Herz-9, the Tor is at least one generation ahead and has a credible anti-PGM capability.
The problem is just that it is more expensive as it has a fire control radar as well as a search radar, as well as a tracked chassis.
The tracked chassis would be solved with the Raad truck but I would replace the search radar with one of those rotating twin thermal cameras (Raad-1) maybe with two additional cameras for high-angle PGM targets. This would not only make the system cheaper, but also passive and safe a large portion of space, for a smaller system that fits the Raad truck. This would be a smart solution.
As a search radar is good to have, I would use one Tor-M1 and 3 Raad-Tor variants for each battery.
Reverse engineering the Tor-M1 PESA tracking radar is within Iran capabilities, somewhat expensive subsystem, but worth it.

It is of course possible that such a Raad-Tor variant is not followed because a 12 missile vs. 8 (+ CIWS), Pantsyr based SHORADS is deemed a better solution. A Raad-Tor would certainly look great.

The whole philosophy of the Raad family, its high power, modular redundant structure, off-road shoot and scoot capability and very important: small footprint, make it a extremely hard nut to crack for airpower. A Bavar-373 is higher performing but easier to detect and much more expensive = available numbers on the ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Some might to fully realize what this battery structure means for survivability:

The opponent might be able to destroy the least mobile and active emitting components of the battery with HARMs (Bashir/JY-11) or a suitable PGM that can target UHF-, VHF-band Kavosh/Kasta/Matla ol Fajr-1.

This will not stop the remaining elements to work based upper tier IADS data. Even if communication with IADS is blocked, the 3rd Khordad component of the battery can so long range sector search. Should the 3rd Khordad element be killed too, each 3 Tabas elements can do medium range search and distribute the target information among all other elements.
If one element is active, all other will stay passive.

This redundancy means airpower has to kill at least 4 independent widespread, almost constantly passive, vehicles to render the battery inoperabel (which are in turn not dependent on the 1-2 active vehicles), otherwise it remains a real threat (and I have not included optical means here).

For comparison: The HQ-2/Sayyad-1 would be knocked out by killing the single fire control radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> This didn't work well enough during testing, the pneumatic leveling system was kept and a complex jacking system similar to the wheeled Tor and Buk-M2 was added. But at the end they had a real smart idea and simplified the jacking system which is a better solution than what the experienced Russians/Belorussians came up with.



In what way is the system simpler?



PeeD said:


> Then they started armoring the system against shrapnel, first the radars remained unarmored, now the whole system is armored (except the critical missiles of course).



Really? I haven't noticed armour on the vehicles. Could you point it out please?


----------



## PeeD

The difference in the jacking system is not a big deal, as the Raad is much narrower they are not really applicable. But the difference is that the rear two jacks of the Raad use a single axis hydraulic jack while the two front ones and all four on the Buk-M2 need a two axis mechanism. The simpler solution is the better one.

As for the armor; anything more than thin steel sheet construction in range of ~5mm can be counted as shrapnel protection. But the real purpose would be a Raad mounted AAA or a Tor. The Russian wheeled Buk-M2 is also small arms / shrapnel protected.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sayyad tactical air defense system:
search radar range: 120km
tracking range: 90km
engagement range(longitude):60km
engagement range(altitude):27km













Bashir tactical S Band radar:






Saeghe EW system:
Band X, Discovery range 3000km

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Sayyad air defense system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bashir radar:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saeghe EW system:


You have shown the same images for the Bashir radar and Saeghe EW system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

*عکس/ استقرار "سامانه S300" در قلب تهران*
برای اولین بار، موشکهایS200و S300 در نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در معرض دید عموم قرار گرفته است. این نمایشگاه تا هفتم مهرماه در میدان بهارستان تهران میزبان بازدیدکنندگان است./عکس: فرهاد خیابانی





نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران




نمایشگاه "یادمان ایثار" در میدان بهارستان تهران

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

Khatam ol anbiya IRIADF showed several systems during the parade, including a large new radar and a new Cortale variant.
They were just showed in short video, all photos are of IRGC-ASF systems.


----------



## husseinibnali

PeeD said:


> Khatam ol anbiya IRIADF showed several systems during the parade, including a large new radar and a new Cortale variant.
> They were just showed in short video, all photos are of IRGC-ASF systems.


Hello PeeD,do you have anything to say about the saeghe EW x-band system shown in parade?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

It was shown already on the last years parade, but we didn't know its X-band back then.

A high power X-band jammer is of course a good asset to counter fighter radars and airborne SAR radars doing reconnaissance. The difficult part is to identify the radar emissions as such for radars that use LPI modes, but it can be cued to radars to do the jamming.

Its another small asset that helps.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Also in the videos of the parade it is visible that IRIADF has shown its Russian Gamma-DE AESA radar for the first time. Unfortunately people like M-ATF are no more around with photos of each system showed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## husseinibnali

PeeD said:


> It was shown already on the last years parade, but we didn't know its X-band back then.
> 
> A high power X-band jammer is of course a good asset to counter fighter radars and airborne SAR radars doing reconnaissance. The difficult part is to identify the radar emissions as such for radars that use LPI modes, but it can be cued to radars to do the jamming.
> 
> Its another small asset that helps.


So is the radar being an x-band make it more capable to detect LPI mode radars?


----------



## Fafnir

PeeD said:


> Also in the videos of the parade it is visible that IRIADF has shown its Russian Gamma-DE AESA radar for the first time. Unfortunately people like M-ATF are no more around with photos of each system showed.


I wonder how long they`ve had that for?,was it purchased along with the nebo,vostok and kasta back in the mid-to late 00s.


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> Also in the videos of the parade it is visible that IRIADF has shown its Russian Gamma-DE AESA radar for the first time. Unfortunately people like M-ATF are no more around with photos of each system showed.


when?!


----------



## Hindustani78

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1166681/middle-east

TEHRAN: Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard has displayed the country’s sophisticated Russian-made S-300 air defense system in central Tehran.

This is the first time that the S-300 air defense system has been displayed in public.

The public show in Tehran’s Baharestan square near the Parliament building square exhibited different missile systems, including ballistic missiles, solid-fuel surface-to-surface Sejjil missiles and the liquid-fuel Ghadr.

The IRGC prepared the show for the annual Defense Week, marking the 37th anniversary of the 1980s Iran-Iraq war.


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> when?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 427472


About that radar

VNIIRT Gamma DE AESA ,Three subtypes exist, the D1/D1E, D2/D2E, and D3/D3E with differing module power ratings and range performance. Depicted is the towed configuration with a 20 minute deploy/stow time. VNIIRT disclosed in 2007 that a self-propelled variant was available, with a 5 minute deploy/stow time compatible with the S-300PMU2 and S-400 SAM systems. To date no imagery of the self-propelled variant has been disclosed.






The VNIIRT Gamma DE is a solid state long range L-Band 3D Active Electronically Steered Array (AESA) search and acquisition radar intended to support interceptors and Integrated Air Defence Systems. It is intended to detect and track aircraft, cruise missiles, precision guided munitions and tactical ballistic missiles at medium and high altitudes. The manufacturer cites two basic operating modes "iso-range" and "iso-altitude".

Gamma DE installations can be supplied with three different AESA module power ratings, yielding the D1/D1E, D2/D2E and D3/D3E variants. Cited MTBF in recent literature is ~1,000 hrs which is consistent with mature AESA technology.





The VNIIRT designers paid considerable attention to operation in high threat environments. A number of design features were introduced for this reason:

The ability to concentrate emitted power into search sectors which are being subjected to jamming, to decrease the J/S ratio.
Wideband pulse-to-pulse automatic frequency hopping with automated avoidance of jammed frequencies (i.e pre-transmit sniffing), employing a spectrum analyser.
Signal processing functions to reject incoherent signals received in the mainlobe, such as jammers or other interfering in-band emitters.
Multichannel rejection of jamming. This is likely to have been implemented by forming nulls in the mainlobe.
Jammer rejection by sidelobe blanking.
Adaptive multichannel pulse Doppler filtering for clutter rejection. While VNIIRT literature describes this as DMTI, it is not clear whether the technique used is conventional DMTI or pulse Doppler.
Rejection of jammers and signals with low radial Doppler shifts relative to the radar.
Another very modern feature in this design is the use of Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR). This is claimed to be performed by the analysis of backscatter power levels, correlation against known signatures, and the flight trajectory characteristics of the track. Helicopters are recognised by analysing the advancing and receding rotor blade Doppler shifts.

To defeat anti-radiation missiles and Emitter Locating Systems, the Gamma DE employs short burst transmissions, with radar emission timing slaved to the Gazetchik E emitting anti-radiation missile decoy system. In addition chaff, smoke generators and infrared decoys are employed to seduce missiles with active radar, electro-optical or imaging infared seekers. The Gazetchik E is claimed to achieve a 0.85-0.95 Pk against anti-radiation missiles. It is worth noting than many such missiles do not have the band coverage to home in on an L-band emitter such as the Gamma DE.

Like many Western L-band radars, such as the MESA, the Gamma-DE has an integrated IFF function in the primary array, supporting Mark XA and XII modes. This is performed using the VNIIRT developed Voprosnik-E secondary radar, embedded in the Gamma-DE antenna system.

The AESA design provides cited mainlobe steering angles of up to ±60° in azimuth and elevation. VNIIRT claim a robust detection range of up to 600 nautical miles against high elevation angle ballistic missile targets. Like Western phased array radars the Gamma DE is capable of adaptively interleaving search and track beams, and nulling particular angular sectors which are subject to jamming. Modes include high update rate search waveforms in narrow solid angles, providing for high quality tracking of high speed closing targets.

A single Gamma DE system comprises a towed antenna head trailer with the 1280 element 8 x 5.2 metre AESA on a turntable, a semi-trailer radar cabin with electronics and operator stations, and a dual redundant 16 kiloWatt diesel generator. An option cited for the Gamma DE is deployment of the radar head on the 24 metre 40V6M or 40 metre 40V6MD semi-mobile mast systems. The latter are carried by semi-trailer and typically towed by a MAZ-537 or other tractor. Cited time to deploy the basic demonstrator configuration is 1.5 hrs. More recent (2007) VNIIRT data states 20 minutes to deploy the towed configuration, and 5 minutes to deploy a self-propelled configuration carried on a truck. This qualifies the towed Gamma DE as mobile, and the self-propelled configuration as "shoot and scoot".

To date no details of the self propelled variant have been disclosed. Given the size and weight of the Gamma DE antenna system, the configuration is likely to be similar to that of the 91N6E Big Bird rather than 96L6 , most likely using the MZKT-7930 tow tractor, and a gas turbine generator equipped semi-trailer for the antenna head and equipment cabin.

In the towed variant, radiofrequency datalinks permit the cabin to be located up to 1 km from the AESA, and additional datalinks permit up to 15 km separation between the cabin and an IADS command post. For semi-hardened revetted deployment optical fibre cables are available.

Almaz-Antey literature on the S-400 / SA-21 system states that compatible interfaces are available between the S-400 battery and the Gamma DE system. The azimuthal tracking accuracy of 0.17-0.2°, elevation accuracy of 0.2-0.3° and range accuracy of 60-100 metres make this radar eminently capable of providing midcourse guidance updates for a range of SAM systems. For comparison, the 64N6E Big Bird series used in the SA-20/21 has around twice the angular and range tracking error magnitude compared to the Gamma DE.

http://www.defencebd.com/2014/04/gamma-de-aesa-radar-of-bangladesh.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 427472


don't you think Gamma has a different shape?!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

There two or three version of Gamma-DE
Another

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Well possible that the acquisition of the L-band Gamma-DE was the starting point for Irans S-band AESA/ESA from Najm-802 to Hafez and all the later developments. On the software/algorithm side it was quite advanced.
Russian S-band Gamma-S is not confirmed to be an AESA (like also the Iranian radars i mentioned), but it was also developed on the basis of the Gamma-D. Like Iran, Russians too concentrated on S-band variants and didn't go for numbers of L-band AESAs.

The mid-2000 Gamma-DE as basis for the sudden Iranian jump in ESA radars sure is an explanation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran showcasing AD S-300, S-200, Tabas, missile Sejil-2, Qader-H ا‍‍‍‍يران نمایش سامانه های دفاعی*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SubWater

any idea about missile and launcher and guiding of missile
launcher seems like small truck




@PeeD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

SubWater said:


> any idea about missile and launcher and guiding of missile
> launcher seems like small truck
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @PeeD


Obviously some sort of MANPADS, exact type not identifiable from the video because of the (I presume, intentional), blurred section showing the truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

AmirPatriot said:


> Obviously some sort of MANPADS, exact type not identifiable from the video because of the (I presume, intentional), blurred section showing the truck.


these two Picture are from launcher
it looks like pick up














and it looks missile directly hit MQ-9


----------



## PeeD

MQ-9 would normally never fly low enough to be engaged by MANPADs. The ejection motor would hint to a MANPAD and less to something like the 9th Herz. This is also size wise the case.

Maybe Iran provided a modified high altitude RBS-70 from its old stocks, if it has ever received them. But as Iran is not really providing arms directly, there are some Chinese MANPAD based SAMs in the black market that could reach out to 6-8km altitude.


----------



## Navigator

IMHO to many noise and smoke for MANPADS. More likely it's small short-range system like Strela-1\Strela-10 etc. And the silhouette on the video is similar to such vehicle with raised missile containers

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

http://jangaavaran.ir/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Air-Defence-Systems-1.pdf

http://jangaavaran.ir/سامانه-های-پدافند-موجود-در-ایران/


----------



## VEVAK

I hope they add mobile versions of the Mesbah & Samavat for every TEL to protect against low flying aircraft, UAV or cruise missiles & increase the distance between each TEL, Radar,.... to at least 500 meters apart so they don't become easy targets for cluster munitions


----------



## Draco.IMF

Turkey and Saudis are getting S-400 Systems.
Iran should call Putin and order also some S-400 batteries.
And please dont tell me Iran dont need them, because they are working on B-373.
S-400 is noticeable ahead + it has Anti Balistic capabilities.
Integrate them into the existing S-300 PMU-2/B-373/Sayyad... systems
Carry on with domestical systems as always, especially with SHORAD (short range AD) systems, they are way more important...
Maybe purchase newst Buk-M3 + Pantsir S2 system also..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> Turkey and Saudis are getting S-400 Systems.
> Iran should call Putin and order also some S-400 batteries.
> And please dont tell me Iran dont need them, because they are working on B-373.
> S-400 is noticeable ahead + it has Anti Balistic capabilities.
> Integrate them into the existing S-300 PMU-2/B-373/Sayyad... systems
> Carry on with domestical systems as always, especially with SHORAD (short range AD) systems, they are way more important...



They are just rumors nothing is certain. People are always talking doesn't mean they will sell anything. Their are alot of politcal factors at play. Turkey S-400 probably won't happen cause they just ran into roadblock because they asked for production capabilities. You can't assume these sales will be made as soon as you hear on the internet.

Nothing is certain: https://sputniknews.com/military/201710091058067859-kremlin-turkey-s400-technology/

Maybe turkey will make the wheels and Russia everything else Imao if deal goes through.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Draco.IMF said:


> Turkey and Saudis are getting S-400 Systems.
> Iran should call Putin and order also some S-400 batteries.
> And please dont tell me Iran dont need them, because they are working on B-373.
> S-400 is noticeable ahead + it has Anti Balistic capabilities.
> Integrate them into the existing S-300 PMU-2/B-373/Sayyad... systems
> Carry on with domestical systems as always, especially with SHORAD (short range AD) systems, they are way more important...
> Maybe purchase newst Buk-M3 + Pantsir S2 system also..


Question is not whether we need S-400 or not, Question is what we can do with € 2 billion if we invest it on our domestic air defense R&D and productions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Hmm I guess the value of 2 billion € invested in Iran actually is equal of 2 to 3 times multiplier since in Iran everything is cheaper . So in Russia it is 2 billion €, in Iran it is 4 to 6 billion € and in this case 1=/=1 it is
1=2 or 3

If I had to spend any huge amount of investment I would ask for some ToT any kind of ToT is good just to make up for some research without having to invest in R&D for the same thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> Turkey and Saudis are getting S-400 Systems.
> Iran should call Putin and order also some S-400 batteries.
> And please dont tell me Iran dont need them, because they are working on B-373.
> S-400 is noticeable ahead + it has Anti Balistic capabilities.
> Integrate them into the existing S-300 PMU-2/B-373/Sayyad... systems
> Carry on with domestical systems as always, especially with SHORAD (short range AD) systems, they are way more important...
> Maybe purchase newst Buk-M3 + Pantsir S2 system also..



Turkey I don't care about, they aren't even our enemy.

Saudi isn't confirmed that it will get the S-400. And if it was, we don't need S-400 as a response to their S-400. It isn't a dick measuring contest.

Saudi doesn't have any significant BM capabilities.

We don't need the Buk when we have our own significant medium range systems.

We don't need the S-400 when we have a very capable B-373 on par with/more capable than the S-300. That money is far better spent improving our own air defence systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

*Moragheb* 3D tactical radar:










Now after two years and still no information!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

YLC-2A based Iranized lower S-band or upper L-band early warning radar. Maybe, like the Bashir, it has been modified to a linear AESA array (not full element AESA). But more likely is that this is the case for the higher power IRIADF, Bavar-373, Meraj-4 and the IRIADF Moragheb is a more cost effective PESA.

Still another example of how Iran completely modifies designs sold by the Chinese, to something fully Iranian and of higher capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## -------

Is Iran investing in GAN technology ?


----------



## PeeD

Unknown. For the mass of Iranian AESA radars, Silicon and GaA based S-band TRMs are sufficient and more cost effective.

The single known X-band AESA would benefit from GaN but due to the large array, GaA also get the job done.
It's a cost issue. Until Iran is not needing an AESA that fits in a small fighter nose, GaNs would be just a expensive extra not worth the cost.
However we have seen a presentation with small elements shown that could be tile GaNs as such small tile GaAs would be of very low power.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD @eagle2007 in the linked article, Tom Cooper says Iran chose direct fed, solid state modules in the Meraj radar, unlike the S-300/400 and MIM-104 Patriot's "horn fed" radars. What's the difference in technology, operation and effectiveness?

https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft-2/


----------



## Parsipride

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD @eagle2007 in the linked article, Tom Cooper says Iran chose direct fed, solid state modules in the Meraj radar, unlike the S-300/400 and MIM-104 Patriot's "horn fed" radars. What's the difference in technology, operation and effectiveness?
> 
> https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft-2/



After I read the first part of the link you posted, It is either luck or an American blunder that they did not attack when the Air defenses were in such a disarray. He mentioned Air tankers were in the air for 2 hours before being noticed, civilian air craft ect.. 

I hope that today they can at least put a formidable defense and not just hot air propaganda.


----------



## Aspahbod

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD @eagle2007 in the linked article, Tom Cooper says Iran chose direct fed, solid state modules in the Meraj radar, unlike the S-300/400 and MIM-104 Patriot's "horn fed" radars. What's the difference in technology, operation and effectiveness?
> 
> https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft-2/



A very interesting claim he makes is that unlike Sayyad-3 & 4, Sayyad-2 is simply refurbished RIM-66 and thus, it will be deployed in few numbers. I don't think this is a very credible article and that includes the part about solid state modules.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Also the article is claiming that till mid 2000´s enemies planes flew deep inside iran air without risk? cant believe that. Iran had back then operational S-200 AD systems..


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

The Meraj-4 seems to be a line-element AESA. This is the simplest form of a AESA where a number of line feed elements are feed by one or stacked T/R modules. If the Meraj has let say 60 line arrays, it would be a AESA with 60 elements instead of full AESAs with hundert to thousands of elements. First U.S EW AESAs where also like that.

Space feed PESA has many benefits on its own but its weak point is that it is feed by one or several tube based RF generating electronics. Solid state elements of Meraj-4 and other such Iranian radars have higher MTBF are more efficient and in case that one of the 60 elements fails, 59 others are available. Hence they are effective for 24/7 operation.

Then there are other benefits which AESAs have, even if space feed PESA have a similar range performance due to their high power.

Irans Meraj-4 takes the position of the S-300/400 Bigbird, just that it is a modern and power/cost/MBTF effective modern radar instead of a brute force PESA (a very good one in that).

The Najm-802 on the other hand seems to be the more sophisticated full-element-AESA EW asset and Moragheb, the lower end PESA line array (non-solid state).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Aspahbod said:


> A very interesting claim he makes is that unlike Sayyad-3 & 4, Sayyad-2 is simply refurbished RIM-66 and thus, it will be deployed in few numbers. I don't think this is a very credible article and that includes the part about solid state modules.



The thing is, we know the Sayyad series stuff to be wrong as a fact, but the solid state one is not so well known. Furthermore, there is an implication that solid state radars are better.



Draco.IMF said:


> Also the article is claiming that till mid 2000´s enemies planes flew deep inside iran air without risk? cant believe that. Iran had back then operational S-200 AD systems..



S-200 was useless against tactical size targets even in the 1980s with Libya... It's only use today is against large aircraft like AWACS, IFR and B-52, though even in those situations it is easily jammed.



PeeD said:


> Space feed PESA has many benefits on its own



Apologies if I've asked this before, but what are these benefits?



PeeD said:


> Solid state elements of Meraj-4 and other such Iranian radars have higher MTBF are more efficient and in case that one of the 60 elements fails, 59 others are available. Hence they are effective for 24/7 operation.



So the Meraj-4 would be less vulnerable to system failures (though not necessarily more reliable, at least conceptually), and probably easier to repair/maintain.



PeeD said:


> Irans Meraj-4 takes the position of the S-300/400 Bigbird



As a long range battle management radar. I seem to remember it being given a 450 km range. I'm not sure if steps have been taken to apply this in future, but I guess in this context it could be used to assist a revitalised IRIAF with (hopefully, datalinked) targeting and/or situational awareness capabilities without the aircraft switching on their own radars.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> S-200 was useless against tactical size targets even in the 1980s with Libya... It's only use today is against large aircraft like AWACS, IFR and B-52, though even in those situations it is easily jammed.



The S-200 is dead-effective is used in the right way with the right supporting asset and not just the untouched export monkey model.

For Libyans it was just sufficient to dive below the LOS of the illumination radar to evade the S-200 and the same would be the case today even with the S-400.
The S-200 is a high class asset developed for an advanced IADS that can make use of it. Not Libyan or Syrian air defense.
Iran on the other hand can make very good use of it, using it only for a slim band of engagement situations.



AmirPatriot said:


> Apologies if I've asked this before, but what are these benefits?



Most importantly they can be much cheaper. They can easily produce circular waveforms and handle very high power levels. However now in 2017 the most important cost benefit factor could have been reduced compared to solid state AESA. However building a S-300 like 10.000 element X-band AESA would still be much more expensive than a space feed PESA, certainly not worth the cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Parsipride said:


> After I read the first part of the link you posted, It is either luck or an American blunder that they did not attack when the Air defenses were in such a disarray. He mentioned Air tankers were in the air for 2 hours before being noticed, civilian air craft ect..
> 
> I hope that today they can at least put a formidable defense and not just hot air propaganda.



It shouldn't surprise anyone that our air defences were in such poor state in the early 2000's. We got lucky we didnt get attacked to be honest. Even our offensive missiles (No zolfiqar, no emad) were in poor state. Luckly with the hard work of young talented minds, both these sectors have improved massively, mostly offensive missiles, which helps in defensive missiles as well. But we need just a little more time for development and production, and to lock up our air defenses with more modern systems like Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran Afag Naval Radar System range 200-KM ایران سامانه راداری دریای آفاق با برد ۲۰۰کیلومیتر*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

I generally hear about long range missiles like S200,300 and upcoming Bavar373. In Syria scene we have seen many cruise missile attacks with very low rate of interception. What is Irans answer as a shorad against cruise missiles to protect airbases and radar sites . Buk-Raad and Hawk-Shaheen can be used to some degree even against supersonic cruise missiles. There was also the purchased Tor system. Are there any recent developments? A variant of pantsyr maybe or similar shorad for subsonic more stealthy cruise missiles


----------



## Stryker1982

vizier said:


> I generally hear about long range missiles like S200,300 and upcoming Bavar373. In Syria scene we have seen many cruise missile attacks with very low rate of interception. What is Irans answer as a shorad against cruise missiles to protect airbases and radar sites . Buk-Raad and Hawk-Shaheen can be used to some degree even against supersonic cruise missiles. There was also the purchased Tor system. Are there any recent developments? A variant of pantsyr maybe or similar shorad for subsonic more stealthy cruise missiles



I'm not quite sure what you mean by "many cruise missle attacks" I'm assuming you mean the one agaisnt the Syrian airbase. As far as I can tell, their was no attempt at interception of these cruise missiles at all. I was actually wondering the same if what systems and how they'd be used to detect and intercept a salvo of say 100 cruise missiles within a short time frame.

But consider that if their was a very low interception rate that also plays into irans favor as well as Iran is plenty full when it comes to missiles.

I can't say for the quality of these systems or how many operation units but some systems that comes to mind are

*Shahab Thaqeb
Herz - 9
Mesbah
*
Their are actually alot of gun based automated AA systems, whether or not they've been tested significantly I dunno but I hope they are effective like a land based CIWS, should reduce costs alot I'd imagine.
*
*


----------



## vizier

Stryker1982 said:


> I'm not quite sure what you mean by "many cruise missle attacks" I'm assuming you mean the one agaisnt the Syrian airbase. As far as I can tell, their was no attempt at interception of these cruise missiles at all. I was actually wondering the same if what systems and how they'd be used to detect and intercept a salvo of say 100 cruise missiles within a short time frame.
> 
> But consider that if their was a very low interception rate that also plays into irans favor as well as Iran is plenty full when it comes to missiles.
> 
> I can't say for the quality of these systems or how many operation units but some systems that comes to mind are
> 
> *Shahab Thaqeb
> Herz - 9
> Mesbah
> *
> Their are actually alot of gun based automated AA systems, whether or not they've been tested significantly I dunno but I hope they are effective like a land based CIWS, should reduce costs alot I'd imagine.



By many other than the Shayrat airbase tomahawk cm attack the israeli attacks from Lebanese and their own airspace hitting airbases in Damascus frequently. These attacks are most probably carried out by cruise missiles.

Crotale variants are good and open for improvement but connecting a multiple engagement radar similar to what you would use for bavar 373 to a shorad would be better in my opinion for saturation attacks.Also similar to barak 8 vertical launch would give 360 degree coverage. A much smaller and simpler sam than barak 8 would be enough for cruise missiles though.


----------



## vizier

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/10/31/540434/Iran-unveils-new-military-radar-system-

Like this one for example. It is claimed to track 100 targets. It may be a coastline radar to detect ships with limited ability to counter air targets but there are better radars in Irans inventory that suits the purpose of short range air defense. At least 10-15 cruise missiles are launched to a single target like airbase or sam installation. It would also be an easier step while developing bavar373 since the short range rocket would be much more simple and much easier to be built but can perhaps use bavars radar and other systems or its own shorter range radar to engage multiple targets.

Crotale based systems would still be good to defend moving columns though where it is difficult to make a saturation cruise missile attack as position continiously changes unlike airbases.


----------



## Stryker1982

vizier said:


> http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/10/31/540434/Iran-unveils-new-military-radar-system-
> 
> Like this one for example. It is claimed to track 100 targets. It may be a coastline radar to detect ships with limited ability to counter air targets but there are better radars in Irans inventory that suits the purpose of short range air defense. At least 10-15 cruise missiles are launched to a single target like airbase or sam installation. It would also be an easier step while developing bavar373 since the short range rocket would be much more simple and much easier to be built but can perhaps use bavars radar and other systems or its own shorter range radar to engage multiple targets.
> 
> Crotale based systems would still be good to defend moving columns though where it is difficult to make a saturation cruise missile attack as position continiously changes unlike airbases.



I'm not really sure about the state of Iran SHORAD systems, but as far as i can tell their seems to be much more emphasis and focus on medium to high altitude threats (Talash, 3rdkhordad, Bavar etc..) . Those systems I mentioned earlier are some SHORADS I can think of on the top of my head, but I'm not sure how effective or how well secure the SHORAD architecture is in Iran, someone else might know more about that, but it most definitely must be required to intercept cruise missiles. I think their is a major weakness in this sector. Ultimately though, all the high-medium attitude systems should be supporting each other in some sort of air defense architecture concept which something I think Iran will be capable of soon. For example, the idea of S-300 - pantsir combination while shorads would focus on point defense over strategic targets and cities. Maybe they intend on Mersad playing this role, and have the other systems remain highly mobile. I'd imagine Mersad system could handle subsonic cruise missiles but really it comes down to how cost effective it is and is their cheaper and still effective options?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Unkown Iranian radar. details have not yet been announced

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sayad 4 ( red )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## somebozo

Isnt it a derivation of S300 built with covert Russian assistance?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Any chance this can be sqeezed thru in the underground tunnel , appear to be needed in Lebnoon /Palestine

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

somebozo said:


> Isnt it a derivation of S300 built with covert Russian assistance?



No. The bavar 373 project started in 2010, after Russia opposed the delivery of the S 300 system to iran. Some of the systems in bavar 373 system are completely different from any other systems.



AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Any chance this can be sqeezed thru in the underground tunnel , appear to be needed in Lebnoon /Palestine



I did not see a tunnel so big that we could put that system in it. But Hezbollah is likely to have this system In the near future because it can be transmitted through Syria and Iraq to Lebanon. Iran always wants Hezbollah to have a lot of power to prevent or delay the Israeli attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Seems like a reasonable goal to safeguard Labnoon

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

somebozo said:


> Isnt it a derivation of S300 built with covert Russian assistance?


S-300 PMU-2 has range of almost 300 Km for detection and for engagement operates within 200 Km range. 

B-373 detects the fighter jets at almost 400-450 Km range and engages with them at 300 Km, also with cruise missiles and BMs. 

It's detection radar has similarity to it's American rivals and engagement radar looks like Russian radars. So i conclude it's completely made in Iran. We mad it when everybody sanctioned us.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Quite impressive Missiles , and SAMs , Iran has made great progress in such little time

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Quite impressive Missiles , and SAMs , Iran has made great progress in such little time



The funniest part is that Israel says that Iran has only 100 of these missiles .Shahab 3 has only 300 missiles.



mohammad45 said:


> S-300 PMU-2 has range of almost 300 Km for detection and for engagement operates within 200 Km range.
> 
> B-373 detects the fighter jets at almost 400-450 Km range and engages with them at 300 Km, also with cruise missiles and BMs.
> 
> It's detection radar has similarity to it's American rivals and engagement radar looks like Russian radars. So i conclude it's completely made in Iran. We mad it when everybody sanctioned us.



I can not wait until the next year for it to be operational so we can see missiles that are being fired from it.



AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Seems like a reasonable goal to safeguard Labnoon



It's not a secret that we are looking for influence from Tehran to the Mediterranean. Just as the Iranian leader says that Israel needs to be destroyed in 25 year, without war and from inside, this is why it will be a 25 year plan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Well since Iran made it they have right to sell it to any customer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Well since Iran made it they have right to sell it to any customer



Exactly


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Wonder if this missile is for Sale  would not mind getting few battalions for testing and evaluation

We were also checking out some options for High Altitude engagements


----------



## Arsalan 345

iranian scientists are supposed to be the best in the world.what they have achieved is remarkable but arab iran proxy is not over.arabs should accept iran as a force in this region and move on.arabs friendly ties with israel and america is not good for the region.i think saudia arab better start making their own weapons rather than dancing with trump with swords in their hands.i mean it was terrible!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> The funniest part is that Israel says that Iran has only 100 of these missiles .Shahab 3 has only 300 missiles.
> 
> 
> 
> I can not wait until the next year for it to be operational so we can see missiles that are being fired from it.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a secret that we are looking for influence from Tehran to the Mediterranean. Just as the Iranian leader says that Israel needs to be destroyed in 25 year, without war and from inside, this is why it will be a 25 year plan.



The reason they probably claim that Iran only has 300 is because even Shahab-3's are expensive to make. Maybe other people know more information but looking at this equation in Fleemans tactical missile design book.







Can we predict the price of a shahab-3 would be roughly: (assuming launch weight of W_L = 40000lbs)

C_1000 = 6100 (40,000)^0.758 = $18.7 mil? Which is very expensive.

The model is meant to predict the price of a missile by calculating the average cost of the 1000th missile.
Page 286.

Is the model somewhat accurate or am i just retarded?


----------



## skyshadow

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Wonder if this missile is for Sale  would not mind getting few battalions for testing and evaluation
> 
> We were also checking out some options for High Altitude engagements



I think in 2023 Iran can sell this but I do not think Iran will sell it to other countries before developing more sophisticated systems like bavar 373.



Arsalan 345 said:


> iranian scientists are supposed to be the best in the world.what they have achieved is remarkable but arab iran proxy is not over.arabs should accept iran as a force in this region and move on.arabs friendly ties with israel and america is not good for the region.i think saudia arab better start making their own weapons rather than dancing with trump with swords in their hands.i mean it was terrible!



Iran has a lot of knowledge that has been gained by the Iranians, such as being the first in the field of surgery and cancer treatment. But there are too many limitations on Iran, such as financial and restrictions on access to information and discoveries and materials from other countries, and restrictions in cooperation with more advanced countries. If Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries invest in Iran, they will do much to help themselves and the Middle East.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> The reason they probably claim that Iran only has 300 is because even Shahab-3's are expensive to make. Maybe other people know more information but looking at this equation in Fleemans tactical missile design book.
> 
> View attachment 435815
> 
> 
> Can we predict the price of a shahab-3 would be roughly: (assuming launch weight of W_L = 40000lbs)
> 
> C_1000 = 6100 (40,000)^0.758 = $18.7 mil? Which is very expensive.
> 
> The model is meant to predict the price of a missile by calculating the average cost of the 1000th missile.
> Page 286.
> 
> Is the model somewhat accurate or am i just retarded?




In the same year that the Shahab 3 rocket was introduced, the cost of making each missile was said to be 1 million and 250 thousand dollars. Iran is rich in wealth and, as one American financial expert states, Iran's spending in missiles and in Syria and Iraq, and Lebanon and North Korea, and countries in South America, and in yemen and in groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, in one year = One year defense spending of the US.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Well Iran is also blessed with great food production capacity etc and not to mention strong economy even without oil. 

Iran has some items of interest in their side the biggest asset is thirst for knowledge

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

somebozo said:


> Isnt it a derivation of S300 built with covert Russian assistance?



Different systems ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Stryker1982 said:


> The reason they probably claim that Iran only has 300 is because even Shahab-3's are expensive to make. Maybe other people know more information but looking at this equation in Fleemans tactical missile design book.
> 
> View attachment 435815
> 
> 
> Can we predict the price of a shahab-3 would be roughly: (assuming launch weight of W_L = 40000lbs)
> 
> C_1000 = 6100 (40,000)^0.758 = $18.7 mil? Which is very expensive.
> 
> The model is meant to predict the price of a missile by calculating the average cost of the 1000th missile.
> Page 286.
> 
> Is the model somewhat accurate or am i just retarded?



No way. No way at all. Look at arms transfer databases and reports for Saddam buying Russian scuds in the 70s and you'll see it is nowhere near $18 million.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

AmirPatriot said:


> No way. No way at all. Look at arms transfer databases and reports for Saddam buying Russian scuds in the 70s and you'll see it is nowhere near $18 million.



I figured that would be way to expensive. I'd expect a simple shahab-3 to be around 1-3 million $. That probably sounds about right.


----------



## Parsipride

*Iran air defence improved but not game-changing, analysts say*

So much for the incredible air forces of the monkey sub-humans. The article states Iran can strike UAE in under three minutes.

If Iran had received the longer-range 48N6E2 missile - which has not been confirmed - the missiles used by the upgraded S-300PMU2 system could have a range of 200km, and the radars have a range of 300km, Jane’s reported. This would allow Iran to monitor from Bushehr, air traffic over parts of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, it said.

The air force capabilities of the GCC, US and Israel are far superior to Iran’s and have until now outmatched the country's outdated air defences. But the S-300’s are a significant improvement that could, to some extent, deter air operations against Iran by its adversaries, according to analysts. 

Iran has built up its own so-called “retaliatory deterrence” through its vast *ballistic missile network that can launch from land and sea and can reach the UAE in under three minutes.* It is designed to overwhelm GCC and US missile defences through its sheer numbers. 

*Crucially, Iran’s precision guidance technology has evolved significantly in recent years, as demonstrated by recent tests that have drawn new US sanctions, making the Iranian missile threat even more acute, especially to the smaller Gulf countries whose critical infrastructure is concentrated geographically.*

If Iran were able to develop effective air defences to guard against advanced aircraft and cruise missiles, Washington and its regional partners would have to redraw their strategic calculations. 

*The S-300’s Iran now possesses already erode the conventional military edge held by Tehran’s adversaries.* “It helped Iran reduce but not fully overcome its technological gap with other advanced nations such as Israel,” Mr Martinez said.

https://www.thenational.ae/world/me...d-but-not-game-changing-analysts-say-1.624475


----------



## AmirPatriot

Parsipride said:


> *Iran air defence improved but not game-changing, analysts say*
> 
> So much for the incredible air forces of the monkey sub-humans. The article states Iran can strike UAE in under three minutes.
> 
> If Iran had received the longer-range 48N6E2 missile - which has not been confirmed - the missiles used by the upgraded S-300PMU2 system could have a range of 200km, and the radars have a range of 300km, Jane’s reported. This would allow Iran to monitor from Bushehr, air traffic over parts of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, it said.
> 
> The air force capabilities of the GCC, US and Israel are far superior to Iran’s and have until now outmatched the country's outdated air defences. But the S-300’s are a significant improvement that could, to some extent, deter air operations against Iran by its adversaries, according to analysts.
> 
> Iran has built up its own so-called “retaliatory deterrence” through its vast *ballistic missile network that can launch from land and sea and can reach the UAE in under three minutes.* It is designed to overwhelm GCC and US missile defences through its sheer numbers.
> 
> *Crucially, Iran’s precision guidance technology has evolved significantly in recent years, as demonstrated by recent tests that have drawn new US sanctions, making the Iranian missile threat even more acute, especially to the smaller Gulf countries whose critical infrastructure is concentrated geographically.*
> 
> If Iran were able to develop effective air defences to guard against advanced aircraft and cruise missiles, Washington and its regional partners would have to redraw their strategic calculations.
> 
> *The S-300’s Iran now possesses already erode the conventional military edge held by Tehran’s adversaries.* “It helped Iran reduce but not fully overcome its technological gap with other advanced nations such as Israel,” Mr Martinez said.
> 
> https://www.thenational.ae/world/me...d-but-not-game-changing-analysts-say-1.624475


There is literally a picture floating about on the internet showing 48N6E2 written on one of the missiles or its canisters... can't find it again tho.


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> Unkown Iranian radar. details have not yet been announced
> View attachment 434310

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

AmirPatriot said:


> There is literally a picture floating about on the internet showing 48N6E2 written on one of the missiles or its canisters... can't find it again tho.



Can't wait for Bavar-373. I'm thinking by end of nowruz we should for sure see something if not earlier.


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> There is literally a picture floating about on the internet showing 48N6E2 written on one of the missiles or its canisters... can't find it again tho.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

AmirPatriot said:


> There is literally a picture floating about on the internet showing 48N6E2 written on one of the missiles or its canisters... can't find it again tho.


Last year Mashregh published this one:



So now we can say they got E2.


----------



## Stryker1982

raptor22 said:


> Last year Mashregh published this one:
> View attachment 436924
> 
> 
> So now we can say they got E2.



Is that chart also saying that Iran has like upwards of 9000 atgms of just fagots and konkurs?? Thats huuuuuge.


less than three minutes to reach UAE. I wonder if exist anymore after 24h with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parsipride




----------



## N_Al40

So this has been on mind ever since the Sayyad-3 was unveiled. As you can see below the Sayyad-3 launcher, the high altitude component of the Talash System, is always equipped with only two launch canisters. 















In comparison, the Sayyad-2 launcher, the medium altitude component of the Talash System, is always equipped with four launch canisters (bar one occasion).













Which brings me to the question...why? Is the Sayyad-3 missile launch system too advanced for the fire control radars and range finders to handle more than two?

Dear God I hope Bavar-373 has 4 launch canisters!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eagle2007

I was under the impression that there was some confusion with the imagery released concerning the Sayyad-3 test and the consensus was that no actual images of the Sayyad-3 was released and all the images are of a Sayyad-2 that was also launched. 

The images released certainly suggest that, as the launch tubes look identical, even if they're only 2 of them. But the handy thing about such launchers is that they are easy to switch to twin/quad launch configuration. From time to time, even US Patriot launchers (original, PAC-1, PAC-2) have been seen with just two tubes instead of the typical four.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

eagle2007 said:


> I was under the impression that there was some confusion with the imagery released concerning the Sayyad-3 test and the consensus was that no actual images of the Sayyad-3 was released and all the images are of a Sayyad-2 that was also launched.
> 
> The images released certainly suggest that, as the launch tubes look identical, even if they're only 2 of them. But the handy thing about such launchers is that they are easy to switch to twin/quad launch configuration. From time to time, even US Patriot launchers (original, PAC-1, PAC-2) have been seen with just two tubes instead of the typical four.


don't knew in some picture the missile fit into the launcher but in some its longer.


----------



## AmirPatriot

eagle2007 said:


> I was under the impression that there was some confusion with the imagery released concerning the Sayyad-3 test and the consensus was that no actual images of the Sayyad-3 was released and all the images are of a Sayyad-2 that was also launched.



Well certainly images of the Sayyad-3 test have been released:






But it is true that there may have been some confusion because of the identical launch canisters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eagle2007

Ahh, good call, hadn't seen those images. Disregard then.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

I dont believe that sayad 2 & 3 are designated by number of canister launchers, it more has to do with the vehicle footprint. In urban environment you can have both systems with two launchers on each just to blend in with other trucks in the city. In cities you can shoot and scoot in civilian truck disguised as an ice cream truck or any other truck for that purpose. Its a pretty darn fancy tactic when practiced in urban areas, where in non urban environment hiding these systems regardless weather it is with 2 or 4 launchers on each is more difficult. And what makes you think there is no stationary version buried underground with 6, 8 and so on launcher canisters just like with MRBM underground silos?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

scimitar19 said:


> I dont believe that sayad 2 & 3 are designated by number of canister launchers, it more has to do with the vehicle footprint. In urban environment you can have both systems with two launchers on each just to blend in with other trucks in the city. In cities you can shoot and scoot in civilian truck disguised as an ice cream truck or any other truck for that purpose. Its a pretty darn fancy tactic when practiced in urban areas, where in non urban environment hiding these systems regardless weather it is with 2 or 4 launchers on each is more difficult. And what makes you think there is no stationary version buried underground with 6, 8 and so on launcher canisters just like with MRBM underground silos?!



Interesting take.

Love the idea of a stationary version!


----------



## Fafnir

N_Al40 said:


> So this has been on mind ever since the Sayyad-3 was unveiled. As you can see below the Sayyad-3 launcher, the high altitude component of the Talash System, is always equipped with only two launch canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In comparison, the Sayyad-2 launcher, the medium altitude component of the Talash System, is always equipped with four launch canisters (bar one occasion).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which brings me to the question...why? Is the Sayyad-3 missile launch system too advanced for the fire control radars and range finders to handle more than two?
> 
> Dear God I hope Bavar-373 has 4 launch canisters!


You can find plenty of pictures online of patriot batteries with only 2 canisters on the tel as well,ultimately it doesnt mean anything especially during testing and development of the system.The real limiting factor for long range sam systems like these is the power and sophistication of its fire control radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Fafnir

N_Al40 said:


> Interesting take.
> 
> Love the idea of a stationary version!


You`d probably like this then,its a depiction of one of the dprks underground sa3 sam sites,probably built back in the 70s or early 80s to protect critical targets like pyongyang,and altho it undoubtedly gives far better protection than the semi revetted/revetted semi permanent or permanent sam sites,it like they once their exact positions are known are now very,very vulnerable to the plethora of precision guided weapons that are now easily available today,not to mention that building systems like this is not cheap,tho one possible upgrade would be to replace the old sa3 sam system with new s300 derived kn06 components.
On todays battlefield only scoot and shoot mobility can guarantee some degree of survivability for modern sam systems,the main problem with immobile systems is their inherent vulnerability to preemptive or saturation type attacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran DIO mass delivery LR Sayyad-3C Air Defense missiles ایران خط‌ تولید موشک صیاد۳ پدافندهوایی*


*



*
*Iran tests Sayyad 2 missiles*

*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## B@KH



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

*Iran Khatam Al-Anbia AD S300 transport to Khorasan province ایران پدافند هوایی اس-۳۰۰ استان خراسان*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

*Iranian air defense system passes initial tests: Commander*

*Tasnim – Iran’s homegrown missile defense system ‘Bavar-373’ has successfully passed all initial tests, a military commander said.
*
In an interview with Tasnim on Saturday, Lieutenant Commander of Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base General Abolfazl Sepehrirad said the Bavar-373 air defense missile system has gone through all of the initial tests successfully.

He also said that all training courses for operating the Russian-made S-300 system are currently being held inside Iran.

Iran received the S-300 from Russia in July 2016 and installed the missile system a month later.

Under a contract signed in 2007, Russia was required to provide Iran with at least five S-300 defense systems, but after its initial refusal to sell the system, Iranian experts began to manufacture a domestic version, known as Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## VEVAK



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Stryker1982

VEVAK said:


>



This is beautiful. Everything about this is very modern, disciplined and professionally conducted. I'm personally pleased with the professionalism and modernity of the air defense personnel. It's not even comparable to the other branches of the armed forces. Even something as simple as uniforms are modern.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MTN1917

VEVAK said:


>


Two previously unseen developments from the video

Mobile version of Kavosh radar(part of Mersad AD system)






New SAM launcher

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

MTN1917 said:


> Two previously unseen developments from the video
> 
> Mobile version of Kavosh radar(part of Mersad AD system)
> View attachment 450706
> 
> 
> New SAM launcher
> View attachment 450711
> 
> View attachment 450712



That SAM launcher looks very odd.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> That SAM launcher looks very odd.


Its still the sayyad tel,its just because the launcher is at a right angle to the vehicle,altho what does look noticeably different is the curved fairing behind the cab which encloses probably the on board generator/electronics.The missile canister is also missing the front blow out cap and the front and rear frame works as well.This could be a very early pic of one of the very first prototypes of the sayyad tel.


----------



## Stryker1982

Fafnir said:


> Its still the sayyad tel,its just because the launcher is at a right angle to the vehicle,altho what does look noticeably different is the curved fairing behind the cab which encloses probably the on board generator/electronics.The missile canister is also missing the front blow out cap and the front and rear frame works as well.This could be a very early pic of one of the very first prototypes of the sayyad tel.



I didn't know the Sayyad tel could be oriented at such angles. Would this mean Sayyad-2 missiles would be capable of engaging low-altitude projectiles?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> I didn't know the Sayyad tel could be oriented at such angles. Would this mean Sayyad-2 missiles would be capable of engaging low-altitude projectiles?


Its practically a RIM-66 at least from outside and you can use it as Ground to Ground missile so engaging low flying threat is not problem , but why use it for that just use tor missiles in that case or if you interested in Domestic copy Shahab Thaqeb fot those purpose ?

after all using this is alot cheaper
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ya_Zahra_air_defense_system


----------



## Fafnir

Stryker1982 said:


> I didn't know the Sayyad tel could be oriented at such angles. Would this mean Sayyad-2 missiles would be capable of engaging low-altitude projectiles?


I suppose it would depend on its minimum engagement altitude/range combination.
As for the tel orientation,because the sayyad like the patriot doest use thrust vectoring but instead uses aerodynamic control surfaces it relies on the launcher for the initial accurate positioning of the missile at launch so it needs a launcher capable of independent rotation and elevation.By comparison the launcher on the s300pmu2 is a pretty simple system which is only capable of elevating to 90 degrees.


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Yesterday some projects of the Imam Hossain university were shown on TV.

Most interesting for air defense:

A short range SAM was shown similar to Pantsir. However it is not a Pantsir copy as the missile has a aerodynamic configuration more akin to the Rapier. Hence like the Taer-2 series it seems they went their own way, while going for the same general layout. We expect a short range SAM with anti-PGM capability from Iran, a more capabel follow on to the Crotale. It was clear that it is either based on the TOR-M1 or Pantsir missile system (more cost efficient), at least for the general layout.

A "production" variant of a laser link communication system was shown which looks mature now after they first showed such a system several years ago. It is a jamming proof link for the IADS, e.g connecting TEL to TELAR.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## raptor22

PeeD said:


> Yesterday some projects of the Imam Hossain university were shown on TV.
> 
> Most interesting for air defense:
> 
> A short range SAM was shown similar to Pantsir. However it is not a Pantsir copy as the missile has a aerodynamic configuration more akin to the Rapier. Hence like the Taer-2 series it seems they went their own way, while going for the same general layout. We expect a short range SAM with anti-PGM capability from Iran, a more capabel follow on to the Crotale. It was clear that it is either based on the TOR-M1 or Pantsir missile system (more cost efficient), at least for the general layout.
> 
> A "production" variant of a laser link communication system was shown which looks mature now after they first showed such a system several years ago. It is a jamming proof link for the IADS, e.g connecting TEL to TELAR.


Don't you see similarity between S300 vm and Bavar?


----------



## N_Al40

PeeD said:


> Yesterday some projects of the Imam Hossain university were shown on TV.
> 
> Most interesting for air defense:
> 
> A short range SAM was shown similar to Pantsir. However it is not a Pantsir copy as the missile has a aerodynamic configuration more akin to the Rapier. Hence like the Taer-2 series it seems they went their own way, while going for the same general layout. We expect a short range SAM with anti-PGM capability from Iran, a more capabel follow on to the Crotale. It was clear that it is either based on the TOR-M1 or Pantsir missile system (more cost efficient), at least for the general layout.
> 
> A "production" variant of a laser link communication system was shown which looks mature now after they first showed such a system several years ago. It is a jamming proof link for the IADS, e.g connecting TEL to TELAR.



That's brilliant news. 

Iran has long needed a Pantisir-like air defence system to deal with low altitude threats and most importantly...cruise missiles.



PeeD said:


> Yesterday some projects of the Imam Hossain university were shown on TV.
> 
> Most interesting for air defense:
> 
> A short range SAM was shown similar to Pantsir. However it is not a Pantsir copy as the missile has a aerodynamic configuration more akin to the Rapier. Hence like the Taer-2 series it seems they went their own way, while going for the same general layout. We expect a short range SAM with anti-PGM capability from Iran, a more capabel follow on to the Crotale. It was clear that it is either based on the TOR-M1 or Pantsir missile system (more cost efficient), at least for the general layout.
> 
> A "production" variant of a laser link communication system was shown which looks mature now after they first showed such a system several years ago. It is a jamming proof link for the IADS, e.g connecting TEL to TELAR.



Have you got any video stills?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

raptor22 said:


> Don't you see similarity between S300 vm and Bavar?



No. Bavar is more akin to S-300P series and yet very different. Iran didn't like the S-300V series, apparently because it's non TVC (booster excluded). The P series on the other hand has TVC to something like 40km of its full range.

@N_Al40 

No, I hope someone uploads them.


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Yesterday some projects of the Imam Hossain university were shown on TV.
> 
> Most interesting for air defense:
> 
> A short range SAM was shown similar to Pantsir. However it is not a Pantsir copy as the missile has a aerodynamic configuration more akin to the Rapier. Hence like the Taer-2 series it seems they went their own way, while going for the same general layout. We expect a short range SAM with anti-PGM capability from Iran, a more capabel follow on to the Crotale. It was clear that it is either based on the TOR-M1 or Pantsir missile system (more cost efficient), at least for the general layout.
> 
> A "production" variant of a laser link communication system was shown which looks mature now after they first showed such a system several years ago. It is a jamming proof link for the IADS, e.g connecting TEL to TELAR.



Awesome, if there are any pictures of this system please share it


----------



## Muhammed45

PeeD said:


> *No, I hope someone uploads them.*


@yavar 
Needs your attention

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Serpentine

PeeD said:


> No, I hope someone uploads them.



Which program and which channel was that?


----------



## PeeD

Serpentine said:


> Which program and which channel was that?



Baradaran from militaryIR uploaded it https://www.aparat.com/v/K5gAB

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Serpentine

PeeD said:


> Baradaran from militaryIR uploaded it https://www.aparat.com/v/K5gAB


Thanks. I couldn't find where it shows the short range system though. Can you please send a screenshot?


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

@PeeD
Apparently your mentioned video is edited, maybe classified information.

A question, American ABM version of Patriot systems are using single-launchers :






And recently, Iran has shown something similar ;





Is that possible we have developed a short range-high altitude ABM system? I can't find a sensible reason to use a single-launcher air defense system, while we know that in case of a foreign attack, multiple launchers can defend airspace better with more chance against cruise attacks. Just wondering


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Baradaran from militaryIR uploaded it https://www.aparat.com/v/K5gAB


The only missiles I saw were various steel models that did not specify as belonging to any particular system or giving much sense of scale or purpose.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

mohammad45 said:


> @PeeD
> Apparently your mentioned video is edited, maybe classified information.
> 
> A question, American ABM version of Patriot systems are using single-launchers :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And recently, Iran has shown something similar ;
> View attachment 454428
> 
> 
> Is that possible we have developed a short range-high altitude ABM system? I can't find a sensible reason to use a single-launcher air defense system, while we know that in case of a foreign attack, multiple launchers can defend airspace better with more chance against cruise attacks. Just wondering



Hot launch systems always expose neighboring missile canisters to hot gases. That's why in a professional training maneuver just single containers are used, or at least reduced number of containers. Its more a cosmetic thing, you rather want a factory-like missile instead one with burnmarks of test starts.

Patriot PAC-3 container has four smaller missiles, instead a large one, so with full loadout it has 16 interceptors per TEL.

@Serpentine 

The system was not shown, just a missile (windtunnel model) which fits into the layout of short range high speed SAMs.

@AmirPatriot 

One can tell quite much from those steel supersonic windtunnel models with some knowledge on missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> Baradaran from militaryIR uploaded it https://www.aparat.com/v/K5gAB


Except telewebion which has a full archive of all channels:
http://www.telewebion.com/archive/tv1/1396-11-26

IRIB archives its news too:
http://www.simanews.ir/Archieve.aspx

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

mohammad45 said:


> @PeeD
> Apparently your mentioned video is edited, maybe classified information.
> 
> A question, American ABM version of Patriot systems are using single-launchers :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And recently, Iran has shown something similar ;
> View attachment 454428
> 
> 
> Is that possible we have developed a short range-high altitude ABM system? I can't find a sensible reason to use a single-launcher air defense system, while we know that in case of a foreign attack, multiple launchers can defend airspace better with more chance against cruise attacks. Just wondering


Similar to Chinese ks-1a by box launchers.











PeeD said:


> No. Bavar is more akin to S-300P series and yet very different. Iran didn't like the S-300V series, apparently because it's non TVC (booster excluded). The P series on the other hand has TVC to something like 40km of its full range.
> 
> @N_Al40
> 
> No, I hope someone uploads them.


I meant back in 90s we wanted both systems but in new deal we just asked for p series .. but V series are similar to Bavar at least I think ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> One can tell quite much from those steel supersonic windtunnel models with some knowledge on missiles.


But not if they will ever reach production  you know how bad our procurement is.


----------



## Fafnir

AmirPatriot said:


> The only missiles I saw were various steel models that did not specify as belonging to any particular system or giving much sense of scale or purpose.


If you look at around 1:35 on the video,you will see two missile models near the top of the screen which bare a striking resemblance to the bavar373 sam and the taer 2 sam

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

*Fafnir*@
what is the missile on the far right hand side of the image?
Rapier missile perhaps?
One on the bottom is a cruise type missile like tomahawk?


----------



## VEVAK

Fafnir said:


> If you look at around 1:35 on the video,you will see two missile models near the top of the screen which bare a striking resemblance to the bavar373 sam and the taer 2 sam



That part of the video is about wind tunnels and those are models Iran used for wind tunnel testing....



scimitar19 said:


> *Fafnir*@
> what is the missile on the far right hand side of the image?
> Rapier missile perhaps?
> One on the bottom is a cruise type missile like tomahawk?



They are models used in wind tunnel testing..... Nothing more! These were there too





Doesn't necessarily mean Iran is planning on building them... 

The Tomahawk looking cruise missile is the most interesting one! I personally believe it's a bad Idea to have an engine hanging out of the bottom of a low flying cruise missile that has to travel long distances at low altitudes! And It's important that Iran designs a LACM that address that major flaw as the Russians have with their newer designs.... 

Right now a small shrapnel from an AAA even without a direct hit or a small bird flying at low altitude can totally blow up the engine of the Soumar!


----------



## OldTwilight

این ها عرضه ندارند مشخص کنند که یک هواپیما مسافربری کجای ایران سقوط کرده ... ...

با این چرندیاتشون پس فردا ما رو وارد یک جنگ می کنند و بعد خودشان و عزیزانشون برای تحقیقات به بلاد متحد « شیطان بزرگ » می روند ... 

این ها اگه واقعا راست می گفتند ، همون بمب اتمی که 20 سال اونقدر از جیب ملت براش پول خرج کردن و اونقدر تحریم به خاطرش به ملت تحریم کردن رو می ساختن ...


----------



## Fafnir

scimitar19 said:


> *Fafnir*@
> what is the missile on the far right hand side of the image?
> Rapier missile perhaps?
> One on the bottom is a cruise type missile like tomahawk?


*Its hard to say just with a guess,but the missile on the right looks like it could either be a 2 stage sam as it does appear to taper very slightly in the middle,another possibility might be an air to air missile as these are usually quite long and thin.One of the problems is that there is nothing to scale the models with so getting a sense of how big the actual systems are meant to be in real life is virtually impossible and without that it makes guesstimating all the more difficult,for instance the model of the bavar 373 is smaller than the taer 2 model but in reality the b373 is a hell of a lot bigger than the taer 2.
The bottom missile does indeed look a lot like the older tomahawk even down to having what appears to be a cruciform tail and an external air intake.*


VEVAK said:


> That part of the video is about wind tunnels and those are models Iran used for wind tunnel testing....


*Yes,I did rather gather that.*


VEVAK said:


> They are models used in wind tunnel testing..... Nothing more! These were there too
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Doesn't necessarily mean Iran is planning on building them...


*True,but its just as possible that these were models for actual projects that ended up being cancelled,after all we have no way of knowing the age of many of the models on display.I think its extremely likely that all the models we saw were based on actual designs for past or current military projects.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Some of the models are for benchmarking/testing the windtunnel.

Others are real. For the Pantsir/Rapier hybrid we see one thing: It is presented with Sayyad-4, Taer-2A and a unknown CM with Tomahawk layout.

The probability is thus high that these are a group of real projects and a Iranised Pantsir makes best sense. More likely than a (bulky/expensive) TOR-M1 missile copy and the pattern is again similar to what was done with the Taer-2A: It has the basic layout of the Buk-M1 missile but the engineering is Iranian and more similar to Sayyad-2/Standard.

I'm 80% sure that this is the next generation Iranian short range, anti-PGM/-CM system after the Ya-Zahra-2/9.Herz.
Great decision if true.

PS: That missile would not be a copy of the Pantsir's. The Iranian variant seems to have a powered second stage --> a significant difference in basic layout, plus likely a boxed launcher.


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD is this the model you were talking about?






Pantsir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD is this the model you were talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pantsir



Yes.
Remains to be seen whether the additional sustainer motor of the second stage is worth the extra cost in terms of range and speed performance.
If range is higher than the Pantsir missile and warhead of similar power, then maybe. But if not, the Pantsir would be the more cost efficient design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Muhammed45

@PeeD 

What is the considerable difference b/n these two radars :

Fath-14 :




Matla'ul fajr-3 :


----------



## PeeD

M


mohammad45 said:


> @PeeD
> 
> What is the considerable difference b/n these two radars :
> 
> Fath-14 :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matla'ul fajr-3 :



Well MuF-3 is a more cost efficient PESA with somewhat longer wavelength.

Fath-14 is a more compact design with potential for shoot and scoot in a mobile variant. It's more sophisticated by being an AESA with more advanced waveform. It can potentially also be used for electronic starring sector scan, while the MuF-3 is a traditional volume search radar.

I'm a like the MuF-2/3 as its close to maximum cost effectiveness.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

PeeD said:


> M
> 
> 
> Well MuF-3 is a more cost efficient PESA with somewhat longer wavelength.
> 
> Fath-14 is a more compact design with potential for shoot and scoot in a mobile variant. It's more sophisticated by being an AESA with more advanced waveform. It can potentially also be used for electronic starring sector scan, while the MuF-3 is a traditional volume search radar.
> 
> I'm a like the MuF-2/3 as its close to maximum cost effectiveness.


For god sake Muf 2/3 are not pesa or any electronicaly scanned radars...those are Vhf radars based on P12/P18 design...P12/18 is particulary used with Yugoslavian S-125 1999 as search radar and it was radar that first detect f-117 and Alert fire crew.Matla ul fajr is highly upgraded and modified P-12/18 design,it is highly mobile and it has integrated ECCM thus since it is digitalized it is highly resistant to jamming..if I remember corectly it has around 100 channels.PESA radars and passive radars like kolchuga(even those are not radars at all...since it only recive signals already transmitedby object) are completly different things..because PESA and all radars transmit signal and than recive it once it bounce from target while passive scaners called passive radars only scan and process signals reflected or transmited by target without transmiting anything itself...for those systems anti radiation missiles don't work, ofcourse MUF is VHF radar with wavelengths of the order of a metre.In metre or more spectrum VHF and UHF STEALTH design doesn't have effect at all.These radars can't be used to guide missiles since accuracy and resolution(resolution is vey important since you have to be able to see targets that fly close to each other as mltipletargets instead one)) is not precise but once it detect object and average positions is known than any radar can detect and aim target, Stealth or not stealth,these VHF radars in metre wavelenghts are used as search radars and when target is detected than acquision and fire control radars are alerted.Also decimetric radars like Kasta are also good for LOW rcs targets and Kasta radar is mostly used as search/acquision radar for AD systems like TOR,BUK because it has good range and also it is accurate so it can track targets and provide data.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Iranian Pantisir-S1 Analogue?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....est-fire-low-altitude-weapons-in-war-game/amp


----------



## PeeD

sanel1412 said:


> For god sake Muf 2/3 are not pesa or any electronicaly scanned radars...those are Vhf radars based on P12/P18 design...P12/18 is particulary used with Yugoslavian S-125 1999 as search radar and it was radar that first detect f-117 and Alert fire crew.Matla ul fajr is highly upgraded and modified P-12/18 design,it is highly mobile and it has integrated ECCM thus since it is digitalized it is highly resistant to jamming..if I remember corectly it has around 100 channels.PESA radars and passive radars like kolchuga(even those are not radars at all...since it only recive signals already transmitedby object) are completly different things..because PESA and all radars transmit signal and than recive it once it bounce from target while passive scaners called passive radars only scan and process signals reflected or transmited by target without transmiting anything itself...for those systems anti radiation missiles don't work, ofcourse MUF is VHF radar with wavelengths of the order of a metre.In metre or more spectrum VHF and UHF STEALTH design doesn't have effect at all.These radars can't be used to guide missiles since accuracy and resolution(resolution is vey important since you have to be able to see targets that fly close to each other as mltipletargets instead one)) is not precise but once it detect object and average positions is known than any radar can detect and aim target, Stealth or not stealth,these VHF radars in metre wavelenghts are used as search radars and when target is detected than acquision and fire control radars are alerted.Also decimetric radars like Kasta are also good for LOW rcs targets and Kasta radar is mostly used as search/acquision radar for AD systems like TOR,BUK because it has good range and also it is accurate so it can track targets and provide data.



I even agree that the MuF-3 does not work as a PESA in normal volume seach. But it almost certainly has electronic scanning capability for hightfinding. This is also a main difference to the Fath-14 I didn't mention, the MuF-3 does normally only do 2D scans.
If it is used for 3D scan you get reduced range but the radar would be called a PESA in that mode as hight scanning is done electronically.
The Fath-14 AESA works normally as 3D only radar and not just electronically scanned in elevation but also in azimuth. Hence it has more advanced waveform and almost certainly digital beamforming capability (likely the reason for the long development phase).

With the rest about PESA having something to do with passive radars you are way off. Furthermore P-18 is ancient compared to MuF-3, which is fully solid state.


----------



## sanel1412

PeeD said:


> I even agree that the MuF-3 does not work as a PESA in normal volume seach. But it almost certainly has electronic scanning capability for hightfinding. This is also a main difference to the Fath-14 I didn't mention, the MuF-3 does normally only do 2D scans.
> If it is used for 3D scan you get reduced range but the radar would be called a PESA in that mode as hight scanning is done electronically.
> The Fath-14 AESA works normally as 3D only radar and not just electronically scanned in elevation but also in azimuth. Hence it has more advanced waveform and almost certainly digital beamforming capability (likely the reason for the long development phase).
> 
> With the rest about PESA having something to do with passive radars you are way off. Furthermore P-18 is ancient compared to MuF-3, which is fully solid state.


You don't know what You talk about ...MUF is not phased array radar at ali and is not passive electronically scanned array radar......every old radars can be digitalized(solid components replace analog)but that doesn'T CHANGE antena design..AESA/PESA radars have phased shifters in antena placed in array...to convert something in to phased array radar whole design have to CHANGE,digitalization has not anything with it..whole S-125 is digitalized and provided under mame Pechora but it stil. use same components only digitalized which provide provide S-125 up to date capatibility,better jamming resistance and some other benefits.MUF 2 and Muf 3 are same design as P12 and P18 and antena is exactly the same.. It doesn't metter it is digitalized..that has nothing to do with antena design,digitalization and solid state components can't change antena design...There is no normal Pesa or half Pesa...it is passive electronically scanned array or not...and it is not working mode...for god sake...radars deasn't works in AESA or PESA mode..radars are designed and built as AESA, PESA..or something third..again Muf use same design as p12/18 which can be modernizma,digitalized...added ECCM but you can't turn non phased array radars in to phased array without redesign antena...Again Muf use same design as P12/18 consisted of set of yagi antena.....fact that Muf is digitalized and use solid state components doesn't change this fact.


----------



## Fafnir

I found a couple of pics of iranian shilkas

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Fafnir said:


> I found a couple of pics of iranian shilkas


Did i go back in time 30 years?


----------



## PeeD

sanel1412 said:


> You don't know what You talk about ...MUF is not phased array radar at ali and is not passive electronically scanned array radar......every old radars can be digitalized(solid components replace analog)but that doesn'T CHANGE antena design..AESA/PESA radars have phased shifters in antena placed in array...to convert something in to phased array radar whole design have to CHANGE,digitalization has not anything with it..whole S-125 is digitalized and provided under mame Pechora but it stil. use same components only digitalized which provide provide S-125 up to date capatibility,better jamming resistance and some other benefits.MUF 2 and Muf 3 are same design as P12 and P18 and antena is exactly the same.. It doesn't metter it is digitalized..that has nothing to do with antena design,digitalization and solid state components can't change antena design...There is no normal Pesa or half Pesa...it is passive electronically scanned array or not...and it is not working mode...for god sake...radars deasn't works in AESA or PESA mode..radars are designed and built as AESA, PESA..or something third..again Muf use same design as p12/18 which can be modernizma,digitalized...added ECCM but you can't turn non phased array radars in to phased array without redesign antena...Again Muf use same design as P12/18 consisted of set of yagi antena.....fact that Muf is digitalized and use solid state components doesn't change this fact.



Basic fact: A phased array PESA can skip doing phased electronic steering and would still be a normal volume search radar, just that it would be limited to 2D.

Another fact: You cant tell from the MuF-3 array design that no phase shifters are present. But you can speculate them to be not present because it was called a 2D radar, there I would agree with you.

We don't know certainly but the jump from MuF-2 to -3 could for example be due to a added phase shifting capability that would enable 3D scan if required, this change would make it a PESA without any clear visible external change.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Stryker1982 said:


> Did i go back in time 30 years?


They aren't bad, to be honest. One of the few purpose built SPAA in Iran's military. I hardly think anything is going got be jamming them at this low of an altitude. Modernisation and reverse engineering shouldn't be difficult at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

General Farzad Esamaili:
today the construction of Bavar-373 long range air defense system finished. this system is superior to S-300.

*پایان ساخت سامانه موشکی قدرتمندتر از اس-۳۰۰*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

@eagle2007 @PeeD any thoughts on the statement by the US' DIA Director that Iran received the "SA-20c"? The S-300PMU2 is the SA-20B. Maybe a PMU2 system with more S-400 components?


----------



## eagle2007

AmirPatriot,

Maybe PeeD knows something more official but most American military wonks who read this news were just as surprised/perplexed by this "SA-20c" business. Good guess it's an internal designation by the DoD but what it means exactly, no clue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

SA-20c could just stand for "custom"

It is no secret that the S-300 that Iran ordered was custom built per Iran's specifications. Hence why Iran ignored requests for more generic export versions when Russia ordered them.


----------



## AmirPatriot

eagle2007 said:


> AmirPatriot,
> 
> Maybe PeeD knows something more official but most American military wonks who read this news were just as surprised/perplexed by this "SA-20c" business. Good guess it's an internal designation by the DoD but what it means exactly, no clue.



I did a little bit of digging just recently and it is just hopeless, S-300 radars and missiles look almost exactly the same.


----------



## yavar

mohsen said:


> General Farzad Esamaili:
> today the construction of Bavar-373 long range air defense system finished. this system is superior to S-300.
> 
> *پایان ساخت سامانه موشکی قدرتمندتر از اس-۳۰۰*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

"this system is superior to S-300."

Yeah....but superior to which version?
PMU-2? I doubt....otherwise Iranians wouldnt beg russia to fulfill the S-300 contract...


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> "this system is superior to S-300."
> 
> Yeah....but superior to which version?
> PMU-2? I doubt....otherwise Iranians wouldnt beg russia to fulfill the S-300 contract...


A contract is something to be honored and we did not beg for it we went to court over it and Russia only honored that contract when it became clear that court is ruling in favor of us and we showed component of this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Hack-Hook said:


> A contract is something to be honored and we did not beg for it we went to court over it and Russia only honored that contract when it became clear that court is ruling in favor of us and we showed component of this system.



A contract should be honored, yes, but that was not my point.

Iran could just request the money rerurned (over 1bln $) and put them into its own domestic AD development.

I remember yavar once mentioned Iran needs the technology of the computer inside the S-300 missile (Anti Ballistis capabilities)


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> A contract should be honored, yes, but that was not my point.
> 
> Iran could just request the money rerurned (over 1bln $) and put them into its own domestic AD development.
> 
> I remember yavar once mentioned Iran needs the technology of the computer inside the S-300 missile (Anti Ballistis capabilities)


Iran requested the money and the damage for breaching the contract Russia didn't want to pay for damage .
I don't knew about the damage but I knew that Iran refused the offer for antay 2500 and asks specially for s300 . maybe there was something inside s300 pmu series. that was not included in Antay 2500 or S300vm series that Iran was interested so much in it .


----------



## sanel1412

> Any thoughts on the statement by the US' DIA Director that Iran received the "SA-20c"? The S-300PMU2 is the SA-20B. Maybe a PMU2 system with more S-400 components?




Iran has recived Customized PMU2 order and Iran side has requested some modification on S-300PMU2 .
When it comes to S-400 ,it is marketing term original designation was PMU3 and after PMU3/S400 was introduced, original pmu2 from 2007 was re-developed from PMU3/S-400 and now these two version are almost the same and can complement each other.
PMU 2 version is only version that can be upgraded to S-400 without changing even one component, now S-400 can be considered as improved PMU2 since as I said original PMU 2 from 2007 is re-developed with S-400 technology .If PMU2 is upgraded to S400 without any upgrades on engagement radar than it would have less range up to 300km because radar max detection range but since tumbstone lunching range is 1000km if you integrate PMU2 in S-400 you are literary converting whole network to S-400 performanse... You can see this in Syria ..instead deploying all S-400, Russians have deployed S-400 and integrate it with S-300.
So S-400 components and PMU2 components are the same in 95%...also you can see most of these components it in S-500...at least in air defense part of s-500 (s-500 is developed from V family not P, and it will be integrated in Russian cosmic defense).
So PMU2 and PMU3/S-400 are almost same in every aspect except in few components like grave stone instead tumbstone..etc, you can see command posts,terminals, administration posts,lunchers on Iran PMU 2 are same as in S-400 ..S-400 has improved missiles but PMU2 can fire it also but as I said with lower range(except if there is S-400 in network )...Now there are lot of optional components you can add. ..radars Gama D,Protivnik ,short range lunchers...basicly everything you see on S-400.
Iran has requested that all components of PMU 2 are most recent and like I said original PMU2 from 2007 is not same as most recent PMU2 , and Iran had some custom requests so I suppose that is reason why SA-20c tag. If you read Almaz-atney chief designers and consultant article about PMU 2 you will find out how PMU2 and S400 are similar, they said that PMU2 started as deep upgrade of PMU1 but latter it end up as technology migration from S400, they completly rebuilt original PMU2 (which was at first PMU1 upgrade )once S-400 was in production ...so we have PMU2 original version and this PMU2 that is latter redesigned to be similar to S-400 as much at it can.
Here is quote about their thechnical discussion ;
*"The best technical discussion of design of the S-300PMU2 to date is a recent article by Alexander Ryazanov, Chief Designer, Vitaliy Semenov, Chief Designer, Almaz-Antey, and Dr Anatoliy Sumin, consultant to Almaz-Antey, published in the Russian language Vozdushno-Kosmicheskaya Oborona journal, No 2 . Follow on articles by other authors expand on this analysis Ryazanov state that the S-300PMU2 began as a “deep modernisation” or technology insertion upgrade to the existing S-300PM/PMU1 / SA-20A design, and state trials (Russian OpEval) were completed in 2007. The protracted development of the S-300PMU2 resulted in technology migration from the concurrent but more advanced S-400 Triumf / SA-21. The intent was to maximise commonality in as many components as possible, between the S-300PMU2 Favorit and S-400 Triumf."*
So you can see that original version from 2007 that was designated as sa-20b was latter upgraded with technology that became available after S-400 was introduced. And this is most likely reason for SA-20C tag.In short you have as they say protracted developement of PMU2 version with goal to be as much as it can complement with s-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

ut 


Draco.IMF said:


> "this system is superior to S-300."
> 
> Yeah....but superior to which version?
> PMU-2? I doubt....otherwise Iranians wouldnt beg russia to fulfill the S-300 contract...


Well it didn't say what version..yes..also we don't know in which way he ment"superior",as I could find about Bavar 373 they said it can identify targets at 300KM and engage at 200Km ...this is PMU2 level perfomanse,but there are other factors..how many targets it can engage in same time... how many targets it can track at same time...also individual components prefomanse...like radars range, resolution...now since we know some components of the B-373 we can use this general information about b-373 we find in different statements coming from Iranian officials and in combination with perfomanse of individual components we know about... get some insight about this comparation.
Again "superior" can mean lot of things....but from information about b-373 I could find around and information about some components we know will be part of system,we can see that this range is level of PMU2 version..at least on paper....again we know very little about b-373,note that in practice in real war when it comes to fighter aircraft no one will even try to shoot on it from this distance but it is important because when it comes to low rcs objects detection range ...
When it comes to radar technology Iran is in this field i would say strong and they had insight in Russians and Chinese most modern tchnology for years,missile technology is probably not problem...but still developement of such complex system was not easy...till now all Iranian air defense systems were based on some already available AD systems and technologies to Iran...RAAD family is based on BUK-M2 tech ,Mersad is Hawk evolution..we have also evolution of almost every other AD system Iran had in it's inventory BUT this is really first time they started to build AD system without having anything such complex in it's inventory...I will repeat once again developement of such complex system require whole new level of technology,it require developement of highly complex components and then integration in one system with many limits in mind...like mobility ...that is why this is very important step for Iran and while this "superior" can mean it is superior than earlier versions of s-300 or it could mean that some perfomanse of individual components are better...we don't know but we can see that everyone is surprised with this system and when Iran announced that it will develop long range system most reactions were jokes about it or at best very pesimist expectations....I said back than that many will be surprised with results simple because after fillowing Iran military for almost 20 years I was very aware of Iranian capatibilities and now we can see that reactions are very different than few years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Sanel made some good points.

Iranian S-300PMU2 has for example the lastest Russian directional communication-link system for battery/IADS communication.

Russian standard S-300PM2 is more potent than the export S-300PMU2 while the S-400 has double the numbers of engagement channels and somewhat improved missiles (+50km) and a new long range missile.
It is possible that Russia agreed to sell Iran some components which are up to the S-300PM2 standard, like a secure directional com-link. That in turn could have caused the added NATO designation of C.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

*Russia to Open Air Defense Services Center in Iran: Official*
*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Russia will open a special service center in Iran offering after-sale assistance for air defense systems, Russia’s Presidential Aide for Military Cooperation Vladimir Kozhin said.*

We are creating a special service center in Iran, where we supplied our air defense equipment," Kozhin said, Vestnik Kavkaza website reported on Monday.

He further said that the military-technical cooperation to create Russian service centers "will be definitely developed."

Iran took delivery of the S-300 defense missile system in July 2016.

The Iranian military successfully tested the Russian-made surface-to-air defense system in March 2017.

Source;Tasnim (can't add link yet )

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dinky

Russia to Create Service Center for Air Defense in Iran – Presidential Aide

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201803121062443823-russia-air-defense-systems-iran/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

any comment?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 460038
> View attachment 460039
> 
> 
> any comment?
> View attachment 460037


خوب ما یک ضرب المثل در مورد شتر و پنبه دانه داریمِ


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> خوب ما یک ضرب المثل در مورد شتر و پنبه دانه داریمِ


خیلی ها زیر کامنت دادن و تایید کردن که همین حرف شما رو می زدند تا چند وقت پیش..


----------



## mohsen

Mersad air defense system, with an extra last line! "*can counter ballistic missiles*"





search range :150 km (using Kavosh radar)
lock range: 80km
engage range: 45 km

Safat CIWS




Electro optical, can link up to four 35mm cannons.


Fakoor mobile command & control system:





S-200 canisters!









Rest of photos:
*راهیان نور| نمایشگاه پدافند هوایی ارتش در اهواز افتتاح شد+عکس*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Mersad air defense system, with an extra last line! "*can counter ballistic missiles*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> search range :150 km (using Kavosh radar)
> lock range: 80km
> engage range: 45 km
> 
> Safat CIWS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Electro optical, can link up to four 35mm cannons.
> 
> 
> Fakoor portable command & control system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> S-200 canisters!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rest of photos:
> *راهیان نور| نمایشگاه پدافند هوایی ارتش در اهواز افتتاح شد+عکس*


Didn't knew S200 comes with canisters


----------



## Fafnir

Hack-Hook said:


> Didn't knew S200 comes with canisters


These are simply transport canisters for the interceptors separate components,both the four boosters plus the core stage are transported like this,but they then have to be assembled together and placed on the launcher and only then can they be fired,whereas the canisters for the s300 system are used to not only transport the complete missiles but to cold launch them as well.Still the sa5 booster canisters do share a passing resemblance to the ribbed s300pm canisters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

*Houthis Hit Saudi F-15 With Ground-To-Air Missile Over Yemen’s Saada Province (Video)*

Houthis missile:





IRGC missile:





Is it coincidence that *IRGC *and Iran-backed Yemenis both unveil an air to air missile converted for other purposes almost simultaneously?

oh boy!!!
Things are getting more clear!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Is it coincidence that *IRGC *and Iran-backed Yemenis both unveil an air to air missile converted for other purposes almost simultaneously?



Yes, it is a coincidence. 

All the Houthis did was put an R-27T (infrared guided) missile from old Yemeni air force stocks on a pickup truck, and lock it on to the F-15. Not so much a conversion, just the pylon is attached to something else.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> Yes, it is a coincidence.
> 
> All the Houthis did was put an R-27T (infrared guided) missile from old Yemeni air force stocks on a pickup truck, and lock it on to the F-15. Not so much a conversion, just the pylon is attached to something else.


plus interfacing American's FLIR data to that Russian missile.

It's good to know that middle east incidents are forwarding in our favor based on coincidences!

The world behold:
*IRGC and IRGC-backed forces invent similar tactics simultaneously coincidentally!*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> *Houthis Hit Saudi F-15 With Ground-To-Air Missile Over Yemen’s Saada Province (Video)*
> 
> Houthis missile:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRGC missile:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it coincidence that *IRGC *and Iran-backed Yemenis both unveil an air to air missile converted for other purposes almost simultaneously?
> 
> oh boy!!!
> Things are getting more clear!



Yemenis unveiled it long time ago ... today is 1439/07/04





Yemeni Houthis Turned Soviet Air-To-Air Missiles Into Ground-To-Air Missiles To Combat Saudi-led Coalition Warplanes








The same thing was done by Serbian army ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> plus interfacing American's FLIR data to that Russian missile.


The R-27T has its own inbuilt IR sensor.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> Yemenis unveiled it long time ago ... today is 1439/07/04
> 
> View attachment 461018
> 
> Yemeni Houthis Turned Soviet Air-To-Air Missiles Into Ground-To-Air Missiles To Combat Saudi-led Coalition Warplanes
> View attachment 461022
> View attachment 461024


Yeah, IRGC built it's missile overnight!!!



2017.Jan Yemenis used an unmanned suicide boat to hit Saudis frigate, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such drones, coincidentally!

2017.Feb Yemen defense ministry unveiled four new drones as their achievements, happens to be similar or exact replicate of Iranian (IRGC) drones, coincidentally!
at the same ceremony they promised new antiship & SAM missiles.

2017.Nov Yemenis unveiled their new anti ship missile, happens to be similar to Iranian missile too, coincidentally!

2017.Dec Yemeni finally showed their missile which was finless, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such missile, coincidentally!

2017.Dec Yemenis revealed a new cruise missile, happens to be similar to Iranian soumar cruise missile, coincidentally!

2018.Jan Yemenis revealed a modified air to air missile to hit Saudis F-15, in 2018.Feb IRGC revealed it's modified air to air missile project too, coincidentally!

Iran happens to be the sole supporter of Yemenis in this war, *coincidentally!*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Yeah, IRGC built it's missile overnight!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 2017.Jan Yemenis used an unmanned suicide boat to hit Saudis frigate, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such drones, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Feb Yemen defense ministry unveiled four new drones as their achievements, happens to be similar or exact replicate of Iranian (IRGC) drones, coincidentally!
> at the same ceremony they promised new antiship & SAM missiles.
> 
> 2017.Nov Yemenis unveiled their new anti ship missile, happens to be similar to Iranian missile too, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemeni finally showed their missile which was finless, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemenis revealed a new cruise missile, happens to be similar to Iranian soumar cruise missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2018.Jan Yemenis revealed a modified air to air missile to hit Saudis F-15, in 2018.Feb IRGC revealed it's modified air to air missile project too, coincidentally!
> 
> Iran happens to be the sole supporter of Yemenis in this war, *coincidentally!*


Incidentally yes, Unless you can prove the origin of those weapons are from Iran then its all chances and incidents .
I get to see a single evidence of Iran involvement in Yemen . all the claims of Iran helping Yemen come from KSA unbelievable incompetence there so they want to blame another one for their failure .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> Yeah, IRGC built it's missile overnight!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 2017.Jan Yemenis used an unmanned suicide boat to hit Saudis frigate, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such drones, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Feb Yemen defense ministry unveiled four new drones as their achievements, happens to be similar or exact replicate of Iranian (IRGC) drones, coincidentally!
> at the same ceremony they promised new antiship & SAM missiles.
> 
> 2017.Nov Yemenis unveiled their new anti ship missile, happens to be similar to Iranian missile too, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemeni finally showed their missile which was finless, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemenis revealed a new cruise missile, happens to be similar to Iranian soumar cruise missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2018.Jan Yemenis revealed a modified air to air missile to hit Saudis F-15, in 2018.Feb IRGC revealed it's modified air to air missile project too, coincidentally!
> 
> Iran happens to be the sole supporter of Yemenis in this war, *coincidentally!*


The only thing they have to connect the boat to Iran were a cable and a Farsi keyboard which are commercially available in Yemen the rest had nothing to do with Iran even the boat was manufactured in the UAE and was donated to Yemeni army in 2013.
About anti ship missiles, they'd been in Yemeni army inventory and were bought from the Soviet Union why Iran provide them with something they have?
And on modified air to air missile, as I said they used it at least 1.5 years ago and the notion ain't something new.
And on CM, I think it wasn't there to target anything its presence was merely Iran signaling entrance of Somar into the service that's why it failed ..
And on missile:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

mohsen said:


> Yeah, IRGC built it's missile overnight!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 2017.Jan Yemenis used an unmanned suicide boat to hit Saudis frigate, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such drones, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Feb Yemen defense ministry unveiled four new drones as their achievements, happens to be similar or exact replicate of Iranian (IRGC) drones, coincidentally!
> at the same ceremony they promised new antiship & SAM missiles.
> 
> 2017.Nov Yemenis unveiled their new anti ship missile, happens to be similar to Iranian missile too, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemeni finally showed their missile which was finless, IRGC happens to be the only other operator of such missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2017.Dec Yemenis revealed a new cruise missile, happens to be similar to Iranian soumar cruise missile, coincidentally!
> 
> 2018.Jan Yemenis revealed a modified air to air missile to hit Saudis F-15, in 2018.Feb IRGC revealed it's modified air to air missile project too, coincidentally!
> 
> Iran happens to be the sole supporter of Yemenis in this war, *coincidentally!*


Similar to fajr rocket:


----------



## pin gu

mohsen said:


> *Houthis Hit Saudi F-15 With Ground-To-Air Missile Over Yemen’s Saada Province (Video)*
> 
> Houthis missile:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it coincidence that *IRGC *and Iran-backed Yemenis both unveil an air to air missile converted for other purposes almost simultaneously?
> 
> oh boy!!!
> Things are getting more clear!



The missile that Yemen army used against SA f-15 had a weak warhead . from that video it was clear that missile could not destroy f-15 I don't think IRGC would give them something useless to Yemen army if their intention was making sky of Yemen secure so *sending a message* or *it was really belong to Yemen army* equipments wil remain valid options. ( I have zero knowledge/experience in this field just throwing up my ideas here )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

pin gu said:


> The missile that Yemen army used against SA f-15 had a weak warhead . from that video it was clear that missile could not destroy f-15 I don't think IRGC would give them something useless to Yemen army if their intention was making sky of Yemen secure so *sending a message* or *it was really belong to Yemen army* equipments wil remain valid options. ( I have zero knowledge/experience in this field just throwing up my ideas here )


Buddy, this missile's warhead is two times bigger than American AIM-120.

Also we can't provide anything in mass, so the only thing which they have, is best for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tajbakhsh

1.





2.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## pin gu

Now lets look at this from another point : 
I think this was first video of hitting missile to SA f-15 unfortunately I could not find the first thread in PDF about it . according to many PDF users in that thread f-15 pilot did a very weird and stupid move : he continued without maneuvering to dodge the missile (simplifying calculation of hitting point???) ( many users questioned his move even some members insulted his intelligence !!! ) . after that *missile hitted below of f-15* or *destroyed at the very close range* of f-15 then f-15 successfully landed in SA .





https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/yeme...l-with-sam-over-capital-city-of-sanaa.538161/


Now with second case of failure to completely destroying SA's f-15 at air theory of f-15's having some sort of defensive mechanism at close range to counter incoming missiles from below is much more stronger .


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Buddy, this missile's warhead is two times bigger than American AIM-120.



But it is far more inaccurate than an AMRAAM.



pin gu said:


> he continued without maneuvering to dodge the missile (simplifying calculation of hitting point???)



This could be because of either:

1. Over reliance on technology, thinking it is enough to dispense chaff/flares to evade an incoming missile. In reality, when dispensing these countermeasures the pilot should also be making evasive maneuvers.

2. The pilot may not have even been aware a missile was targetting him. IR guided missiles will not light up on RWR. This may be because of poor intelligence, which would warn pilots that there may be makeshift SAMs in the area. Or the pilot himself may be poorly trained, and may not have looked around to visually spot a missile, with the accompanying trail of smoke.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

At 0:46 he used flares/released fuel tanks and at 0:48.5 missile touched( or missile destroyed by f-15 ) his f-15

after using flares it was logical to start maneuvering/turning off his engines or doing something (he didn't). at :047 it was very clear that missile is coming directly to airplane (1.5 second time for ejection which is very short time for reaction but its possible to choose the best option even with consideration of that little time he had for ejection).

For one time we can say yes maybe it was pure luck but if its happens in second time chances of this being luck or something like that is veryyy little .keep it in mind we only talk about cases that we have video of them its possible that the same thing have been happened and there is no video of it .


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> But it is far more inaccurate than an AMRAAM.


Says who?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Says who?



1. Logic. The R-27T was put into service in 1983, while the AMRAAM was introduced in 1991. The AMRAAM has better electronics which allow it to track the target better.

2. Combat History. The R-27 was used in a war between Ethiopia and Eritrea, with only 1 kill out of 24 shots taken. That is a Pk of 4%. The AMRAAM has 11 kills in 18 launches, so a Pk of 61%.

3. Specifications. The R-27 weighs 100 kg more than the AMRAAM and so is more difficult to get on target.

There is no point getting defensive just because you may like the outcome of something that didn't happen. I too wish that missile had got a good hit on the F-15, but it clearly didn't. You can see in the video, the F-15 is still flying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Full Moon

mohsen said:


> Says who?



Dorood bar shooma. It has been a while Mohsen jan.

How have you been?


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> 1. Logic. The R-27T was put into service in 1983, while the AMRAAM was introduced in 1991. The AMRAAM has better electronics which allow it to track the target better.
> 
> 2. Combat History. The R-27 was used in a war between Ethiopia and Eritrea, with only 1 kill out of 24 shots taken. That is a Pk of 4%. The AMRAAM has 11 kills in 18 launches, so a Pk of 61%.
> 
> 3. Specifications. The R-27 weighs 100 kg more than the AMRAAM and so is more difficult to get on target.
> 
> There is no point getting defensive just because you may like the outcome of something that didn't happen. I too wish that missile had got a good hit on the F-15, but it clearly didn't. You can see in the video, the F-15 is still flying.


You have to consider the counter measures, almost all planes carry Flares, how many carry ECM pods, let alone activating them? 
The thing is that this comparison is essentially pointless, it's like comparing orange with apple.
The are way too many effective Parameters, You say success rate was 4% in that war, I say it's 100% in this war.
Saudis can claim whatever they want, but my brains says that a smoking airplane must be lucky even to return.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> how many carry ECM pods



The R-27T is IR guided. ECM would have no effect.



mohsen said:


> The thing is that this comparison is essentially pointless, it's like comparing orange with apple.
> The are way too many effective Parameters, You say success rate was 4% in that war, I say it's 100% in this war.



So why did you bring up the AMRAAM?



mohsen said:


> Saudis can claim whatever they want, but my brains says that a smoking airplane must be lucky even to return.



There are plenty of cases of damaged aircraft returning to base. If you don't believe the Saudis, you can read up on the experience of our own IRIAF in the sacred defence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

LOOL...this is just too much!!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978312976821293056

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978196780151115776

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> The R-27T is IR guided. ECM would have no effect.


 !
I was referring to AMRAAM's advantage of not facing counter measures (ECM).




> So why did you bring up the AMRAAM?


to show that higher warhead weight doesn't necessarily mean anything.




> There are plenty of cases of damaged aircraft returning to base. If you don't believe the Saudis, you can read up on the *experience of our own IRIAF in the sacred defence*.


and how many didn't return?
Question is the probability; Yemenis said they hit it, and published a video. Saudis said it returned to base, without providing any evidence.
today no one believes the Saudis, not even their own allies:
*Videos raise questions over Saudi missile intercept claims -defensenews*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Tajbakhsh said:


> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2.


I can not understand the reason behind this camouflage in Iran ...


----------



## OldTwilight

raptor22 said:


> I can not understand the reason behind this camouflage in Iran ...


Its better than painting kid like Flower on the System ...


----------



## eagle2007

ALCON,

Strictly speaking, ECM equipment can ABSOLUTELY effect IR-guided missiles. Electronic counter measures covers far more than "simple" radar jamming. IR jamming equipment is now becoming standard on most larger, vulnerable aircraft (such as tankers and cargo aircraft) in the major air forces of the world.

Most IR-targeting ECM equipment involve firing low-powered lasers into the seekers of IR guided missiles either to blind them or damage the seeker and render it useless. 

I should clarify that IR-targeting ECM equipment is usually separate from radio-frequency based jamming equipment but in modern fighters (regardless of American, Russian, etc) are centrally controlled by a single computer. Put another way, the ECM suite has one brain, but with many arms (warning sensors for IR and RF, active jamming, and chaff/flare dispensers).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

raptor22 said:


> I can not understand the reason behind this camouflage in Iran ...


Obviously not designed for Iran, if it wasn't for Syrians, then it was for Russian air defense forces, something in hurry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jäger

ok I have been following Iranian developments for a while, so I would like to ask this question that has been on my mind.
if Iran received the S-300PMU2 from Russia instead of S-300P, then why would Iran need S-400 that some sources claim they have interest in? is it because PMU2 has lower range then S-400 or what?
Also on the Sayyad-2C/Talaash system was that made to supplement the S-300PMU2s or being used for other areas of air defense?


----------



## SubWater

New attack to F16
It looks Yemenis use boster this time to increase range of the missile

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978704900891860993

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

SubWater said:


> New attack to F16
> It looks Yemenis use boster this time to increase range of the missile
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978704900891860993


Nice development by Yemenis, unfortunately fighter dodged it. Trial and error by Yemeni air defense forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Bundeswehr said:


> if Iran received the S-300PMU2 from Russia instead of S-300P, then why would Iran need S-400 that some sources claim they have interest in? is it because PMU2 has lower range then S-400 or what?
> Also on the Sayyad-2C/Talaash system was that made to supplement the S-300PMU2s or being used for other areas of air defense?


Not only Iran didn't show interest in S400, but clearly said that after S300 we wont purchase any other air defense system.
Sayyad2 missile was made to supplement our S200 system, in that time we didn't have the S300.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pin gu

SubWater said:


> New attack to F16
> It looks Yemenis use boster this time to increase range of the missile
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/978704900891860993



Maximum speed check
Releasing fuel tanks and flares check
At last seconds he pulled airplane up ( maneuvering ) then successfully dodged the missile

But F-15 pilot

Maximum speed check
Releasing fuel tanks and flares check
No maneuvering ....







In case of timings I must say this F-15 pilot is in control and very calm .he keeps his fuel tanks till last seconds .these are not actions of inexperienced pilot or someone in fear of death that doing stupid things but he intentionally didn't maneuver in last seconds but why ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jäger

mohsen said:


> Not only Iran didn't show interest in S400, but clearly said that after S300 we wont purchase any other air defense system.
> Sayyad2 missile was made to supplement our S200 system, in that time we didn't have the S300.


thank you for the answering . I forgot about that Iran would not acquire another air defense system.


----------



## SubWater

Bundeswehr said:


> thank you for the answering . I forgot about that Iran would not acquire another air defense system.


we do not need import air defense systems more after huge investment in this field.
hopefully our Bavar-373 will display soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jäger

SubWater said:


> we do not need import air defense systems more after huge investment in this field.
> hopefully our Bavar-373 will display soon.


I know this may have no relation to this thread, topic so forth, but could Iran have an ISR plane that could track enemy jets to give the information to Bavar 373 Crews and F-14 Pilots? It would be interesting to see a unified, strong Iranian air defense for sure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Bundeswehr said:


> I know this may have no relation to this thread, topic so forth, but could Iran have an ISR plane that could track enemy jets to give the information to Bavar 373 Crews and F-14 Pilots? It would be interesting to see a unified, strong Iranian air defense for sure.



We don't have AWACS, Bavar-373 uses ground based radars like the Meraj-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jäger

AmirPatriot said:


> We don't have AWACS, Bavar-373 uses ground based radars like the Meraj-4.


is there plan to acquire AWAC? thanks for the info bro  much appreciate

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Bundeswehr said:


> is there plan to acquire AWAC? thanks for the info bro  much appreciate



Currently there is no known plan to acquire AWACS. Iran is negotiating for the Su-30SM and maybe it would buy some AWACS with it, but this is pure speculation.


----------



## Jäger

AmirPatriot said:


> Currently there is no known plan to acquire AWACS. Iran is negotiating for the Su-30SM and maybe it would buy some AWACS with it, but this is pure speculation.


If I have heard correctly the Iranian will manufacture SU-30SM under license right?


----------



## Hack-Hook

No


Bundeswehr said:


> If I have heard correctly the Iranian will manufacture SU-30SM under license right?


----------



## AmirPatriot

Bundeswehr said:


> If I have heard correctly the Iranian will manufacture SU-30SM under license right?


It _wants _to, but no deal has yet been struck.


----------



## sobhan

AmirPatriot said:


> It _wants _to, but no deal has yet been struck.


Brother
I think Iran and Russians are working on this project hidden as T90ms producting in Iran as Karrar mbt tanks


----------



## N_Al40

sobhan said:


> Brother
> I think Iran and Russians are working on this project hidden as T90ms producting in Iran as Karrar mbt tanks



I heard that the deal for SU-30SM is done, but has not been announced yet due to political reasons. Is that true?


----------



## Parsipride

Do not know how valid this news source is, but it does show the Israeli propaganda machine at work none stop since the F-16 was shot down. They are desperately trying to show that they are invisible.

*REPORT: ISRAELI STEALTH FIGHTERS FLY OVER IRAN*

two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.

Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz. 

The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program

It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.

The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.

Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.





 




>
Israel strikes Iranian targets in Syria, IAF pilots eject F-16

>
How Russia is using Syria as a military 'guinea pig'











The Lockheed Martin F35 fighter jet plane, also known as the Adir, in a test flight. (photo credit: LOCKHEED MARTIN AERONAUTICS/ LIZ LUTZ)

Two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.


Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz. 



Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.



The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program.

It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.

The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.

Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.



00:41


_Netanyahu in April 2016: Israel has carried out dozens of strikes in Syria_

On March 21, the IDF cleared for publication that Israel was behind the 2007 destruction of a nuclear reactor that was under construction in northern Syria. 

In February, Israeli F-16 fighter jets entered Syrian airspace, striking 12 Iranian targets in Syria in response to an Iranian drone that was shot down over Israel. Two Israeli crew members were wounded when they ejected from their jet before it crashed, which was later determined to be caused by pilot error.

In response to the Iranian drone, a senior Israeli official warned that Israel will react with force to Iran's efforts to entrench itself further in Syria.

"...the Iranians are determined to continue to establish themselves in Syria, and the next incident is only a matter of time,” he said, warning that Israel does not rule out that that the Islamic Republic will continue to try to attack Israel.


----------



## Muhammed45

Parsipride said:


> Do not know how valid this news source is, but it does show the Israeli propaganda machine at work none stop since the F-16 was shot down. They are desperately trying to show that they are invisible.
> 
> *REPORT: ISRAELI STEALTH FIGHTERS FLY OVER IRAN*
> 
> two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.
> 
> Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program
> 
> It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.
> 
> The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.
> 
> Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> Israel strikes Iranian targets in Syria, IAF pilots eject F-16
> 
> >
> How Russia is using Syria as a military 'guinea pig'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Lockheed Martin F35 fighter jet plane, also known as the Adir, in a test flight. (photo credit: LOCKHEED MARTIN AERONAUTICS/ LIZ LUTZ)
> 
> Two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.
> 
> 
> Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> 
> 
> Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.
> 
> 
> 
> The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program.
> 
> It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.
> 
> The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.
> 
> Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.
> 
> 
> 
> 00:41
> 
> 
> _Netanyahu in April 2016: Israel has carried out dozens of strikes in Syria_
> 
> On March 21, the IDF cleared for publication that Israel was behind the 2007 destruction of a nuclear reactor that was under construction in northern Syria.
> 
> In February, Israeli F-16 fighter jets entered Syrian airspace, striking 12 Iranian targets in Syria in response to an Iranian drone that was shot down over Israel. Two Israeli crew members were wounded when they ejected from their jet before it crashed, which was later determined to be caused by pilot error.
> 
> In response to the Iranian drone, a senior Israeli official warned that Israel will react with force to Iran's efforts to entrench itself further in Syria.
> 
> "...the Iranians are determined to continue to establish themselves in Syria, and the next incident is only a matter of time,” he said, warning that Israel does not rule out that that the Islamic Republic will continue to try to attack Israel.


Just one point Bro

Jews are satisfied to stay there only if their safety was ensured by occupiers. The slightest insecurity makes those cowards lose their hope and move out of Israel. F 16 I was their flagship, now it's gone just like iron Dome, merkavas etc. Nest of spider is shaking to the root.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Parsipride said:


> Do not know how valid this news source is, but it does show the Israeli propaganda machine at work none stop since the F-16 was shot down. They are desperately trying to show that they are invisible.
> 
> *REPORT: ISRAELI STEALTH FIGHTERS FLY OVER IRAN*
> 
> two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.
> 
> Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program
> 
> It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.
> 
> The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.
> 
> Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> Israel strikes Iranian targets in Syria, IAF pilots eject F-16
> 
> >
> How Russia is using Syria as a military 'guinea pig'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Lockheed Martin F35 fighter jet plane, also known as the Adir, in a test flight. (photo credit: LOCKHEED MARTIN AERONAUTICS/ LIZ LUTZ)
> 
> Two Israeli F-35 fighter jets entered Iranian airspace over the past month, Kuwaiti newspaper_ Al-Jarida _reported on Thursday. The act is a signal of heightened regional tensions, especially in light of recent Israeli military attacks in Syria, including against Iranian bases in the country.
> 
> 
> Sources quoted in _Al-Jarida_ stated that two stealth fighters flew over Syrian and Iraqi airspace to reach Iran, and even targeted locations in the Iranian cities Bandar Abbas, Esfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> 
> 
> Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.
> 
> 
> 
> The report states that the two fighter jets, among the most advanced in the world, circled at high altitude above Persian Gulf sites suspected of being associated with the Iranian nuclear program.
> 
> It also states that the two jets went undetected by radar, including by the Russian radar system located in Syria. The source refused to confirm if the operation was undertaken in coordination with the US army, which has recently conducted joint exercises with the IDF.
> 
> The source added that the seven F-35 fighters in active service in the IAF have conducted a number of missions in Syria and on the Lebanese-Syrian border. He underlined that the fighter jets can travel from Israel to Iran twice without refueling.
> 
> Israel has admitted to launching about 100 air strikes on Syria over the past five years, targeting Hezbollah terrorists, weapons convoys and infrastructure, and it is believed to be behind dozens more.
> 
> 
> 
> 00:41
> 
> 
> _Netanyahu in April 2016: Israel has carried out dozens of strikes in Syria_
> 
> On March 21, the IDF cleared for publication that Israel was behind the 2007 destruction of a nuclear reactor that was under construction in northern Syria.
> 
> In February, Israeli F-16 fighter jets entered Syrian airspace, striking 12 Iranian targets in Syria in response to an Iranian drone that was shot down over Israel. Two Israeli crew members were wounded when they ejected from their jet before it crashed, which was later determined to be caused by pilot error.
> 
> In response to the Iranian drone, a senior Israeli official warned that Israel will react with force to Iran's efforts to entrench itself further in Syria.
> 
> "...the Iranians are determined to continue to establish themselves in Syria, and the next incident is only a matter of time,” he said, warning that Israel does not rule out that that the Islamic Republic will continue to try to attack Israel.



Are there any other sources that can corroborate what this piece is saying? It sounds way to juicy and propagandist to be taken at face value. Two F-35s going over Iranian air space sounds out of place but not out of the realm of possibility. 

If anything this article could be hinting at the Arab states increasing cooperation with Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Are there any other sources that can corroborate what this piece is saying? It sounds way to juicy and propagandist to be taken at face value. Two F-35s going over Iranian air space sounds out of place but not out of the realm of possibility.
> 
> If anything this article could be hinting at the Arab states increasing cooperation with Israel.



Israel has a known history of Psychological Warfare Ops. through media; take it with a grain of salt

*Patriot Missiles Are Made in America and Fail Everywhere*
*The evidence is in: the missile defense system that the United States and its allies rely on is a lemon.*

*On March 25, Houthi forces in Yemen fired seven missiles at Riyadh. Saudi Arabia confirmed the launches and asserted that it successfully intercepted all seven.

This wasn’t true. It’s not just that falling debris in Riyadh killed at least one person and sent two more to the hospital. There’s no evidence that Saudi Arabia intercepted any missiles at all. And that raises uncomfortable questions not just about the Saudis, but about the United States, which seems to have sold them — and its own public — a lemon of a missile defense system.

Social media images do appear to show that Saudi Patriot batteries firing interceptors. But what these videos show are not successes. One interceptor explodes catastrophically just after launch, while another makes a U-turn in midair and then comes screaming back at Riyadh, where it explodes on the ground.

It is possible, of course, that one of the other interceptors did the job, but I’m doubtful. That is because my colleagues at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies and I closely examined two different missile attacks on Saudi Arabia from November and December 2017.

In both cases, we found that it is very unlikely the missiles were shot down, despite officials’ statements to the contrary. Our approach was simple: We mapped where the debris, including the missile airframe and warhead, fell and where the interceptors were located. In both cases, a clear pattern emerged. The missile itself falls in Riyadh, while the warhead separates and flies over the defense and lands near its target. One warhead fell within a few hundred meters of Terminal 5 at Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport. The second warhead, fired a few weeks later, nearly demolished a Honda dealership. In both cases, it was clear to us that, despite official Saudi claims, neither missile was shot down. I am not even sure that Saudi Arabia even tried to intercept the first missile in November.

The point is there is no evidence that Saudi Arabia has intercepted any Houthi missiles during the Yemen conflict. And that raises a disquieting thought: Is there any reason to think the Patriot system even works?

In fairness, the system deployed in Saudi Arabia — the Patriot Advanced Capability-2 or PAC-2 — is not well designed to intercept the Burkan-2 missiles that the Houthis are firing at Riyadh. The Burkan-2 flies around 600 miles and appears to have a warhead that separates from the missile itself.

But I am deeply skeptical that Patriot has ever intercepted a long-range ballistic missile in combat — at the least, I have yet to see convincing unclassified evidence of a successful Patriot intercept. During the 1991 Gulf War, the public was led to believe the that the Patriot had near-perfect performance, intercepting 45 of 47 Scud missiles. The U.S. Army later revised that estimate down to about 50 percent — and even then, it expressed “higher” confidence in only about one-quarter of the cases. A pesky Congressional Research Service employee noted that if the Army had correctly applied its own assessment methodology consistently, the number would be far lower. (Reportedly that number was one — as in one lousy Scud missile downed.)

According to a House Committee on Government Operations investigation, there was not enough evidence to conclude that there had been any intercepts. “There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War,” a summary of the investigations concluded dryly, “and there are some doubts about even these engagements.”

This report — which called on the Pentagon to declassify more information about the performance of the Patriot and request an independent evaluation of the program — never saw the light of day. A fierce lobbying campaign by the Army and Raytheon spiked it, save for a summary.

Against that background, you can imagine that I was pretty skeptical of the Pentagon’s claims that the Patriot shot down Iraqi ballistic missiles in 2003 — claims that have generally been accepted uncritically. And when I heard that missile defenses were protecting Riyadh, I wanted to see for myself — and, unfortunately, I wasn’t surprised by what I found.

But if the Patriot system doesn’t work, why would the United States or the Saudi government claim otherwise?

At some level, we should be sympathetic. The basic function of a government is to provide security for its citizens. There is enormous pressure on the Saudi government to show that it is taking steps to defend its citizens. By asserting successful intercepts — assertions that are uncritically spread in headlines — the Saudi government is able to present itself as fulfilling its obligations to protect its population. And, like in 1991, the perception that a defense is working helps keep a lid on regional tensions. Just as false claims about missile defenses helped keep Israel from retaliating against Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War, perhaps the fable that Riyadh is defended makes it easier to ignore the fact that Iranian proxies are firing Iranian missiles into Saudi Arabia’s capital.

But my colleagues and I are independent analysts, not government functionaries. Our obligation is to the truth — and in this case, the truth seems to be that these systems are not working. The danger here is that leaders in Saudi Arabia and the United States will come to believe their own nonsense. Consider this: Despite that the fact that anonymous U.S. officials have confirmed that there was no successful intercept in November 2017, President Donald Trump had a very different impression: “Our system knocked the missile out of the air,” Trump told reporters the following day. “That’s how good we are. Nobody makes what we make, and now we’re selling it all over the world.” This is a theme Trump has returned to again and again. When asked about the threat from North Korea’s nuclear-armed missiles, Trump said, “We have missiles that can knock out a missile in the air 97 percent of the time, and if you send two of them, it’s going to get knocked down.” Trump has repeatedly given every indication that he believes missile defenses will protect the United States.

That’s dangerous, particularly at a moment when the Trump administration seems poised to collapse the nuclear deal with Iran and send Tehran down the same path that North Korea followed to a nuclear capability that can strike U.S. partners in the region and ultimately the United States itself. And so we need to tell the truth: Missile defense systems do not represent a solution to the challenge posed by growing missile capabilities or an escape from vulnerability in the nuclear age. There is no magic wand that can “knock down” all the missiles aimed at the United States or its allies. The only solution is to persuade countries not to build these weapons in the first place. If we fail, defenses won’t save us.



*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Esfahan is about 1600 km from Tel Aviv. F35 can fly around ~2300 km with internal tank. With aditional 2x 600 galon (israeli version) conformal fuel tanks it is said that there will be additional 45% range. So 45% from ~2300 km is ~1035 km, in total it is a range of ~3335 km. So it would "work", but only flying there and back and no fun while flying. (let alone the 600 gal cft)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979472253711732736


----------



## Muhammed45

Ich said:


> Esfahan is about 1600 km from Tel Aviv. F35 can fly around ~2300 km with internal tank. With aditional 2x 600 galon (israeli version) conformal fuel tanks it is said that there will be additional 45% range. So 45% from ~2300 km is ~1035 km, in total it is a range of ~3335 km. So it would "work", but only flying there and back and no fun while flying. (let alone the 600 gal cft)


Isfahan is well protected. F 35 was detected by Syrian radars and there are reports from Syrian sources that it was shot down by an S 200 missile. F 35 junk is not more stealthy then F 22 and it was detected in Persian gulf. These crappy claims just leaves an smile on my face, looking at their pathetic try to look powerful. What was F 35 doing after all? Saying hello and then good bye? 

Undermining g S 300 and Iranian advanced radars will cost them a lot. Meanwhile remember F 117 lol. Israelis farting so loud.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Draco.IMF

The most sophisticated/"stealth" RQ-170 CIA drone was captured in 2011 and some people believe about magic israeli F-35 flying undetected over Iran?
The chances are higher it was St Clause with his stealth reindeers

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

It’s highly unlikely that the US would allow israel to fly them over Iran or near Iran just for the fact if something goes wrong (malfunction or electronic warfare, anti aircraft hit) than you have pieces of valuable technology that many world powers (Iran, China and Russia) would like to see.

Flying valuable high tech technology just for the sake of bravado doesn’t seem logical.

Plus if it is carrying external fuel tanks to get there it loses a considerable amount of the “stealth” element.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

Ich said:


> Esfahan is about 1600 km from Tel Aviv. F35 can fly around ~2300 km with internal tank. With aditional 2x 600 galon (israeli version) conformal fuel tanks it is said that there will be additional 45% range.



While conformal fuel tanks for F-35 exist only in the project..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Ich said:


> Esfahan is about 1600 km from Tel Aviv. F35 can fly around ~2300 km with internal tank. With aditional 2x 600 galon (israeli version) conformal fuel tanks it is said that there will be additional 45% range. So 45% from ~2300 km is ~1035 km, in total it is a range of ~3335 km. So it would "work", but only flying there and back and no fun while flying. (let alone the 600 gal cft)


It's all without any weapon or full armed? beside it would increase the chances to be detected ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Esfahan is about 1600 km from Tel Aviv. F35 can fly around ~2300 km with internal tank. With aditional 2x 600 galon (israeli version) conformal fuel tanks it is said that there will be additional 45% range. So 45% from ~2300 km is ~1035 km, in total it is a range of ~3335 km. So it would "work", but only flying there and back and no fun while flying. (let alone the 600 gal cft)


then you calculate How much those tanks reduce stealth ?


----------



## ilia

*HERE’S WHY THE CLAIM THAT TWO ISRAELI F-35 STEALTH JETS ENTERED IRANIAN AIRSPACE DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE*

*https://theaviationist.com/?p=52477*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

raptor22 said:


> It's all without any weapon or full armed? beside it would increase the chances to be detected ...





Hack-Hook said:


> then you calculate How much those tanks reduce stealth ?



They say that CFT can be mounted together with full armed. They say also that the stealth ability of the F35 remain. Well, who knows. The Israelis havent build any CFT for F35 by now, so....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gold Eagle



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kastor

Draco.IMF said:


> The most sophisticated/"stealth" RQ-170 CIA drone was captured in 2011 and some people believe about magic israeli F-35 flying undetected over Iran?
> The chances are higher it was St Clause with his stealth reindeers


Lol, exactly, this is nothing more than the usual Israeli lie, actually, these leaks are an old of trick of theirs, they used similar PSY OPS on the U.S.A to have them speed up Stuxnet operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

yavar said:


>



Summary please

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> Summary please



Same old same old.

Interviewer asked about how 1396 went.

-biggest achievement was completion of testing of Bavar-373

-He was asked about the bigges political victory, of military, and mentioned how the military doesn't involve itself in politics. But thet most military related political event was the shahadat of Shahid Hojjaji.

-mentioned Kowsar-88 tests also took place

Nothing new.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/980134883065462784

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aamirzs

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1277401/middle-east

LONDON: Israeli media reports have said that F-35 stealth bombers have penetrated deep into Iranian airspace overcoming all radar and air defense systems.

The planes took off from Azerbaijan and succeeded in carrying reconnaissance missions in Iran close to Iran-Iraq border. The media report detailed that the undetectable stealth planes flew close to sensitive Iranian installations in Bandar Abbas, Isfahan and Shiraz.

No official confirmation was attainable since Israel refused to comment on its military operations.


----------



## Ich

aamirzs said:


> LONDON: Israeli media reports have said that F-35 stealth bombers have penetrated deep into Iranian airspace overcoming all radar and air defense systems.
> 
> The planes took off from Azerbaijan and succeeded in carrying reconnaissance missions in Iran close to Iran-Iraq border. The media report detailed that the undetectable stealth planes flew close to sensitive Iranian installations in Bandar Abbas, Isfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> No official confirmation was attainable since Israel refused to comment on its military operations.




Yes, it is the same miracle as it is with this military nerv gas that cant kill humen even it is dosed over month...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Ich said:


> Yes, it is the same miracle as it is with this military nerv gas that cant kill humen even it is dosed over month...


It's actually sad that so many want to believe this is true. Israel won't station, hell, the US won't let Israel station the F-35 in Azerbaijan, it makes no sense to leave such a expensive weapon that Israel has in limit quantities for the time being so close to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

BlueInGreen2 said:


> It's actually sad that so many want to believe this is true. Israel won't station, hell, the US won't let Israel station the F-35 in Azerbaijan, it makes no sense to leave such a expensive weapon that Israel has in limit quantities for the time being so close to Iran.



And imagine: So many persians in Azerbaijan and no one saw or heard something...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

aamirzs said:


> http://www.arabnews.com/node/1277401/middle-east
> 
> LONDON: Israeli media reports have said that F-35 stealth bombers have penetrated deep into Iranian airspace overcoming all radar and air defense systems.
> 
> The planes took off from Azerbaijan and succeeded in carrying reconnaissance missions in Iran close to Iran-Iraq border. The media report detailed that the undetectable stealth planes flew close to sensitive Iranian installations in Bandar Abbas, Isfahan and Shiraz.
> 
> No official confirmation was attainable since Israel refused to comment on its military operations.


Bandar Abbas!! So it flew all the way to Persian Gulf and back without any issues! Wonder why they can't do the same over Syria? I mean do those so called pre-emptive attacks without being detected? It seems Israelis know better how to operate US made jets. Because US jets in Persian Gulf receive warnings from Iran AD day in day out!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984001126990340103

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984060599557672961


----------



## AmirPatriot

N_Al40 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984001126990340103
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984060599557672961

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

AmirPatriot said:


> View attachment 465614



LOOL, that's what I thought too!! But I am cautiously optimistic of this news


----------



## Kiarash

Taghvaee is a BIG charlatan !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 466179
> View attachment 466180


Could someone please share some info of this system?


----------



## Stryker1982

Why do those SAM's look so wrinkly. Looks fake. Poor paint job?



skyshadow said:


> View attachment 466179


----------



## SOHEIL

Stryker1982 said:


> Why do those SAM's look so wrinkly. Looks fake. Poor paint job?



Which one?


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> Why do those SAM's look so wrinkly. Looks fake. Poor paint job?



Yes they are fake, rockets are replicated because they are in the exhibition and all the people can see them closely and for that reason they are not using real rockets.






These missiles are real


----------



## Draco.IMF

raptor22 said:


> Could someone please share some info of this system?


is this a modernized BUK?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Stryker1982 said:


> Why do those SAM's look so wrinkly. Looks fake. Poor paint job?


 
It appears to be a protective (plastic?) cover pulled over the tip of the Missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

raptor22 said:


> Could someone please share some info of this system?


It is KUB ,Iranians got their around 1998 if I remeber corectly ,and those KUBs already were modernized and could be integrated with BUK-M1 and fire BUK-M1(SA-11) missiles which is reported Iran got with KUBs..
This modernization is probably adding integration capatibility with BUK-M2/M3 and integration of newer BUK-M2/M3(SA-17) missiles(used on Iran Raad family).
This is very imoprtant in terms of linking them with RAAD family ...since it seems RAAD family share technology with newer BUK-m2/3 .
In one batery you should see one Raad with radar + 3 more lunchers without radar + one Kasta 2M radar as search radar.When it is modernized these kubs can be integrated in baterry ...so I suppose that would be it.

Kasta 2E


----------



## OldTwilight

29 farvardin is Army day ( 3 days from today ) ....
With this situation , if we have anything we will show it to boost our people moral ...
If they don't show anything , there is nothing ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 466425



Koja?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> Koja?


Dezful

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cthulhu

AmirPatriot said:


> View attachment 465614


What's funny is that some news outlets take Babak seriously. And people wonder why journalism is heading down to sh!t.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Cthulhu said:


> What's funny is that some news outlets take Babak seriously. And people wonder why journalism is heading down to sh!t.


Two days ago He published tweet ...something about "Eu will put sanctions on Iran" and than He said "Good news for Iran people and bad news for Ayatollahs"...I responded him "Poor little man..why don't you go and live in Iran and than say sanctions are good news?"..I mean it is nice to live somewhere else and talk that sanctions are good news for people(when sanctions afect peoples the most)..after this He just block me from his channel...I mean man is hypocrat..It is legitimate to fight for your views but not at this way...He is fully aware that sanctions never afects people from government...they will alwys eat good..ordinary people will suffer mostly ...so it would be nice for him to share Iran people destiny before He can say it is good news...any way He is not capable to express himself without his propagande agenda

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

sanel1412 said:


> Two days ago He published tweet ...something about "Eu will put sanctions on Iran" and than He said "Good news for Iran people and bad news for Ayatollahs"...I responded him "Poor little man..why don't you go and live in Iran and than say sanctions are good news?"..I mean it is nice to live somewhere else and talk that sanctions are good news for people(when sanctions afect peoples the most)..after this He just block me from his channel...I mean man is hypocrat..It is legitimate to fight for your views but not at this way...He is fully aware that sanctions never afects people from government...they will alwys eat good..ordinary people will suffer mostly ...so it would be nice for him to share Iran people destiny before He can say it is good news...any way He is not capable to express himself without his propagande agenda



He likes the Sanctions because he understands the real Purpose of the Sanctions is to hurt the Ordinary people Of Iran so much that they theoretically rise up and overthrow the Islam Republic in order to bring in a Vassel state that is friendly towards the Zionists. In this respect he feels that the worst the situation is made for Ordinary Iranians the better it is for Regime change. Plus as you said he does not live there to suffer or to shed his blood for his regime change so he has nothing to worry about!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/985294709307445248
Good perspective from the attack on Syria. Multi-direction attack from 3 sides.

In some ways, the launch of CM's from the Persian gulf and the B-1B flying over the Persian gulf towards Syria is good for our air defense teams to analyze their radar signatures and see real time U.S air & naval campaign operations. I feel like Iran can really learn from this and know what to expect in case something happens in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/985480856079872000

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Stryker1982 said:


> Why do those SAM's look so wrinkly. Looks fake. Poor paint job?


Seekers are covered with hoods

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/985653642467446789
Anyone know what this site may be?
He's also got a very interesting tweet chain I recommend all to see.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The combination of S-300 and Iranian Cruise Missiles / Rockets is sufficient
Same for Syria

However 50 / 50 split suppy of Mig 29 to both Nations should even the Odds

Does Iran makes quality Long range missiles Syria looks like a great customer to use some gadgets


----------



## Dinky

*Iran unveils new missile system on Army Day*
Kamin-II (Ambush-II); Latest missile unveiled by Iran Army today during National Army Day ceremony: It's reportedly a low-altitude missile aimed at targeting unmanned aerial vehicles and other flying targets at low altitudes





TEHRAN, Apr. 18 (MNA) – Iranian Army unveiled 'Kamin-2' missile system during a ceremony to commemorate the anniversary of National Army Day in Tehran today.


The 'Kamin-2' missile system which is the latest Iranian missile system was unveiled during nationwide parades in Iran to commemorate the Iranian Army Day on Wednesday morning.

The low altitude missile system is designed to confront with a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and to target drones and planes flying at low altitudes.

The system is domestically upgraded by Iranian experts according to most advanced technology in the world.

It is worth mentioning that 'Kamin-2' is an upgraded version of Mersad missile system, which has already been tested and put into operation during previous air defense military drills.
https://en.mehrnews.com/news/133457/Iran-unveils-new-missile-system-on-Army-Day


----------



## MTN1917

Some interesting observations from 1397 Army's day:

Tabas Air defense system seen for the first time in the service of IRIADF(previously it was only seen in IRGC ASF service)

















3rd Khordad Air defense system seen for the first time in IRIADF service









Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

Where is Bavar 373? 

Only an image on the Tabas!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Army Day is over and there was nothing ... so disappointing ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

So they basically showed NOTHING. What the F***. Bavar has completed tests, Qaher has completed tests? So where the hell is it!?!?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

Iran makes fake weapons. Really, they are just refurbished planes and Chinese supplied missiles. Its time to get serious and stop drinking patriotic Kool-Aid

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Armchair said:


> Iran makes fake weapons. Really, they are just refurbished planes and Chinese supplied missiles. Its time to get serious and stop drinking patriotic Kool-Aid


What weapons does




make?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthHurtz

OldTwilight said:


> Army Day is over and there was nothing ... so disappointing ....





Stryker1982 said:


> So they basically showed NOTHING. What the F***. Bavar has completed tests, Qaher has completed tests? So where the hell is it!?!?



your government exhausted all the important military acheivements last year in anticipation for the presidential election. karrar, kowsar, qaher, saba etc not to mention what was unveiled in the months leading up to 2017. there is likely very little to show that isn't in heavy development phase, and the arms that were unveiled last year are likely still in development or testing.



Armchair said:


> Iran makes fake weapons. Really, they are just refurbished planes and Chinese supplied missiles. Its time to get serious and stop drinking patriotic Kool-Aid



we need to consider the possibility that iran, is in fact not real.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Stryker1982 said:


> So they basically showed NOTHING. What the F***. Bavar has completed tests, Qaher has completed tests? So where the hell is it!?!?



Unveiling's tend to happen in the run up to Army Day, the day itself and in the following days after. But yes, I too was disappointed.

Not to mention the first units of Karrar Tanks that are ready to be delivered...since December 2017


----------



## skyshadow

Kamin 2

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

News reports saying Israel attacked T-4 base because Iran flew in an advanced air defense system ie TOR-M1 in the days before it. But it might have been a BUK system as well. I don’t know if Iran would risk losing TOR-M1 systems.


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> News reports saying Israel attacked T-4 base because Iran flew in an advanced air defense system ie TOR-M1 in the days before it. But it might have been a BUK system as well. I don’t know if Iran would risk losing TOR-M1 systems.


Tor M1 is short system for defending against hostile projectiles .... its by no mean is anything to be afraid of or anything to make thread for Israel air force ....


----------



## SOHEIL

Armchair said:


> Iran makes fake weapons. Really, they are just refurbished planes and Chinese supplied missiles. Its time to get serious and stop drinking patriotic Kool-Aid



Go ****

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

Armchair said:


> Iran makes fake weapons. Really, they are just refurbished planes and Chinese supplied missiles. Its time to get serious and stop drinking patriotic Kool-Aid



You're obviously just a troll or you haven't done any extensive research. Maybe start by reading wikipedia's info about Iran's defense industry.


----------



## TruthHurtz

sha ah said:


> You're obviously just a troll or you haven't done any extensive research. Maybe start by reading wikipedia's info about Iran's defense industry.



"just like check wikipedia bro it's 100% accurate"


----------



## mohsen



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 468903


That part taged with yellow color ...I think it is just optics and angle...probably fins of missile behind... because photo is shoted while TEL is moving it result with this.As for radars on tels...If you take look BUK-M1 and BUK-M2/M3 you will find same difference....because of different radars and anntenas

For example BUK difference between version Sa-11 BUK-M1 and Sa-17 BUK-M2

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

sanel1412 said:


> That part taged with yellow color ...I think it is just optics and angle...probably fins of missile behind... because photo is shoted while TEL is moving it result with this.As for radars on tels...If you take look BUK-M1 and BUK-M2/M3 you will find same difference....because of different radars and anntenas
> 
> For example BUK difference between version Sa-11 BUK-M1 and Sa-17 BUK-M2



As it is wrote in your pic. M2 can manage the same missiles as M1 plus the M2 missile. So it looks like we see an iranian M2 with M1 missiles. Maybe Iran produced alot M1 missiles itself or has only small amount of M2 missiles or none.


----------



## skyshadow

*Recent Iranian shipments to Syria concern US intelligence*



By Barbara Starr, CNN Pentagon Correspondent



Updated 1057 GMT (1857 HKT) April 25, 2018








social media sites that track global air traffic recorded at least two flights by Syrian Air Force IL-76 cargo jets between Iran and Syria. The official said other flights, including at least one from an Iranian cargo jet, have also caught US attention.




Trump signals possible breakthrough on Iran deal as US, Europe continue talks
Israel reportedly struck several targets inside Syria earlier this month including a T4 airbase in Homs province where Iranians had placed anti-aircraft missiles as well as unmanned aerial vehicles.
Israel has launched attacks on sites in Syria in the past, most notably in February when it struck twelve targets including three aerial defense batteries, as well as four targets which the Israel Defense Forces described as Iranian. That attack came after the shooting down of an Israeli F-16 fighter jet by Syrian forces, and the infiltration of Israeli airspace by what the IDF said was an Iranian drone.
US intelligence assessed the Israeli aircraft may have been shot down by a barrage of anti-aircraft missiles. There are concerns that if the fresh shipments are indeed weapons, they could include more anti-aircraft missiles.
A senior Iranian security official said Iran would punish Israel for the recent airstrikes on the T4 airbase in Homs, according to Iran's semi-official FARS news agency. Ali Shamkhani, the Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, and former defense minister, said Israel has not yet realized that the era of "hit-and-run" has come to an end and it should pay the price for such "stupidity."




Pompeo wants to switch Australian ambassador pick to South Korea
Shamkhani said "When a regime thinks that it is entitled to target counterterrorism troops in a move that comes with a planned violation of another country's airspace, it should have certainly thought of its repercussions and reactions." He added that "There will definitely be a punishment of the aggressor but naturally, the time, place and quality of the response to this vicious act depends on the Islamic Republic's will and choice,"
Russia's Defense Ministry claimed two Israeli F-15 warplanes launched eight guided missiles from Lebanese airspace, targeting the T-4 base in central Syria early this month. The strike resulted in the killing of "some Iranian military advisers,".
Israeli officials have not issued any response to reports of the strikes.
CNN's Hamdi Alkhshali contributed reporting


----------



## Tajbakhsh

Radarpost:

1.





2.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

http://tass.com/defense/1000148

Syrian Buk-M2 claimed by the Russians to have shot down 24 cruise missiles with 29 missiles fired. This means a PK of 83% against CM's.
While the missile of Iranian 3rd Khordad system is technically very different the overall system, especially the PESA radar used are quite similar.
This is also to open the eyes of some pro cruise missile people, such potent systems like the 3rd Khordad would have a high 80-90% PK against them.

Selecting the Buk-M2 based 3rd Khordad as backbone of IRGC-ASF tactical level SAM was very wise.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> http://tass.com/defense/1000148
> 
> Syrian Buk-M2 claimed by the Russians to have shot down 24 cruise missiles with 29 missiles fired. This means a PK of 83% against CM's.
> While the missile of Iranian 3rd Khordad system is technically very different the overall system, especially the PESA radar used are quite similar.
> This is also to open the eyes of some pro cruise missile people, such potent systems like the 3rd Khordad would have a high 80-90% PK against them.
> 
> Selecting the Buk-M2 based 3rd Khordad as backbone of IRGC-ASF tactical level SAM was very wise.



Iran badly needs to group these with a Pansir like system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

arashkamangir said:


> Iran badly needs to group these with a Pansir like system.



It would be a massive shame if Iran doesn't seal a deal with Russia for 75+ Panstir systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

BlueInGreen2 said:


> It would be a massive shame if Iran doesn't seal a deal with Russia for 75+ Panstir systems.



It would be a shame if Iran cannot reverse engineer/develop a Panstir like system. Especially after creating the Bavar system from scratch.



PeeD said:


> http://tass.com/defense/1000148
> 
> Syrian Buk-M2 claimed by the Russians to have shot down 24 cruise missiles with 29 missiles fired. This means a PK of 83% against CM's.
> While the missile of Iranian 3rd Khordad system is technically very different the overall system, especially the PESA radar used are quite similar.
> This is also to open the eyes of some pro cruise missile people, such potent systems like the 3rd Khordad would have a high 80-90% PK against them.
> 
> Selecting the Buk-M2 based 3rd Khordad as backbone of IRGC-ASF tactical level SAM was very wise.



The West says all their missiles hit their targets, Russia says most of the missiles were intercepted by “soviet era systems”.

The truth is probably in between these sides.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

The Pantsir is more economic against CM saturation attacks. The 3rd Khordad offers a greater area under SAM protection due to its larger missiles and hence is even more economic than the Pantsir in a limited attack.

Russians just send Tor-M2 to Syria to supplement Pantsirs and I don't know which one would be the better one for Iran, especially because newest Tor variants have 16 missiles instead of 8 of original Tor while the Pantsir has 12 (but longer ranged).

It comes down to a cost issue. One of the most economic CM killers would be the 23mm Mesbah with Safat automatic guidance, or the 100mm... Iran has gone very good ways in that field.



TheImmortal said:


> The West says all their missiles hit their targets, Russia says most of the missiles were intercepted by “soviet era systems”.
> 
> The truth is probably in between these sides.



The main portion of twisting the story is done by the west of course. Americans are very capable in that field, but selling the people that they shot more than 70 CMs against a single complex of three buildings is a difficult task if that person still has rational thinking.
The Russians have presented photos of their shot downs while the Americans were bold enough to claim none were shot down... Yes media in the U.S will maintain their "none shot down" line with their controlled public but its in fact a cheap lie.

The Buk-M2 is a 90's system but Russians may exaggerate its PK somewhat. The point is simply: Even if the Americans used successfully 70 CMs against that target, it just shows that CM's are extremely inefficient weapons.

Three terminal guided Khorramshahr missiles with 1,8 ton mach 3 impact warheads would sure have done the job for Iran and only Syrian Buk-M2 would be even able to target it (with a much, much lower PK)...

The west lives in a bubble from the Saddam days... They don't know what modern warfare against a near-peer opponent looks like. This was a wake up call.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlueInGreen2 said:


> It would be a massive shame if Iran doesn't seal a deal with Russia for 75+ Panstir systems.





TheImmortal said:


> It would be a shame if Iran cannot reverse engineer/develop a Panstir like system. Especially after creating the Bavar system from scratch.
> 
> 
> 
> The West says all their missiles hit their targets, Russia says most of the missiles were intercepted by “soviet era systems”.
> 
> The truth is probably in between these sides.



there is no shame is those, shame is that we had Ya Zahra Airdefence system since 2012 and Herze-9 since 2013 both based on Crotale but upgraded and failed to send any of them to syria to protect our bases there and relied on others to protect our forces.
















Another shame is since 2010 we had Mesbah-1 but even we didn't send that there to protect our forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990588003625074689

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990605995788431360

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990610200620163072

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990610202645934080


----------



## Fafnir

BlueInGreen2 said:


> It would be a massive shame if Iran doesn't seal a deal with Russia for 75+ Panstir systems.


Actually theres a possibility that iran either seriously considered developing or is in fact developing its own pantsir equivalent 




You can see in this picture of wind tunnel test models on the far right a 2 stage missile that bears a passing resemblance to the pantsir sam

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> The main portion of twisting the story is done by the west of course. Americans are very capable in that field, but selling the people that they shot more than 70 CMs against a single complex of three buildings is a difficult task if that person still has rational thinking.
> The Russians have presented photos of their shot downs while the Americans were bold enough to claim none were shot down... Yes media in the U.S will maintain their "none shot down" line with their controlled public but its in fact a cheap lie.
> 
> The Buk-M2 is a 90's system but Russians may exaggerate its PK somewhat. The point is simply: Even if the Americans used successfully 70 CMs against that target, it just shows that CM's are extremely inefficient weapons.
> 
> Three terminal guided Khorramshahr missiles with 1,8 ton mach 3 impact warheads would sure have done the job for Iran and only Syrian Buk-M2 would be even able to target it (with a much, much lower PK)...
> 
> The west lives in a bubble from the Saddam days... They don't know what modern warfare against a near-peer opponent looks like. This was a wake up call.


You do not know what you are talking about.

If we use X amount of weapons on a target, it is because we want absolute destruction of said target. Not so that it can be rebuilt. But so that it cannot be rebuilt without a lot of effort and time.

The cruise missile is an 'inefficient' weapon? What is your standard for efficiency in the first place? Is every Iranian soldier is a sniper? One shot, one kill? If not, then can we say that the AK-47 is an 'extremely inefficient' rifle because it takes a lot of bullets to kill?

Here is the reality...

Soviet/Russian and Chinese weapons have one thing -- the sales brochures.

US weapons have actual combat experience. Do not talk about 'modern warfare' when it is the West who have practically invented the concept.


----------



## PeeD

@gambit 

Same here, I also think that you don't know what you are talking about. You are heavily influence by the community you lived in, the USAF. Heavily influenced by propaganda and industry PR a la PAK-FAIL...

You might be a pilot but I'm the guy that has been working on the technology which let you fly. For me and some others like Russian experts who can cut of the PR stuff and fancy names you give for your weapons, people like you live in a bubble.
Fact is, the U.S NEVER faced a peer opponent since WWII. So believe me when I say your views about the grand total of weapon systems is fantasy for me. But I appreciate your knowledge as a pilot.

I hope things are clear in that regard now.

The AK is a great rifle. Unfortunately due to PR you are ready to compare a 1940s design with a 1960s (AR-15) design. You are too manipulated to at least compare it to the 5.54mm AK-74.

Then, if you want to destruct beton structures, yes use dozens of CMs but if you just want to destroy the capability, and whats important, the equipment, you never send 70 CM's.
The CM is a very efficient weapon against targets not defended against state of the art components of the IADS and there are always plenty of targets that or not within the IADS envelope. Or against 1991 Iraq...

But if you try it against that kind of stuff your efficiency drops to the ground.

Tell whatever you need to yourself to make sense of 70 CMs against a limited area building complex. Sure impressive firepower but that's not the way you win wars against a peer opponent.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Ich

Me still like the 100 mm automated AAA, electro-optical guided and linked together with 6 in a group, targeting the same aim. Also can linked to greater radars for target search. They can send a lot of metal against saturation attacks

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> @gambit...people like you live in a bubble.


No, it is people like you who lives in a bubble. As we shall see...



PeeD said:


> Fact is, the U.S NEVER faced a peer opponent since WWII.


This is a worthless argument. What WW II taught *EVERYONE*, not just US, was that it is stupid to fight a peer or near peer opponent. When you have a peer or near-peer opponent, but sides effectively cancelled each other out. No one is willing to risk defeat. The results are proxies or small scale battles that involves little or no political consequences.



PeeD said:


> The AK is a great rifle.


Never said it is a 'bad' weapon. I have fired various versions of the AK series. Never owned one, though.



PeeD said:


> Unfortunately due to PR you are ready to compare a 1940s design with a 1960s (AR-15) design. You are too manipulated to at least compare it to the 5.54mm AK-74.


I was only using your absurd argument that the quantity of ordnance used is somehow indicative of its 'efficiency' in combat.

But just in case you think that the larger caliber inherently make it 'superior', have your left arm shot with the 5.56 and your right arm shot with the 7.62. Then assume you recover and still have arms, tell us which is 'superior'.



PeeD said:


> Then, if you want to destruct beton structures, yes use dozens of CMs but if you just want to destroy the capability, and whats important, the equipment, you never send 70 CM's.


That was what we wanted -- complete destruction. Not just damaged capabilities.



PeeD said:


> The CM is a very efficient weapon against targets not defended against state of the art components of the IADS and there are always plenty of targets that or not within the IADS envelope. Or against 1991 Iraq...
> 
> But if you try it against that kind of stuff your efficiency drops to the ground.
> 
> Tell whatever you need to yourself to make sense of 70 CMs against a limited area building complex. Sure impressive firepower but that's not the way you win wars against a peer opponent.


If we launched X quantity of weapons, it is because we calculated in risks such as technical failures and/or air defense caused. So for you to tell US what you think is an appropriate quantity means you do not know what you are talking about.

So even if half of what launched made it, the weapon is efficient enough. You talk this way not because you have any experience in the matter, even in peace time military service, but because you just want to make any of our stuff look as bad as possible.

There are technologies that transform, not merely make doing things more efficiently.

Does the Iranian Army trains its soldiers with tactics that involves only single shot rifles? Of course not. The machine guns transformed battlefield tactics. No army reduced its ranks because of the machine gun. In fact, the opposite happened. If the machine gun replaced 10 soldiers, the army will simply reassign those 10 soldiers to do something else or buy more machine guns. And so on. Today, if an army does not have the machine gun in any of its variations, it is a defeated army before a single shot is fired by anyone.

The US did not 'invented' the cruise missile. That credit belongs to Nazi Germany with the V-1. But we made the weapon better in ways that it became transformative of how long distance targets are engaged. So far, no one, and that includes US peer or near-peer opponents, demonstrated their versions of the cruise missile to be transformative to their strategies and tactics.

People are not stupid, and that includes the Iranian military leadership. Your generals and admirals are smart enough to understand *EXACTLY* what I have been saying. Combat experience trumps sales brochures.


----------



## PeeD

@gambit 

For some reason you try to imply that I generally said that CM's are inefficient weapons, no strawman arguments please. The CM becomes inefficient in a employment regime against a IADS node equipped with state of the art point defense systems like multishot PESA Pantsir or Tor. Against such targets you need more than subsonic terrain masking CMs to get a high cost/system efficiency.
The U.S never faced such systems in its wars? Well, welcome to the reality...
It's like you send a VLO aircraft directly against a VHF AESA and wonder that it is detected at some point... employ CMs in a good way, based on battlefield intel and they are very useful. Hence no, Americans, Russians and now even Iranians are not just stupid to build CMs.

No one is stupid, F-16.net users might think Iranians are stupid but I never think Americans. I think Russians build the more effective and cost efficient weapons, I might even say hey are he better weapon makers. But this does not mean that they have a higher firepower than the Americans with their vast financial resources.

The AK is a good example. So if we want to compare it to the 3-5 times more expensive milled AR-15 we compare the AK-74 to the AR-15 which both use high velocity intermediate cartridge (not the 40's high drag 7,62 x 39). Then we can compare if the value added with the M-16 is worth a 3-5 times higher price.
A good design always takes cost into consideration and here the Russians perform much better and I claim that accuracy deficits of the AK-74 are negligible.



gambit said:


> That was what we wanted -- complete destruction. Not just damaged capabilities.



You never use 70 CMs against a target of that size. It is amazing that you are able to keep your eyes shut on this and try to explain... Hell Americans even claimed nearly all those 70 CMs impacted because NONE were shot down (!).
So in their strange world CMs are still the weapons they used against Iraq 1991 as Syrians were not able to shot down a single one. So if you have such a formidable effective weapons I might protest if you want to send a single dozen, as the target is quite a complex and all equipment needs to be destroyed to a non-repairable state. If you want to say two dozens I will agree to it. If you want to send three dozens, I say its still ok, then the destruction is assured. If you want to say 4 or 5 dozen I begin to think that you have a childish need to reduce every pile to rubble with no effective benefit. If you want to send 6 or 7 dozens I will request a medical check-up.

But ok, maybe the U.S has that amount of excess resources to spend it. Don't expect me to understand non-rational behavior and you may want to re-check the size of that building complex again.

@Ich

The 100mm AAA is indeed one of the Iranian systems which would have a high cost-efficiency against CM saturation attacks. Mesbah-2 with its Phalanx-level rate of fire is also a great asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> @gambit
> 
> For some reason you try to imply that I generally said that CM's are inefficient weapons, no strawman arguments please. The CM becomes inefficient in a employment regime against a IADS node equipped with state of the art point defense systems like multishot PESA Pantsir or Tor.


And *WHEN* will that happen? *UNTIL* the American cruise missile platform has been proven ineffective against these Russian air defense platforms, what you called as 'inefficient' is baseless speculation.

Before I was deployed to Desert Storm, which is before the Internet Age for most of you on this forum, there were no shortage of speculations, some legitimate, most were baseless, on how the US and allies were going to get caught in a 'quagmire' in Iraq. The Iraqi Army were fanatics, combat experienced against Iran, and were equipped with, as you used the cliche, 'state of the art' Soviet/Chinese weapons. We know what happened, do we?



PeeD said:


> The U.S never faced such systems in its wars? Well, welcome to the reality...
> It's like you send a VLO aircraft directly against a VHF AESA and wonder that it is detected at some point...


You mean you are confident that the US have never tested our F-117, F-22, F-35, and B-2 against these freqs? And that we do not know the results and how to counter them? You have been suckered by the Russians, friend.



PeeD said:


> No one is stupid, F-16.net users might think Iranians are stupid but I never think Americans. I think Russians build the more effective and cost efficient weapons, I might even say hey are he better weapon makers. *But this does not mean that they have a higher firepower than the Americans with their vast financial resources.*


Now you are getting the 'big picture'.

There is an apocryphal story about WW II. A German officer and his men captured an American supply truck. They went thru its contents and found a one-week old chocolate cake from a bakery back in the US. The German officer then admitted that the war is lost for Germany. No one can fight against a foe that has enough resources to supply cakes along with ammunition to its soldiers.

Whether that story is true or not, is not the point. Imperial Japanese Navy admiral Yamamoto, the man who planned Pearl Harbor, predicted that the war is lost for Japan simply by sheer economic might from the US. The point of any war is to overwhelm the enemy at *ANY* point you can see and exploit.

If my 10 'good enough' missiles can overwhelm 2 or 3 of your 'superior' defense -- I win. And that is what the world sees and want to buy.

This is why whenever the US military is hamstrung by other people's rules-of-engagements (ROE), the war or local conflict ended up dragged out and casualties mounts for all sides.

So if there is a shooting fight between US and Iran, and most likely it will just US, you can toss those fancy Russian weapons sales brochures into the garbage. Yeah...Individually, whatever it is maybe technically superior, but against tactics that exploits the best features of multiple platforms that can attack from direction directions at different time? Iran *WILL* lose.

Seventy cruise missiles against three buildings and they got totally destroyed? Damn good shooting, I'd say...


----------



## PeeD

@gambit 

Its not about any side kicking the others *** or Iran come out is a winner against a country with a several hundert times larger defense budget. It's about Americans that never fought even a close to near peer opponent since the WWII.

The most potent SAM system Iraqis had in 1991 was the SA-6, a system at 1965 level, downgraded Soviet technology. It was 25 years to late to do the change while it kicked the *** of the Israelis in 1973 when it was still a 10 year old monkey model.
No offense but I don't know which idiot claimed that Iraqis would be a near-peer opponent in 1991. Just like Iran would have been in 1991 they were a highly inferior opponent equipped with systems which were on average two decades older in generation than US, often older.
But Iran in the 80's with just a few years in power is not the 40 year old Islamic republic of today.

Russians are also not the Soviets anymore wo could do a policy of selling degraded hardware, often with 50% reduced capability.
No. The only thing that was a kind of small threat to the F-117 in 91 were a few old P-18 radars and the Americans did some extra effort to remove them from Iraqi arsenal. The rest was just a fight against a 1960s army which just had some numbers and artillery. Advantages like stealth, night-time attacks or cut communications don't work that way anymore against a 2018 Iran.
I might not believe that Syrian Russian systems shot down the 70 out of 100 as they claim. But 40 is reasonable if the sites were protected by Buk and Pansir. This are the systems that make the difference and the U.S never faced such capable systems, that's why it lives in it's 1991 bubble.

Another point: Iran does not buy Russian systems excepts for very few cases. It mainly develops own systems, often selecting Russian systems as role model and less often American ones.
Irans Sayyad-2 e.g uses a Patriot based launcher, while its 3rd Khordad is modeled on the Buk-M2.
So they have almost no monkey models there with leaked weak points.

I would never underestimate the U.S firepower, but you, as a product of the community you grew up in, has no touch of the reality.
The 70 CMs on single limited building complex and the "none shot down, all hit" claim of the U.S might be a starting point for you to get some doubts on the reality on the ground, rational.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> @gambit
> 
> Its not about any side kicking the others *** or Iran come out is a winner against a country with a several hundert times larger defense budget. *It's about Americans that never fought even a close to near peer opponent since the WWII.*


And how is this even a legitimate criticism of US military power? And why is it targeted only at the US? What make you think Soviet/Russian weapons systems are 'superior' to US when neither variants of that country never fought against a peer or near-peer opponent?



PeeD said:


> The most potent SAM system Iraqis had in 1991 was the SA-6, a system at 1965 level, downgraded Soviet technology. It was 25 years to late to do the change while it kicked the *** of the Israelis in 1973 when it was still a 10 year old monkey model.
> No offense but I don't know which idiot claimed that Iraqis would be a near-peer opponent in 1991. Just like Iran would have been in 1991 they were a highly inferior opponent equipped with systems which were on average two decades older in generation than US, often older.
> But Iran in the 80's with just a few years in power is not the 40 year old Islamic republic of today.


Here is the flaw in your argument...

When you focused solely on the technical aspects of a weapon, you have effectively removed any tactic, human skills, experience, and institutional knowledge that *WILL* influence the battlefield effectiveness of that weapon. In the hands of a raw recruit fresh out of Basic, a machine gun would be useless against an experienced soldier armed with only a single shot rifle. That is what you have been telling everyone all this time when you claimed that Soviet/Russian weapons are technically superior to US.

Do you really believe that if it was the Soviets back in 1990, they could -- not would -- have defeated the F-117? No, they could not have. And if you could not, then you would not be able. Some weapons and their deployment would simply overpower their opposition on the battlefield regardless of how wealthy and advanced the source country maybe. Soviet electronics engineer Adolf Tolkachev worked for US and he confirmed that the Soviets had no credible defense against the F-111. Tolkachev did not worked on consumer products but on Soviet air defense radars.

Desert Storm shook the foundation of every military academies in the world, including the Soviets'. The first shots fired in Desert Storm was not some 'hi-tech' weaponry but from the standard Hellfire missile launched from the regular Apache helos. Not even the cruise missile was considered. We wanted literally human confirmation that the Iraqi radar stations were out of action. No other weapon platform could have provided that.

So for those military academies, including Iran's, the fact that Iraq was not a even a near-peer opponent to US is irrelevant. According to Said Aburish, Saddam Hussein's weapons buyer, Saddam Hussein tried to buy Western weapons first before he had to settle on Soviet/Chinese sources.



PeeD said:


> Advantages like stealth, night-time attacks or cut communications don't work that way anymore against a 2018 Iran.


This is called 'hubris'. Look it up.

Right now, there is not a single shred of proof -- outside the lab -- that those long wavelengths radars are effective against US 'stealth'.



PeeD said:


> I would never underestimate the U.S firepower, but you, as a product of the community you grew up in, has no touch of the reality.
> The 70 CMs on single limited building complex and the "none shot down, all hit" claim of the U.S might be a starting point for you to get some doubts on the reality on the ground, rational.


You have underestimated US -- badly. We do not care if it was 70 or even 10. As long as the target is destroyed, that is all that mattered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@gambit



gambit said:


> And how is this even a legitimate criticism of US military power? And why is it targeted only at the US? What make you think Soviet/Russian weapons systems are 'superior' to US when neither variants of that country never fought against a peer or near-peer opponent?



You didn't get my point: You can't brag about the fact that you obliterated Iraqis in 91 despite people said they are the 4th strongest military in the world.
Why? Because they were not, they were vastly inferior. There are worlds between Soviet capability of 91 and Iraq's.

You bring the example of Iraq often, so let me put it short: No, Iraq in 91 had several generations obsolete gear compared to U.S and Soviets. You can't use Iraq 91 to prove Soviet/Russian systems are inferior to western.

Capability wise the recent engagement was one of near-peer opponent, a representative one. JASSM against Pantsir in one of the seldom cases of equal generation systems from east and west facing each other.



gambit said:


> That is what you have been telling everyone all this time when you claimed that Soviet/Russian weapons are technically superior to US.



I didn't say they are technically superior in general. I said they are better designs for warfare and certainly you get more bang for the buck. I would pick a M16 over a AK-74 but it doesn't change the fact that I can equip 3-4 times more units with a negligibly worse weapon.



gambit said:


> Do you really believe that if it was the Soviets back in 1990, they could -- not would -- have defeated the F-117? No, they could not have.



Bold statement. After the hellfires you mentioned took out Iraqi P-18/-12 in the starting hours, the F-117 had free hand to attack even the most critical targets in Iraq and where still not, CM's did the job.
So no, you could not have attacked the Soviets with F-117 at will, back then they had OTH radars as well as replaced their P-18 with Nebo and all the other things like P-14 tall kings around.

So no-go areas would have vastly increased, no strikes against communication nodes at will. Soviets just didn't really believe that Americans would do all the effort for a VLO platform like the F-117. You did go the extra mile with the unlimited resources at hand. Still, as said, unlike the Iraqis their systems were not obsolete.



gambit said:


> Soviet electronics engineer Adolf Tolkachev worked for US and he confirmed that the Soviets had no credible defense against the F-111. Tolkachev did not worked on consumer products but on Soviet air defense radars.



Not credible. A traitor with narrow knowledge on some systems making a bold claim. But well actually he is right, any air defense will have problems with terrain masking platforms. This is a general line of sight problem.
However after pop-up against a point defense protected target, a Tor or Tunguska would have cared for the F-111. If low level bombing was the plan, it again would need to come so close to release it's retarding bombs that against those systems would have cared for it.
But against all those other (many) targets, not protected by such systems the F-111 would have been great, hands down.



gambit said:


> So for those military academies, including Iran's, the fact that Iraq was not a even a near-peer opponent to US is irrelevant. According to Said Aburish, Saddam Hussein's weapons buyer, Saddam Hussein tried to buy Western weapons first before he had to settle on Soviet/Chinese sources.



It was a impressive show of firepower and how several generations more advanced systems can make obsolete systems worthless. Everybody learned some lessons from it and some developed asymmetric counter technology to it. Soviets understood that Americans were really ready to spend money on such a exotic system like the F-117, while their rational thinking would have put that money on F-111s for example.

As for the shopping list of the Iraqis: Guess there is something truth in it. You must feel quite pissed if Soviets treat you like monkeys that deserve just weapon systems that are 25 years behind in technology than the build for themselves...



gambit said:


> This is called 'hubris'. Look it up.
> 
> Right now, there is not a single shred of proof -- outside the lab -- that those long wavelengths radars are effective against US 'stealth'.



No hubris... if you think you those methods work the same way like on Iraq in 91 then you have the hubris.

Come on, why do you think the Apaches took out those ancient Iraqi P-18/-12 first of all? Iraqis thought those were useless junk and favored their S- and X-band assets.
There is no doubt anymore about the effect of VHF-band against fighter sized stealth. We already discussed the use of P-18 to down the F-117 over Serbia. Of course the RQ-170 also just had a strange malfunction and Iranians didn't detect it at all... Resonance regimes and Rayleigh-, Mie-scattering are pretty well understood effects by now.
This does not mean that stealth does not offer that extra of capability that can decide on life or death. Stealth is good, but no one in the east could believe the Americans would spend so much money on such a technology and really produce the cockroach.

Let me just state here the fact that no F-117 will be able to drop LGBs on a communication node undetected if a VHF-Nebo is around. No F-35 will attack Russian S-400 with a volley of SDBs.
But a RQ-170 will use its stand-off GMTI if the airspace is not sufficiently covered by VHF assets and offer a great added capability.



gambit said:


> You have underestimated US -- badly. We do not care if it was 70 or even 10. As long as the target is destroyed, that is all that mattered.



I don't think so. I just know that only the U.S can afford to spend so many expensive weapons on such a limited size target, around the load out of a cruiser for one building complex, more than 70 million USD.... Good for your opponents that you make war like that...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> @gambit
> 
> For some reason you try to imply that I generally said that CM's are inefficient weapons, no strawman arguments please. The CM becomes inefficient in a employment regime against a IADS node equipped with state of the art point defense systems like multishot PESA Pantsir or Tor. Against such targets you need more than subsonic terrain masking CMs to get a high cost/system efficiency.
> The U.S never faced such systems in its wars? Well, welcome to the reality...
> It's like you send a VLO aircraft directly against a VHF AESA and wonder that it is detected at some point... employ CMs in a good way, based on battlefield intel and they are very useful. Hence no, Americans, Russians and now even Iranians are not just stupid to build CMs.
> 
> No one is stupid, F-16.net users might think Iranians are stupid but I never think Americans. I think Russians build the more effective and cost efficient weapons, I might even say hey are he better weapon makers. But this does not mean that they have a higher firepower than the Americans with their vast financial resources.
> 
> The AK is a good example. So if we want to compare it to the 3-5 times more expensive milled AR-15 we compare the AK-74 to the AR-15 which both use high velocity intermediate cartridge (not the 40's high drag 7,62 x 39). Then we can compare if the value added with the M-16 is worth a 3-5 times higher price.
> A good design always takes cost into consideration and here the Russians perform much better and I claim that accuracy deficits of the AK-74 are negligible.
> 
> 
> 
> You never use 70 CMs against a target of that size. It is amazing that you are able to keep your eyes shut on this and try to explain... Hell Americans even claimed nearly all those 70 CMs impacted because NONE were shot down (!).
> So in their strange world CMs are still the weapons they used against Iraq 1991 as Syrians were not able to shot down a single one. So if you have such a formidable effective weapons I might protest if you want to send a single dozen, as the target is quite a complex and all equipment needs to be destroyed to a non-repairable state. If you want to say two dozens I will agree to it. If you want to send three dozens, I say its still ok, then the destruction is assured. If you want to say 4 or 5 dozen I begin to think that you have a childish need to reduce every pile to rubble with no effective benefit. If you want to send 6 or 7 dozens I will request a medical check-up.
> 
> But ok, maybe the U.S has that amount of excess resources to spend it. Don't expect me to understand non-rational behavior and you may want to re-check the size of that building complex again.
> 
> @Ich
> 
> The 100mm AAA is indeed one of the Iranian systems which would have a high cost-efficiency against CM saturation attacks. Mesbah-2 with its Phalanx-level rate of fire is also a great asset.



Mesbah-2 has been developed already?


----------



## Ich

The best way to place the iraqi army in 91 is to look with what army Iran defeated them some years before.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> @gambit
> 
> You didn't get my point: You can't brag about the fact that you obliterated Iraqis in 91 despite people said they are the 4th strongest military in the world.
> Why? Because they were not, they were vastly inferior. There are worlds between Soviet capability of 91 and Iraq's.


Then it looks like no one got your point because back then, every military in the world was predicting 'Vietnam War' era casualties for the US and allies. Even US got into the act because before deployment, our squadron received the typical 'worst case' scenarios briefing that covers everything from NBC weapons to POWs.

Look at China's PLA today for its reforms. Got American signatures all over. The PLA leadership presented to the Politburo its analysis that while the US and allies would win, the Iraqi Army would inflict thousands, if not tens of thousands, casualties thanks to and in large part of Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics. It ended we were more in danger of fratricide than of those Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics.

Yours is the typical hindsight 20/20 criticism that everyone despises. You offer no insights, not even an addition to the current retroactive studies that are still being circulated today on how to fight a modern war.



PeeD said:


> You bring the example of Iraq often, so let me put it short: No, Iraq in 91 had several generations obsolete gear compared to U.S and Soviets. You can't use Iraq 91 to prove Soviet/Russian systems are inferior to western.


Here is what you missed...And probably because you never served to understand better. Am not saying that as an insult but as a matter of fact.

Weapons and tactics have a push-pull relationship to each other. Tactics hints at human interventions. The implications are enormous on the battlefields. If you are given a machine gun, but did not deploy it in positions to take advantage of its capabilities, the machine is no good to your army and you will be be defeated. No matter how much you extols the virtues of the machine gun after defeat, it will extremely difficult to see that weapon in a positive light.

The Soviets do make excellent, not merely good, hardware. But the centralized ground control and command doctrines that they, and the Chinese, exported proved inadequate in large scale at Desert Storm. Tactics, or poorly designed tactics, crippled whatever good features of the hardware. That was one major hard lessons of Desert Storm. And it looks like that lesson was missed in this forum.



PeeD said:


> *Bold statement.* After the hellfires you mentioned took out Iraqi P-18/-12 in the starting hours, the F-117 had free hand to attack even the most critical targets in Iraq and where still not, CM's did the job.
> So no, you could not have attacked the Soviets with F-117 at will, back then they had OTH radars as well as replaced their P-18 with Nebo and all the other things like P-14 tall kings around.


Damn right it is, and I have no problems making it.

The initial opening of the Iraq air defense radar net was not for the F-117, as you seemed to imply. It was to create a radar coverage hole large enough for *ALL* air assets to exploit for as long as the Iraqis continued to remain confused. And the confusion is what you missed.

This is not the movies where everything reacts instantaneously. The few minutes that Iraqi centralized command structures needed to confirm that the radar gap was not due to hardware failure -- was what we intended. When you have weapons that travels at several hundreds km/hr, every minute lost in translation is X distance of km that the enemy covered towards your positions that has no response mechanisms. That had nothing to do with how sophisticated the hardware.

So yes, that was a hard lesson about 'stealth' for the Soviets and their clients who bought their hardware and uses their tactics. So yes, I have no problems saying that if it was the Soviets, they would have been 'shocked and awed' by the F-117 and everything that flew that night.



PeeD said:


> Not credible. A traitor with narrow knowledge on some systems making a bold claim. But well actually he is right, any air defense will have problems with terrain masking platforms. This is a general line of sight problem.


Absolutely credible. His 'traitor' accusation had nothing to do with the technical data that he gave to US. When I was on the F-111, at every arms reduction negotiations, the Soviets demanded that we remove the F-111 from the UK basing. And each time we told the Soviets to STFU. Tactics is where you exploit any gap, be it technological or human caused or both. Tolkachev confirmed just one of our many suspicions. Your slur of him revealed an emotion bias, not objectivity as you should have been.



PeeD said:


> However after pop-up against a point defense protected target, a Tor or Tunguska would have cared for the F-111. If low level bombing was the plan, it again would need to come so close to release it's retarding bombs that against those systems would have cared for it.
> But against all those other (many) targets, not protected by such systems the F-111 would have been great, hands down.


I remember one excellent night air refueling training sortie and I was fairly new on the jet. It was a four-ship flight. After refueled, lead was contacted and asked if the flight was willing to help the French with their new experimental air defense radar. The flight split into two attack elements, approaching from north and west. The pilot asked how low can we go over the Channel and I, in the WSO seat, said about 50 ft or about 20 meters. Both flights did pop ups within a few seconds of each other. If it was a nuclear delivery, it would have been over for the target area. The French air defense radar never picked up the F-111s because the approach altitude was too low.

Do not tell US what we 'need' to do based upon your inexperience.



PeeD said:


> No hubris... if you think you those methods work the same way like on Iraq in 91 then you have the hubris.


No, we do not. But what we are is the world's most self critical military. We have no problems with anyone's image of US as we do not care. We have not been idle since Desert Storm. In fact, many things we used in DS we discarded in light of newer technologies and tactics that those new technologies revealed. So maybe you should consider the possibility that it is *YOU* who have been stuck on Desert Storm because it was not yours to start, and that you cannot expand upon the lessons it produced, whereas we can.



PeeD said:


> Come on, why do you think the Apaches took out those ancient Iraqi P-18/-12 first of all? Iraqis thought those were useless junk and favored their S- and X-band assets.
> There is no doubt anymore about the effect of VHF-band against fighter sized stealth. We already discussed the use of P-18 to down the F-117 over Serbia.


NATO flew over 30,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only two jets: An F-16 and an F-117.

That is not an air defense combat record to boast at the bar.

Am going to ask you again: Do you really believe that we do not know of basic radar principles, at all bands, when we designed our 'stealth' platforms, and that we do not know how to counter them, either with technologies or tactics or both?

Your avoidance of those questions reveals much about your fear -- that you really do not have that much confidence in what the Russians and Chinese claimed.

No one on this forum is a greater proponent of 'stealth' than I, because I have seen its effects first hand. You have not. All you have are sales brochures from sellers who either have no experience or is struggling with the technology.



PeeD said:


> Let me just state here the fact that no F-117 will be able to drop LGBs on a communication node undetected if a VHF-Nebo is around. No F-35 will attack Russian S-400 with a volley of SDBs.


That is no 'fact'. You do not know the meaning of the word. That is hubris.



PeeD said:


> I don't think so. I just know that only the U.S can afford to spend so many expensive weapons on such a limited size target, around the load out of a cruiser for one building complex, more than 70 million USD.... Good for your opponents that you make war like that...


Yes, you have underestimated US in this debate. War is not a boxing match where both contestants fights within boundaries. We do not care if people mock US for using outsized quantity of X weapons against a target. If a fly needed to be killed and all we have is a rocket, we will use that rocket to kill that fly if such an action will help win the war.

I will put this bluntly: Except for acts of war crimes, in a war, the end always justifies the means.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WordsMatter

gambit said:


> Then it looks like no one got your point because back then, every military in the world was predicting 'Vietnam War' era casualties for the US and allies. Even US got into the act because before deployment, our squadron received the typical 'worst case' scenarios briefing that covers everything from NBC weapons to POWs.
> 
> Look at China's PLA today for its reforms. Got American signatures all over. The PLA leadership presented to the Politburo its analysis that while the US and allies would win, the Iraqi Army would inflict thousands, if not tens of thousands, casualties thanks to and in large part of Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics. It ended we were more in danger of fratricide than of those Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics.
> 
> Yours is the typical hindsight 20/20 criticism that everyone despises. You offer no insights, not even an addition to the current retroactive studies that are still being circulated today on how to fight a modern war.
> 
> 
> Here is what you missed...And probably because you never served to understand better. Am not saying that as an insult but as a matter of fact.
> 
> Weapons and tactics have a push-pull relationship to each other. Tactics hints at human interventions. The implications are enormous on the battlefields. If you are given a machine gun, but did not deploy it in positions to take advantage of its capabilities, the machine is no good to your army and you will be be defeated. No matter how much you extols the virtues of the machine gun after defeat, it will extremely difficult to see that weapon in a positive light.
> 
> The Soviets do make excellent, not merely good, hardware. But the centralized ground control and command doctrines that they, and the Chinese, exported proved inadequate in large scale at Desert Storm. Tactics, or poorly designed tactics, crippled whatever good features of the hardware. That was one major hard lessons of Desert Storm. And it looks like that lesson was missed in this forum.
> 
> 
> Damn right it is, and I have no problems making it.
> 
> The initial opening of the Iraq air defense radar net was not for the F-117, as you seemed to imply. It was to create a radar coverage hole large enough for *ALL* air assets to exploit for as long as the Iraqis continued to remain confused. And the confusion is what you missed.
> 
> This is not the movies where everything reacts instantaneously. The few minutes that Iraqi centralized command structures needed to confirm that the radar gap was not due to hardware failure -- was what we intended. When you have weapons that travels at several hundreds km/hr, every minute lost in translation is X distance of km that the enemy covered towards your positions that has no response mechanisms. That had nothing to do with how sophisticated the hardware.
> 
> So yes, that was a hard lesson about 'stealth' for the Soviets and their clients who bought their hardware and uses their tactics. So yes, I have no problems saying that if it was the Soviets, they would have been 'shocked and awed' by the F-117 and everything that flew that night.
> 
> 
> Absolutely credible. His 'traitor' accusation had nothing to do with the technical data that he gave to US. When I was on the F-111, at every arms reduction negotiations, the Soviets demanded that we remove the F-111 from the UK basing. And each time we told the Soviets to STFU. Tactics is where you exploit any gap, be it technological or human caused or both. Tolkachev confirmed just one of our many suspicions. Your slur of him revealed an emotion bias, not objectivity as you should have been.
> 
> 
> I remember one excellent night air refueling training sortie and I was fairly new on the jet. It was a four-ship flight. After refueled, lead was contacted and asked if the flight was willing to help the French with their new experimental air defense radar. The flight split into two attack elements, approaching from north and west. The pilot asked how low can we go over the Channel and I, in the WSO seat, said about 50 ft or about 20 meters. Both flights did pop ups within a few seconds of each other. If it was a nuclear delivery, it would have been over for the target area. The French air defense radar never picked up the F-111s because the approach altitude was too low.
> 
> Do not tell US what we 'need' to do based upon your inexperience.
> 
> 
> No, we do not. But what we are is the world's most self critical military. We have no problems with anyone's image of US as we do not care. We have not been idle since Desert Storm. In fact, many things we used in DS we discarded in light of newer technologies and tactics that those new technologies revealed. So maybe you should consider the possibility that it is *YOU* who have been stuck on Desert Storm because it was not yours to start, and that you cannot expand upon the lessons it produced, whereas we can.
> 
> 
> NATO flew over 30,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only two jets: An F-16 and an F-117.
> 
> That is not an air defense combat record to boast at the bar.
> 
> Am going to ask you again: Do you really believe that we do not know of basic radar principles, at all bands, when we designed our 'stealth' platforms, and that we do not know how to counter them, either with technologies or tactics or both?
> 
> Your avoidance of those questions reveals much about your fear -- that you really do not have that much confidence in what the Russians and Chinese claimed.
> 
> No one on this forum is a greater proponent of 'stealth' than I, because I have seen its effects first hand. You have not. All you have are sales brochures from sellers who either have no experience or is struggling with the technology.
> 
> 
> That is no 'fact'. You do not know the meaning of the word. That is hubris.
> 
> 
> Yes, you have underestimated US in this debate. War is not a boxing match where both contestants fights within boundaries. We do not care if people mock US for using outsized quantity of X weapons against a target. If a fly needed to be killed and all we have is a rocket, we will use that rocket to kill that fly if such an action will help win the war.
> 
> I will put this bluntly: Except for acts of war crimes, in a war, the end always justifies the means.


very well articulated... Well said about the hubris of IRI and the prevailing ignorance amongst those who falsely assume, wish really, that IRI will be the David that brought down the US Goliath.


----------



## Muhammed45

WordsMatter said:


> very well articulated... Well said about the hubris of IRI and the prevailing ignorance amongst those who falsely assume, wish really, that IRI will be the David that brought down the US Goliath.


@Serpentine 
Derailing, off topic insulting Iran. He doesn't add anything logical to this section, Iranian air defense system. But just trolling 

Do something, thanks mod

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WordsMatter

mohammad45 said:


> @Serpentine
> Derailing, off topic insulting Iran. He doesn't add anything logical to this section, Iranian air defense system. But just trolling
> 
> Do something, thanks mod


 That's funny...


----------



## Muhammed45

WordsMatter said:


> That's funny...


@Serpentine


----------



## PeeD

@gambit

When I criticize the U.S it is on a high level and then mainly the defense industry not the services. I also must say that you are spoiled for your previous conflicts, while I talk more on the technological side.
Irans military has transformed 180° from desert storm to now.

If you would have been on the sober technological side of things you would have questioned that bullshit of "4th strongest military" in 91.
You would have known that Soviets gave Iraqis 1950's vintage pure steel penetrators for their tank guns.
You would have known that their static ground based air defense, despite being modeled on Soviet role model used compromised French systems because again: Soviets wanted to sell them early 1960's vintage C2 in the late 80's.

No. Everyone with such knowledge would have predicted a deep generational discrepancy that would end very sad.
And still they shot down more than 50 aircraft...

The Americans did a good job there and had good tactics and training. But don't sell be such hero stories, at least not to me here.

When Iraq attacked Iran they did not manage to take a single city. While Iran was just a few year old military with war experience and total lack of gear, it managed to cut of Iraqis from the sea from which they exported their most vital resource.
All this despite the west provided it with all possible intelligence from AWACS data to satellite and U2 imagery.
So Iran did this to the "4th best military in the world" and Iraqis could only break that siege via unprecedented (since WWI) use of chemical weapons, with the OK from the west.
So yes, don't sell me those story and Iran knows what a total war means, without any limits.

DS was a impressive show of firepower and how several generations of technological gap between adversaries can lead to total obliteration of the obsolete side. It was the first "modern" war.



gambit said:


> Look at China's PLA today for its reforms. Got American signatures all over. The PLA leadership presented to the Politburo its analysis that while the US and allies would win, the Iraqi Army would inflict thousands, if not tens of thousands, casualties thanks to and in large part of Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics. It ended we were more in danger of fratricide than of those Soviet/Chinese weapons and tactics.



I have absolutely no respect from pre mid 90's PLA conventional capability. The gap between them and Soviets was very large and they just tried to copy their role model. So sorry, absolutely unimportant what 1991 conventional PLA thought or not.



gambit said:


> The Soviets do make excellent, not merely good, hardware. But the centralized ground control and command doctrines that they, and the Chinese, exported proved inadequate in large scale at Desert Storm. Tactics, or poorly designed tactics, crippled whatever good features of the hardware. That was one major hard lessons of Desert Storm. And it looks like that lesson was missed in this forum.



It's not the Soviets fault that Saddam was stupid.
You can't have an proper ground based IADS if all components are not available and redundancy is to low.
The Iraqi or even PLA IADS of 91 were not flexibel or powerful enough to win a war against U.S airpower. The Soviet IADS was on the other side, but they kept it for themselves, never thought about exporting it.
Was it immune to terrain masking aircraft? No, but who in the world back than had such a capability? Nobody.
Was it capable to detect and kill F-117? Certainly..., probably the only military back then that could do that.



gambit said:


> So yes, that was a hard lesson about 'stealth' for the Soviets and their clients who bought their hardware and uses their tactics. So yes, I have no problems saying that if it was the Soviets, they would have been 'shocked and awed' by the F-117 and everything that flew that night.



This kind of hubris, makes me wonder how much of the technological side was present in the U.S fighter community.

Yes, Soviet clients with second and third grade gear were probably pissed. Soviets themselves probably thought, damn, now we need to make systems like the Nebo, export items, without heavy downgrading.
But they certainly knew one thing: Those high flying subsonic F-117 will be a nice snack for our interceptors once or large P-14 or Nebo network start to detect them...



gambit said:


> Absolutely credible. His 'traitor' accusation had nothing to do with the technical data that he gave to US. When I was on the F-111, at every arms reduction negotiations, the Soviets demanded that we remove the F-111 from the UK basing. And each time we told the Soviets to STFU. Tactics is where you exploit any gap, be it technological or human caused or both. Tolkachev confirmed just one of our many suspicions. Your slur of him revealed an emotion bias, not objectivity as you should have been.



Rather not emotional bias but wondering how someone can think a technology leak in one field would mean the U.S would have "known it all" about Soviet gear. What information did he provide you about the Nebo? Did he work on it too?
No, he had limited knowledge about a limited amount of systems.

Terrain masking is up until today something that is extremely difficult to counter. Exploiting a physical effect (LOS) is easier than designing something that creates a physical effect (F-117).



gambit said:


> I remember one excellent night air refueling training sortie and I was fairly new on the jet. It was a four-ship flight. After refueled, lead was contacted and asked if the flight was willing to help the French with their new experimental air defense radar. The flight split into two attack elements, approaching from north and west. The pilot asked how low can we go over the Channel and I, in the WSO seat, said about 50 ft or about 20 meters. Both flights did pop ups within a few seconds of each other. If it was a nuclear delivery, it would have been over for the target area. The French air defense radar never picked up the F-111s because the approach altitude was too low.
> 
> Do not tell US what we 'need' to do based upon your inexperience.



Good example. For nuclear delivery terrain masking can almost always guarantee reaching within 20km of the target which might be sufficient.
What was your conventional plan against Tor and Tunguska protecting a war deciding asset? Hoping that they are junk?

Look at your "Do not tell US what we 'need' to do" hubris. What I see is a highly trained military which does not make as good decisions on equipment as the Russians/Soviets and it's mainly due to your defense industry.



gambit said:


> NATO flew over 30,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only two jets: An F-16 and an F-117.
> 
> That is not an air defense combat record to boast at the bar.



We are on the technological side of things. Yes Iraqis had a 100 times larger air defense force and shoot down 50 coalition aircraft... Completely unimportant.

What is important is the case of 1950's and 60's P-18 and SA-3 shooting down a 80's "superweapon". Plus the hubris to think that this "superweapon" would then have shock and awed 1991 Soviets.



gambit said:


> Am going to ask you again: Do you really believe that we do not know of basic radar principles, at all bands, when we designed our 'stealth' platforms, and that we do not know how to counter them, either with technologies or tactics or both?
> 
> Your avoidance of those questions reveals much about your fear -- that you really do not have that much confidence in what the Russians and Chinese claimed.



Answer: Americans know very well about the long wave problem of their VLO assets. They think the extra benefit against fire control radars is well worth the extra financial effort. They are also wise enough to know that the F-117 would be ineffective against a near-peer opponent today and is a very cost inefficient system.
They also know that their stealth is highly effective against all the countries, except for those who are at near-peer level.
So in total: Stealth is a very expensive but certainly good to have capability and still you will never attack a asset like the S-400 due to it.

Btw. Chinese only became mature in IADS in the 2000's if you ask me.



gambit said:


> Yes, you have underestimated US in this debate. War is not a boxing match where both contestants fights within boundaries. We do not care if people mock US for using outsized quantity of X weapons against a target. If a fly needed to be killed and all we have is a rocket, we will use that rocket to kill that fly if such an action will help win the war.



Ok if this is your explanation of the 70 CMs on one building complex issue, good for you. I believe the Russians here: At best 20 were for that target, the rest were shot down when they attempted to target more critical targets protected by Buk an Pantsir. This is the wake up call for the U.S, the first such case, just like the F-117 was the first such case back then.

@BlueInGreen2 

Mesbah-2 is the designation for the 8 barrel variant, as far as I remember.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


> very well articulated... Well said about the hubris of IRI and the prevailing ignorance amongst those who falsely assume, wish really, that IRI will be the David that brought down the US Goliath.


i see your mother want those camel more than one time maybe million she have good time yes no problem your boss and home soudi arabia has more camel and you can work with pigs di ck


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD IEI have updated their site, you may be interested in this.

http://ieimil.ir/products/3d-radar-m4

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tajbakhsh



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD IEI have updated their site, you may be interested in this.
> 
> http://ieimil.ir/products/3d-radar-m4



Thanks, some observations:

- As expected Meraj-4 is a linear AESA. It is the Bavar-373's Bigbird equivalent, lower update rate but similarly advanced in all features.
Chinese just copied the Bigbird as most powerful mobile radar for LRSAM. Iran developed something new and made the step from PESA to AESA that could bring it to the brute force power of the Bigbird or even more (aperture size is the same).

- Fath-14 is described as 2D radar while the Matla ol Fajr 2 or even 1 have high finding capability. The step to a 3D beamforming AESA from the original Vostock radar seems to have not yet been mastered, hence the Fath-14 is as of now just a very large aperture Vostock (which itself seems to be just mechanical scanned array).

- Other important radars like the IRGC-ASF Bashir and Najm-802 are not offered for export.

- As expected Iran has a surface wave OTH radar, basically the asset to spot ships out to 400km to be targeted by Khalij Fars AshBMs.

- Practically all offered radars, down to the low cost ones have solid state transmitters, no tube hardware.

and more...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WordsMatter

PeeD said:


> Thanks, some observations:
> 
> - As expected Meraj-4 is a linear AESA. It is the Bavar-373's Bigbird equivalent, lower update rate but similarly advanced in all features.
> Chinese just copied the Bigbird as most powerful mobile radar for LRSAM. Iran developed something new and made the step from PESA to AESA that could bring it to the brute force power of the Bigbird or even more (aperture size is the same).
> 
> - Fath-14 is described as 2D radar while the Matla ol Fajr 2 or even 1 have high finding capability. The step to a 3D beamforming AESA from the original Vostock radar seems to have not yet been mastered, hence the Fath-14 is as of now just a very large aperture Vostock (which itself seems to be just mechanical scanned array).
> 
> - Other important radars like the IRGC-ASF Bashir and Najm-802 are not offered for export.
> 
> - As expected Iran has a surface wave OTH radar, basically the asset to spot ships out to 400km to be targeted by Khalij Fars AshBMs.
> 
> - Practically all offered radars, down to the low cost ones have solid state transmitters, no tube hardware.
> 
> and more...


LOL... then where are these weapons? Why not field them in Syria to protect your troops there?


----------



## sanel1412

WordsMatter said:


> LOL... then where are these weapons? Why not field them in Syria to protect your troops there?


Because that would be violation of JCPOA and embargo on weapons import/export...whic Iran want to avoid....at least they wanted before US withdraw from it..now who knows..any way there are lot of Iranian weapons in Syria...from M600,Noor AsCM,also Syria got some.radars from.Iran but this is provided directly to SAA. Iran troops.in Syria are there to support SAA,their nature is completly different than Hezbolah in Liban..ther is no tactical and strategic assests for deterance...Iran is achieved everything it desired...it got Iraq in it hands...PMU are there now part of Iraq armed forces...they have ground corridor from P.Gulf to Mediterranean sea...they are in Yemen on KSA border..Why would they respond to provocations when last 20 years everything goes as they want...Israel is seen that Asad is winning...they hoped fail of Syria will make them peace deal where occupation of Golan height would be legalized(now no one recognize it)...they also hoped they will kill 3 enemies with one shot..Syria as only remain Arab enemy...cut of Iran from Liban and Hezbollah supply line...but Instead now they are in 5 time worst postinion..not only Hezbollah and SAA are now much capable to fight...but also now they have 80000 Iranian troops on north...So...that is why Israel is provoking war...this is their last train to provoke war they can't win but they can force US to jump in...But Iran is not stupid....they will not jeopardize everything they fight for in last 40 year just because some idiots is asking this and that...any way if I'm Israel.I would.worry...no strategic deep...for them.even conventional misseles are existencional threat...no where to escape...thus now there is open corridor from Iran to their borders...
And let me tell you something ,even Arab governments are on same line with Israel when it comes to.Iran...if Israel attack.Iran...you can be sure they would have problems with their people...So let me put this in this way....Let say war start...Israel will have to fight in Israel vs Palestinians...they will fight on two borders ..Syrial and Liban...they could only swim..because Iran is not Egypt or Jordan....if war start you can be sure. there will.be war in hart of Israel...
Israel without USA has no any chance even in theory. ...they have around 100 aircrafts that can reach Iran and they would have to refuel whole fleet...let's say they put 60:40 ratio for escort vs bombers....Iran can cover this whole.fleet with 20 F14 and shot on them from 200km....even if they never hit anything only lunching on them would force whole fleet to throw fuel tanks and most weapons...It is simple mission impossible... I didn't even mention that one attack would not even scratch Iran...that is why they are trying so badly to force US to go to.war...it is because thay can only cry when it comes to Iran.
Iranian conventional misseles are for Israel more threat than Israel nukes for Iran....there is nothing on this planet that can compensate strategic deep and Israel size.
Arabs generals were idiots...now when you look how they fight against Israel...it is unbelievable. ..and truth is Israel beat them mostly because of their weakness not because of it strength even I give them credits for excellent strategy and acting in right time...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

No need to laugh.

Iran does war in a way that makes sense for it. The highest cost-effect ratio is required to make a intervention sustainable.
A sustainable war effort is the key to success. We are not Saudi Arabia.

High tech weapons and gear has most of the times requirements for other supporting systems and is often less cost-effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## nadeemkhan110

WordsMatter said:


> LOL... then where are these weapons? Why not field them in Syria to protect your troops there?


Rule#1: When ever you move your troops near to enemies always take your upgraded air defenced sytems with you.





Hq-9


----------



## WordsMatter

sanel1412 said:


> Because that would be violation of JCPOA and embargo on weapons import/export...whic Iran want to avoid....at least they wanted before US withdraw from it..now who knows..any way there are lot of Iranian weapons in Syria...from M600,Noor AsCM,also Syria got some.radars from.Iran but this is provided directly to SAA. Iran troops.in Syria are there to support SAA,their nature is completly different than Hezbolah in Liban..ther is no tactical and strategic assests for deterance...Iran is achieved everything it desired...it got Iraq in it hands...PMU are there now part of Iraq armed forces...they have ground corridor from P.Gulf to Mediterranean sea...they are in Yemen on KSA border..Why would they respond to provocations when last 20 years everything goes as they want...Israel is seen that Asad is winning...they hoped fail of Syria will make them peace deal where occupation of Golan height would be legalized(now no one recognize it)...they also hoped they will kill 3 enemies with one shot..Syria as only remain Arab enemy...cut of Iran from Liban and Hezbollah supply line...but Instead now they are in 5 time worst postinion..not only Hezbollah and SAA are now much capable to fight...but also now they have 80000 Iranian troops on north...So...that is why Israel is provoking war...this is their last train to provoke war they can't win but they can force US to jump in...But Iran is not stupid....they will not jeopardize everything they fight for in last 40 year just because some idiots is asking this and that...any way if I'm Israel.I would.worry...no strategic deep...for them.even conventional misseles are existencional threat...no where to escape...thus now there is open corridor from Iran to their borders...
> And let me tell you something ,even Arab governments are on same line with Israel when it comes to.Iran...if Israel attack.Iran...you can be sure they would have problems with their people...So let me put this in this way....Let say war start...Israel will have to fight in Israel vs Palestinians...they will fight on two borders ..Syrial and Liban...they could only swim..because Iran is not Egypt or Jordan....if war start you can be sure. there will.be war in hart of Israel...
> Israel without USA has no any chance even in theory. ...they have around 100 aircrafts that can reach Iran and they would have to refuel whole fleet...let's say they put 60:40 ratio for escort vs bombers....Iran can cover this whole.fleet with 20 F14 and shot on them from 200km....even if they never hit anything only lunching on them would force whole fleet to throw fuel tanks and most weapons...It is simple mission impossible... I didn't even mention that one attack would not even scratch Iran...that is why they are trying so badly to force US to go to.war...it is because thay can only cry when it comes to Iran.
> Iranian conventional misseles are for Israel more threat than Israel nukes for Iran....there is nothing on this planet that can compensate strategic deep and Israel size.
> Arabs generals were idiots...now when you look how they fight against Israel...it is unbelievable. ..and truth is Israel beat them mostly because of their weakness not because of it strength even I give them credits for excellent strategy and acting in right time...


You know people keep saying that Israel does not have any chance without the US, then thank god for the US that has always fully supported her allies, whether in war or peace. I also believe that Israel is fully capable of defeating Syria, and IRI. We are witnessing that already in Syria. There's no safe heaven for SAA or IRGC. On a daily basis this "axis" is getting her a** handed to her. Yes IRI is all talk and more talk. I take that back: IRI is talk, flag-burning in the parliament or streets (don't see the benefit of that TBH), state sponsored street demos. But when it comes to Israel she is nothing but impotent. 
This assertion that IRI can't send weapons to Syria is just untrue. IRI sends plenty of arms to Hizbullah and Syria, and she hasn't been that worried about violating the terms of JCPOA. You know it's one thing to claim "we have defeated ISIS", a rag-tag army of zealots and ideologues, *with the help of Russian air force*, but it's entirely a whole different ballgame when faced with one of the best armies in the world, aka Israel. People don't like to acknowledge that because they can'y stand the fact that a tiny country could achieve so much in so little time. Whether Israel uses American arms is irrelevant. Israel makes maximum use of these weapon.
People keep referring to Arabs as "idiots" on this thread. I am certain they are not. 
As for Israel being more afraid of IRI's long range missiles, vs IRI being afraid of Israel's nukes, I am not sure that's true either. Are you suggesting that conventional missiles can do more harm than nuclear ones?



PeeD said:


> No need to laugh.
> 
> Iran does war in a way that makes sense for it. The highest cost-effect ratio is required to make a intervention sustainable.
> A sustainable war effort is the key to success. We are not Saudi Arabia.
> 
> High tech weapons and gear has most of the times requirements for other supporting systems and is often less cost-effective.


Wait what?! At the end of the day you make war to win, achieve an objective, whether political or military. What is IRI's objective in Syria? To save Assad? At what price (blood and treasure)? IRI isn't the US to be able to spend $2T on a war (to save an ally). Syria is not Lebanon for IRI to walk in a vacuum and build another Hizbullah. 
How did the last "sustainable war effort" work out for IRI? I am referring to Iran-Iraq war. What was the damage at the end of 8 years of "sustainable" war effort? Essentially IRI was forced to a negotiating table without achieving a single objective. Remember that war? Was that a winning strategy?
IRI has had one victory in her entire existence, Hizbullah. And even that will be challenged very shortly. If you think IRI can stay in Syria you are mistaken. Assad will ask IRI "politely" to leave after he's done with her. And he will "thank you for your service" publicly, but that's all IRI will get. 
I am sure you will disagree with me, but had IRI invested JCPOA's windfall on Iranians and Iran, reformed her political system, had fought corruption at home, she would be in far better shape than she is today. Instead, she got smug and decided to throw her weight around. That's hubris.


----------



## TruthHurtz

WordsMatter said:


> You know people keep saying that Israel does not have any chance without the US, then thank god for the US that has always fully supported her allies, whether in war or peace. I also believe that Israel is fully capable of defeating Syria, and IRI. We are witnessing that already in Syria. There's no safe heaven for SAA or IRGC. On a daily basis this "axis" is getting her a** handed to her. Yes IRI is all talk and more talk. I take that back: IRI is talk, flag-burning in the parliament or streets (don't see the benefit of that TBH), state sponsored street demos. But when it comes to Israel she is nothing but impotent.
> This assertion that IRI can't send weapons to Syria is just untrue. IRI sends plenty of arms to Hizbullah and Syria, and she hasn't been that worried about violating the terms of JCPOA. You know it's one thing to claim "we have defeated ISIS", a rag-tag army of zealots and ideologues, *with the help of Russian air force*, but it's entirely a whole different ballgame when faced with one of the best armies in the world, aka Israel. People don't like to acknowledge that because they can'y stand the fact that a tiny country could achieve so much in so little time. Whether Israel uses American arms is irrelevant. Israel makes maximum use of these weapon.
> People keep referring to Arabs as "idiots" on this thread. I am certain they are not.
> As for Israel being more afraid of IRI's long range missiles, vs IRI being afraid of Israel's nukes, I am not sure that's true either. Are you suggesting that conventional missiles can do more harm than nuclear ones?
> 
> 
> Wait what?! At the end of the day you make war to win, achieve an objective, whether political or military. What is IRI's objective in Syria? To save Assad? At what price (blood and treasure)? IRI isn't the US to be able to spend $2T on a war (to save an ally). Syria is not Lebanon for IRI to walk in a vacuum and build another Hizbullah.
> How did the last "sustainable war effort" work out for IRI? I am referring to Iran-Iraq war. What was the damage at the end of 8 years of "sustainable" war effort? Essentially IRI was forced to a negotiating table without achieving a single objective. Remember that war? Was that a winning strategy?
> IRI has had one victory in her entire existence, Hizbullah. And even that will be challenged very shortly. If you think IRI can stay in Syria you are mistaken. Assad will ask IRI "politely" to leave after he's done with her. And he will "thank you for your service" publicly, but that's all IRI will get.
> I am sure you will disagree with me, but had IRI invested JCPOA's windfall on Iranians and Iran, reformed her political system, had fought corruption at home, she would be in far better shape than she is today. Instead, she got smug and decided to throw her weight around. That's hubris.



stop writing walls of text.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


> LOL... then where are these weapons? Why not field them in Syria to protect your troops there?


they are not in syria bic they are in your home to serve your mather and sister to have big di ck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

ashool said:


> they are not in syria bic they are in your home to serve your mather and sister to have big di ck


There is no need for insults....we are all here to express our opinions...it include also other people views which is oposite to our owns...I don't have anything against hot discussion but we should keep this on civilised level and avoid insults on personal level ... expecually taking on someones parents,sister or family...again this is just discussion....no need for going that hard


----------



## Parsipride

WordsMatter said:


> You know people keep saying that Israel does not have any chance without the US, then thank god for the US that has always fully supported her allies, whether in war or peace. I also believe that Israel is fully capable of defeating Syria, and IRI. We are witnessing that already in Syria. There's no safe heaven for SAA or IRGC. On a daily basis this "axis" is getting her a** handed to her. Yes IRI is all talk and more talk. I take that back: IRI is talk, flag-burning in the parliament or streets (don't see the benefit of that TBH), state sponsored street demos. But when it comes to Israel she is nothing but impotent.
> This assertion that IRI can't send weapons to Syria is just untrue. IRI sends plenty of arms to Hizbullah and Syria, and she hasn't been that worried about violating the terms of JCPOA. You know it's one thing to claim "we have defeated ISIS", a rag-tag army of zealots and ideologues, *with the help of Russian air force*, but it's entirely a whole different ballgame when faced with one of the best armies in the world, aka Israel. People don't like to acknowledge that because they can'y stand the fact that a tiny country could achieve so much in so little time. Whether Israel uses American arms is irrelevant. Israel makes maximum use of these weapon.
> People keep referring to Arabs as "idiots" on this thread. I am certain they are not.
> As for Israel being more afraid of IRI's long range missiles, vs IRI being afraid of Israel's nukes, I am not sure that's true either. Are you suggesting that conventional missiles can do more harm than nuclear ones?
> 
> 
> Wait what?! At the end of the day you make war to win, achieve an objective, whether political or military. What is IRI's objective in Syria? To save Assad? At what price (blood and treasure)? IRI isn't the US to be able to spend $2T on a war (to save an ally). Syria is not Lebanon for IRI to walk in a vacuum and build another Hizbullah.
> How did the last "sustainable war effort" work out for IRI? I am referring to Iran-Iraq war. What was the damage at the end of 8 years of "sustainable" war effort? Essentially IRI was forced to a negotiating table without achieving a single objective. Remember that war? Was that a winning strategy?
> IRI has had one victory in her entire existence, Hizbullah. And even that will be challenged very shortly. If you think IRI can stay in Syria you are mistaken. Assad will ask IRI "politely" to leave after he's done with her. And he will "thank you for your service" publicly, but that's all IRI will get.
> I am sure you will disagree with me, but had IRI invested JCPOA's windfall on Iranians and Iran, reformed her political system, had fought corruption at home, she would be in far better shape than she is today. Instead, she got smug and decided to throw her weight around. That's hubris.




*Israel Now Faces New Rules Of Engagement In Syria*

*Damascus has now signaled to Israel that its acts of aggression will be costly as Syrian leadership has shown a willingness to escalate. **But how did this new and increasingly dangerous situation come about, and which side actually has the upper hand *

*Below is a dispatch *authored and submitted by Elijah Magnier*, Middle East based chief international war correspondent for Al Rai Media, who is currently on the ground in the region and **has interviewed multiple officials involved in the conflict.*
Even as CNN is out with a new report condemning Iran for denying any responsibility or role in the latest massive exchange of fire between Israel and Syria, The New York Times has admitted (albeit buried deep in the story) that Israel was the actual aggressor and initiator of hostilities which threatened to spiral out of control overnight Wednesday and into Thursday morning.

While CNN and most Israeli and mainstream media sources blame Iran for initiating an attack on Israel, on the very day of the early morning strikes (Thursday), the Times acknowledged, "The barrage [of Syria/Iran missiles] came after an apparent Israeli missile strike against a village in the Syrian Golan Heights late Wednesday."

This is significant as Israel is seeking to cast Iran as an aggressor on its border which must be dealt with preemptively; however Syria's response—which involved between 20 and 50 missiles launched in return fire—imposed new rules of engagement on a situation in which Israel previously acted with impunity. 
*



*
Israeli F-15 fighter jet takes off in Negev desert. Image source: AFP via Middle East Eye

*



*
And though multiple international reports have pointed to strikes landing on the Israeli side, Israel has apparently been extremely careful in preventing photographs or video of any potential damage to see the light of day. According to professor of Middle East history Asad AbuKhalil, "Israel censor still hasn’t allowed any reports about casualties or damage."

Up until recently, Assad had not taken the bait of Israeli provocation for years now in what we previously described as a kind of "waiting game" of survival now, retaliation later. But with the Syrian Army now victorious around the Damascus suburbs and countryside, and with much of Syria's most populous regions back under government control, it appears that Assad's belated yet firm response to the Israeli large scale attack has changed the calculus. 

*
Israel hits Syrian and Iranian objectives and weapons warehouses again (evacuated weeks before) for the fourth time in a month. 28 Israeli jets participated in the biggest attack since 1974. Tel Aviv informed the Russian leadership of its intentions without succeeding in stopping the Syrian leadership from responding. Actually, what is new is the location where Damascus decided to hit back: the occupied Golan Heights (20 rockets were fired at Israeli military positions).

Syria, in coordination with its Iranian allies (without taking into consideration Russian wishes) took a very audacious decision to fire back against Israeli targets in the Golan. This indicates that Damascus and its allies are ready to widen the battle, in response to continual Israeli provocations.

But what is the reason why new Rules of Engagement (ROE) were imposed in Syria recently?

For decades there was a non-declared ROE between Hezbollah and Israel, where both sides were aware of the consequences. Usually, Israel prepares a bank of target objectives with Hezbollah offices, military objectives and warehouses and also specific commanders with key positions within the organization. Israel hits these targets, updated in every war. However, the Israelis react immediately against Hezbollah commanders, who have the task of supporting, instructing and financing Palestinians in Palestine, and above all the Palestinians of 1948 living in Israel. This has happened on many occasions where Hezbollah commanders related to the Palestinian dossier were assassinated in Lebanon.
*
Last month, Israel discovered that Iran was sending advanced low observable drones dropping electronic and special warfare equipment to Palestinians. The Israeli radars didn’t see these drones going backward and forward with their traditional radars, but were finally able to identify one drone using thermal detection and acoustic deterrence, to down it on its last journey.

In response to this, Israel targeted the Syrian military airport T-4 used by Iran as a base for these drones. But Israel was not satisfied and wanted to take further revenge, hitting several Iranian and Syrian targets during the following weeks.

*Tel Aviv believed it could get away with repetitively hitting Iranian objectives without triggering a military response.* Perhaps Israel really believed that Iran was afraid of becoming engaged in a war with Israel, with the US ready to take part in any war against the Islamic Republic from its military bases spread around Syria, in close vicinity to the Iranian forces deployed in Syria. Obviously, Iran has a different view from the Israelis, the Americans and even the Russians, who like to avoid any contact at all cost.

Regardless of how many Israeli jets took part in the latest attack against Iranian and Syrian objectives and how many missiles were launched or intercepted, *a serious development has occurred: the Syrian high command broke all pre-existing rules and found no obstacle to bombing Israel in the occupied Golan Heights.*

Again, the type of missiles or rockets fired by Syria against Israeli military objectives it is not important or whether these fell into an open space or hit their targets. What is important is the fact that *a new ROE is now in place in Syria*, similar to the one established by Hezbollah over Kiryat Shmona near the Lebanese border, when militants fired anti-aircraft cannons every time Israel violated Lebanese airspace in the 2000.

Basically Israel wanted to hit objectives in Syria but claims not to be looking for confrontation. Israel would have liked to continue provoking Syria and Iran in the Levant, but claims to be unwilling to head towards war or a battle. Israel would like to continue hitting any target it chooses in Syria without suffering retaliation.

*But with its latest attack, Israel’s “unintended consequences” or provocation has forced the Syrian government to consider the occupied Golan Heights as the next battlefield.* If Israel continues and hits beyond the border area, Syria will think of sending its missiles or rockets way beyond the Golan Heights to reach Israeli territory.

Actually, Hezbollah’s secretary general Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said a few years back: “Leave Lebanon outside the conflict. Come to Syria where we can settle our differences.” Syria, logically, has become the battlefield for all countries and parties to settle their differences, the platform where the silent war between Israel and Iran and its allies is finding its voice.

In Damascus, sources close to the leadership believe Israel will continue attacking targets. However, Israel knows now where Syria’s response will be.*This is what Israel has triggered but didn’t expect. Now it has become a rule.*

The Israeli Iron Dome is inefficient and unable to protect Israel from rockets and missiles launched simultaneously. Now the battle has moved into Syrian territory occupied by Israel to the reluctance of Tel Aviv, and Russia. Iran and Syria are not taking into consideration Russia’s concern to keep the level of tension low if Israel is not controlling itself. Syria recognizes the importance of Russia and its efficient role in stopping the war in Syria and all the military and political support Moscow is offering.

However, Damascus and Tehran have other considerations, especially the goal of containing Israel. They have trained over 16 local Syrian groups ready to liberate the Golan Heights or to clash with any possible Israeli advance into Syrian territory.

Israel triggered what it has always feared and has managed to get a new battlefield, the Golan heights. It is true that Israel limited itself to bombing weapons warehouses never hit before. It has bombed bases where Iranian advisors are based along with Syrian officers (Russia cleared most positions to avoid the embarrassment of being hit by Israel). It is also true that Israel didn’t regularly bomb Iranian military and transport aircraft carrying weapons to Syria, or the main Iranian center of control and command at Damascus airport. This means that not all parties are pushing for a wider escalation, so far.

Can the situation get out of control? Of course it can, the question is when?!?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashool

sanel1412 said:


> There is no need for insults....we are all here to express our opinions...it include also other people views which is oposite to our owns...I don't have anything against hot discussion but we should keep this on civilised level and avoid insults on personal level ... expecually taking on someones parents,sister or family...again this is just discussion....no need for going that hard


do you now him go and read every comment it writes he is only only insults iranian people leadership and produces its not insults this wahabi fail flag did you think its not soudi wahabi who hate iranian people so this animal deserve it to be insult in that level


----------



## sanel1412

ashool said:


> do you now him go and read every comment it writes he is only only insults iranian people leadership and produces its not insults this wahabi fail flag did you think its not soudi wahabi who hate iranian people so this animal deserve it to be insult in that level


I understand and such behive is reckognized..trust me..but any way...insults will not gain anything for you or them...it just throw wrong picture .Of course this is only frendly advice for all parties....you are free to do what ever you think it is best

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Moving swiftly on from certain people who keep trying to derail...



PeeD said:


> - As expected Meraj-4 is a linear AESA. It is the Bavar-373's Bigbird equivalent, lower update rate but similarly advanced in all features.
> Chinese just copied the Bigbird as most powerful mobile radar for LRSAM. Iran developed something new and made the step from PESA to AESA that could bring it to the brute force power of the Bigbird or even more (aperture size is the same).



Sorry for the tardy reply, but here I am. I remember you said Meraj-4 was a PESA. What now makes you think it is an AESA? The advanced features? The Irbis radar for the Su-35 also has AESA-like features, even though it is a PESA. 

The capabilities of such a large element (6000+) AESA must be quite significant. I'm guessing this radar can track an immense number of targets. You could probably hook up multiple Bavar-373 systems to a single Meraj-4.

The only thing we need to wait for now is the full unveiling with launch of the Bavar-373. They've held that back for far too long.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Im curious how potent B-373 will be, if it will be on par with the export downdgraded S-300 PMU2, which I personally doubt
Iran made in the last 10 years dramatic steps forward in homegrown AD systems, but I think it will take another 5-10 to have something potent like the export PMU-2
Also very curious if Iran will have its own reverse engineered Tor/Pantsir systems
And hows the progress with Mersad/Raad/Herz 9? Any ideas?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Draco.IMF said:


> Im curious how potent B-373 will be, if it will be on par with the export downdgraded S-300 PMU2, which I personally doubt
> Iran made in the last 10 years dramatic steps forward in homegrown AD systems, but I think it will take another 5-10 to have something potent like the export PMU-2
> Also very curious if Iran will have its own reverse engineered Tor/Pantsir systems
> And hows the progress with Mersad/Raad/Herz 9? Any ideas?


There is no such thing as export downgraded S-300PMU2 ...PMU2 IS export version of S-300 ...and it shares same technology from S-400 ,it is only version that can be upgraded to S-400 without replacing hardware....Here is good reference about PMU2 protracted developemnt and migration S-400 technology to PMU2.
Any way this is reason why Iran has insisted on this version...even when Russians claimed they don't produce any more version that Iran ordered in 2007...in that time most recent version available for export was PMU1...but this technology is replaced with S-400 and Russians also developed PMU2 on same S-400 technology because they wanted to make both versions to share same components which makes it easy for integration and upgrades...

"The best technical discussion of design of the S-300PMU2 to date is a recent article by Alexander Ryazanov, Chief Designer, Vitaliy Semenov, Chief Designer, Almaz-Antey, and Dr Anatoliy Sumin, consultant to Almaz-Antey, published in the Russian language Vozdushno-Kosmicheskaya Oborona journal, No 2 . Follow on articles by other authors expand on this analysis *Ryazanov state that the S-300PMU2 began as a “deep modernisation” or technology insertion upgrade to the existing S-300PM/PMU1 / SA-20A design, and state trials (Russian OpEval) were completed in 2007. The protracted development of the S-300PMU2 resulted in technology migration from the concurrent but more advanced S-400 Triumf / SA-21. The intent was to maximise commonality in as many components as possible, between the S-300PMU2 Favorit and S-400 Triumf*."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> Im curious how potent B-373 will be, if it will be on par with the export downdgraded S-300 PMU2, which I personally doubt
> Iran made in the last 10 years dramatic steps forward in homegrown AD systems, but I think it will take another 5-10 to have something potent like the export PMU-2
> Also very curious if Iran will have its own reverse engineered Tor/Pantsir systems
> And hows the progress with Mersad/Raad/Herz 9? Any ideas?


Well I doubt it they planning to do anything about pantsir/tor just now by what we see in recent years it seems Iran right now is playing with Crotale as we can see with Herz9 system


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Moving swiftly on from certain people who keep trying to derail...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the tardy reply, but here I am. I remember you said Meraj-4 was a PESA. What now makes you think it is an AESA? The advanced features? The Irbis radar for the Su-35 also has AESA-like features, even though it is a PESA.
> 
> The capabilities of such a large element (6000+) AESA must be quite significant. I'm guessing this radar can track an immense number of targets. You could probably hook up multiple Bavar-373 systems to a single Meraj-4.
> 
> The only thing we need to wait for now is the full unveiling with launch of the Bavar-373. They've held that back for far too long.



Early on I classified the Meraj-4 as PESA to be conservative. But when I saw extensive cooling on-array I realized that it is a AESA and stated so a while ago.
The Meraj-4 has a transceiver for every horizontal element line. So it is a 40 element AESA but each of those elements control something less than 100 "PESA elements". This is not something new, U.S L-band early warning radars for example work the same way. But this concept is different to the Irbis "PESA+" method.
The Meraj-4 is simply said a real AESA, but not a individual element one. It is stated to be a solid state active array on the IEI website, hence it is even officially confirmed.

Single face element count is the same as the tube technology PESA Bigbird.
Like the Bigbird, it tracks many targets, yes and can likely control something like 4 Bavar-373 batteries.

Najm-802 on the other hand is a full AESA for each element, but most likely not as powerful as the Meraj-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

PeeD said:


> Early on I classified the Meraj-4 as PESA to be conservative. But when I saw extensive cooling on-array I realized that it is a AESA and stated so a while ago.
> The Meraj-4 has a transceiver for every horizontal element line. So it is a 40 element AESA but each of those elements control something less than 100 "PESA elements". This is not something new, U.S L-band early warning radars for example work the same way. But this concept is different to the Irbis "PESA+" method.
> The Meraj-4 is simply said a real AESA, but not a individual element one. It is stated to be a solid state active array on the IEI website, hence it is even officially confirmed.
> 
> Single face element count is the same as the tube technology PESA Bigbird.
> Like the Bigbird, it tracks many targets, yes and can likely control something like 4 Bavar-373 batteries.
> 
> Najm-802 on the other hand is a full AESA for each element, but most likely not as powerful as the Meraj-4.


Wow, really AESA?


----------



## Blue In Green

Draco.IMF said:


> Im curious how potent B-373 will be, if it will be on par with the export downdgraded S-300 PMU2, which I personally doubt
> Iran made in the last 10 years dramatic steps forward in homegrown AD systems, but I think it will take another 5-10 to have something potent like the export PMU-2
> Also very curious if Iran will have its own reverse engineered Tor/Pantsir systems
> And hows the progress with Mersad/Raad/Herz 9? Any ideas?



Not to come off as brutish but everyone and their mothers have been wondering about the efficacy of the Bavar-373. The wait is killing a lot of us who've been waiting for what seems like eons...

Personally I would like to see a fairly large amount of these systems being made. Whether or not Iran can actually produce them in a respectable amount remains to be seen. The more "advanced" the system, the more difficult it is to produce. 

Always wondered myself want Irans actual military production output of high-quality weaponry is (but I fully don't suspect getting a straight answer since that would be somewhat of a security concern).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

what do you guys think of this article by tom cooper? 

http://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

TruthHurtz said:


> what do you guys think of this article by tom cooper?
> 
> http://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft/


I remember reading this back when it was published,I`d actually forgotten all about it to tell you the truth.I can remember when I first read it being pretty shocked at the number of mistakes,often really silly ones,what made it even worse was that Tom Cooper was generally considered to be one of the more reliable authors out there when it came to the iranian airforce and its performance during the iran-iraq war and his books on the subject were generally considered to be the go to source.But as for these articles,well honestly if I didnt know any better I`d swear a certain other "military journalist" wrote it,you know the one I mean.


----------



## TruthHurtz

Fafnir said:


> I remember reading this back when it was published,I`d actually forgotten all about it to tell you the truth.I can remember when I first read it being pretty shocked at the number of mistakes,often really silly ones,what made it even worse was that Tom Cooper was generally considered to be one of the more reliable authors out there when it came to the iranian airforce and its performance during the iran-iraq war and his books on the subject were generally considered to be the go to source.But as for these articles,well honestly if I didnt know any better I`d swear a certain other "military journalist" wrote it,you know the one I mean.



i'm only decently versed in iranian military equipment but even i can point out he made many mistakes within the article, i wonder if he uses the same sources taghvaee does? lol. he switches from praising the ingenuity and originality of the systems to claiming they are flat out imports from china which is confusing. there's not even a comment section or email provided where you can contest/question his assertions, it's entirely closed opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fafnir

TruthHurtz said:


> i'm only decently versed in iranian military equipment but even i can point out he made many mistakes within the article, i wonder if he uses the same sources taghvaee does? lol. he switches from praising the ingenuity and originality of the systems to claiming they are flat out imports from china which is confusing. there's not even a comment section or email provided where you can contest/question his assertions, it's entirely closed opinion.


Yes,thats exactly what I felt.The whole thing came off kind of weird in tone,as tho he couldnt quite make up his mind whether to rubbish irans efforts or to be somewhat impressed,it was almost as if he was trying to adopt every single viewpoint on irans capabilities ie: iran is sh!t,iran isnt shit its actually pretty good,iran is pretty good but thats only thanks to china and without that iran would be shit,so yeah,its an odd one.


----------



## TruthHurtz

Fafnir said:


> Yes,thats exactly what I felt.The whole thing came off kind of weird in tone,as tho he couldnt quite make up his mind whether to rubbish irans efforts or to be somewhat impressed,it was almost as if he was trying to adopt every single viewpoint on irans capabilities ie: iran is sh!t,iran isnt shit its actually pretty good,iran is pretty good but thats only thanks to china and without that iran would be shit,so yeah,its an odd one.



I think the compromise here is that, yes iran owes many of it's capabilities to chinese (and to an extent russian) assistance starting from the end of the iran-iraq war, but since the turn of the decade iran has invested more effort into designing and manufacturing domestic equipment as part of your supreme leaders "resistance economy" policy. the newer systems may involve some chinese assistance, which is no problem because it shortens development time and cuts down on cost among other advantages.

when it comes to military analysts on iran, in a weird way i have found israelis like uzi rubin to paint a more accurate picture. perhaps because the israelis like to hype up iranian capabilities in order to prompt a western response, while on the other hand western analysts like to downplay iranian capabilities to save face on their own capabilities (imagine claiming anything but a curbstomp to your people).


----------



## AmirPatriot

@Draco.IMF @BlueInGreen2 with the sorts of things we are saying I do think Bavar-373 is actually similar and in some areas even better than the S-300. The missile looks to have a similar or better range, all its dedicated radars are AESA, which the S-300 lacks. I say dedicated because both the Bavar and S-300 can be hooked up to longer range long waveband radars like the Matla ul Fajr and Nebo SVU, which are PESAs and AESAs respectively. But those radars are not specifically for these systems.

The S-300 has its own advantages, like better ABM capability, TVC, and a bit better mobility (Meraj-4 is not mounted on an all terrain truck), and the Russians are famed for their ECM/ECCM which Iran may not be as good as them. But overall it looks like a great system and Iran should really get down to the business of deploying it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

AmirPatriot said:


> @Draco.IMF @BlueInGreen2 with the sorts of things we are saying I do think Bavar-373 is actually similar and in some areas even better than the S-300. The missile looks to have a similar or better range, all its dedicated radars are AESA, which the S-300 lacks. I say dedicated because both the Bavar and S-300 can be hooked up to longer range long waveband radars like the Matla ul Fajr and Nebo SVU, which are PESAs and AESAs respectively. But those radars are not specifically for these systems.
> 
> The S-300 has its own advantages, like better ABM capability, TVC, and a bit better mobility (Meraj-4 is not mounted on an all terrain truck), and the Russians are famed for their ECM/ECCM which Iran may not be as good as them. But overall it looks like a great system and Iran should really get down to the business of deploying it.



what did you think of tom cooper's recent "analysis" in above posts?


----------



## zartosht

sanel1412 said:


> I understand and such behive is reckognized..trust me..but any way...insults will not gain anything for you or them...it just throw wrong picture .Of course this is only frendly advice for all parties....you are free to do what ever you think it is best



i was trying to avoid posting to not add to the problem. but will waste a post to briefly state that normally you are right........... *but *this absolute parasite is an exception.

this is an excellent thread, with in depth knowledge of air defense systems. and you are reading and learning about interesting things. and in the middle this pathetic troll loser without a life comes along with his trolling and ridiculous insulting of anything iran. it kills the mood of the thread, derails it, and you get a whole bunch of unrelated posts that bring the overall quality down. 

This parasite insults and trolls everything iran to compenstate for his pathetic life. The least he can do is have a little courtesy and keep his trolling out of high quality stickied threads. I think he deliberately does it to annoy people and get a reaction at this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

TruthHurtz said:


> what did you think of tom cooper's recent "analysis" in above posts?



I'd read it a while ago, I thought it would be good because it's Tom Cooper but like you guys I did spot some mistakes and odd assertions.


----------



## yavar

http://uupload.ir/files/1p2n_3d_radar_m4.jpg






*3D Radar M4*
*3D Air Surveillance Radar*
This three-dimensional air surveillance radar is a tactical, long range, fighter interceptor system with active phase array antenna; early warning; and ECCM capabilities operating in S band. It is developed to meet the primary requirement of the first stage of air defense network. The tactical and mobility feature of the system as well as reducing number of operators and organizations in charge can be regarded as an end user strategy element. Air targets intelligence which is detected by different sensors such as tracking radars , medium and short range radars are transferred to a command and control shelter via a secure network and will be combined in that center.

*Features*
*Burn Through: concentrating the power in the direction of the active jammer in order to increase the radar range in the direction of the active jammer
*SLB: blanking the active input jamming signals from the side lobe
*SLC: cancelling the active input jamming signals from the side lobe
*Frequency hopping: random selection of radar operating frequency to encounter active and passive jammers
*JATS: smart selection of radar operating frequency by analyzing the active jamming signals
*Pulse Compression: standing against active jammers and providing the radar with capability of low probability interception (LPI)
*CFAR: standing against passive jammers and determining the automatic threshold level.
*Clutter Map: standing against passive jammers and cancelling the surface strong clutter
*Low SLL Antenna: standing against Anti Radiation Missile (ARM) and passive jammers
*Sector Blanking (Transmission Switch off): turning off the transmitter in Standby mode in order to hide radar from interception equipment and also keep it safe against Anti *Radiation Missile (ARM)
*Pulse Doppler Mode: standing against the passive jammers like chaff and better cancellation of volume clutter

http://www.ieimil.ir/products/3d-radar-m4

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tokhme khar

This Bavar system is a very commendable effort by Iran. Millions of hours of R&D, testing, configuration, modifications and commissioning. It really is about time to induct it in service. Surprised they haven't got a dedicated proper 'package' arrangement for it as the Russian methodology of dedicated off road robust vehicle based systems. Eventually though, it is headed that way. Iran needs to move away from commercial highway tractor/ trailer/ shipping container based systems into more professional dedicated military fit for purpose vehicle design's, like the Russians have.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

Tokhme khar said:


> This Bavar system is a very commendable effort by Iran. Millions of hours of R&D, testing, configuration, modifications and commissioning. It really is about time to induct it in service. Surprised they haven't got a dedicated proper 'package' arrangement for it as the Russian methodology of dedicated off road robust vehicle based systems. Eventually though, it is headed that way. Iran needs to move away from commercial highway tractor/ trailer/ shipping container based systems into more professional dedicated military fit for purpose vehicle design's, like the Russians have.



the zafar and zolijaneh trucks were designed as dedicated off road military vehicles. plus civilian trucks can act as a disguise for military equipment if covered properly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tokhme khar

many Iranian rocket systems and even this Bavar so far are based on commercial lorry trucks chassis. They offer no protection at all, even from small arms fire, and basically no off road capabilities. The least they could do is just copy the Maz-543 or the Luna/ Frog-7 TEL or even the Scud TEL's and develop them further as a basis for local military vehicles. Seeing an Iveco or Mercedes lorry truck is an adhoc solution. Good for paved roads only.



TruthHurtz said:


> the zafar and zolijaneh trucks were designed as dedicated off road military vehicles. plus civilian trucks can act as a disguise for military equipment if covered properly.


----------



## HamWatan

Iran has s300 or s400?


----------



## Ich

HamWatan said:


> Iran has s300 or s400?



Iran have Bavar 373.


----------



## skyshadow

HamWatan said:


> Iran has s300 or s400?



s300 pmu2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

HamWatan said:


> Iran has s300 or s400?



Iran has the S-300 PMU-2

Iran also produces a wide variety of SAM systems 
Shahab thaqeb/Herz-9/Ya Zahra (Iranian versions of the Chinese HQ-7 & Crotale)

Shahin/Mersad (Iranian upgraded version of the HAWK)







Raad/3rd of Khordad/Tabas are various Iranian versions of the Russian BuK SAM systems





Sayyad-1 Which is an Iranian version of the Russian SA-2 (Not produced anymore)

Sayyad-2/Talash Which is an Iranian upgraded version of the U.S. SM-1 Standard 






Sayyad 3C which is an upgraded Sayyad-2





And finally the Bavar-373 that's under development and has started testing phase

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 475175
> View attachment 475176
> View attachment 475177
> View attachment 475178



The 2nd image could have been a game changing Iranian project. To develop a 5th generation F-14 inspired fighter jet. It would
be smaller in size, but as the picture demonstrates would still have swept Wing capability for fast interception during supersonic flight.

Still baffles me today, I still remember what one of the engineers said during the F-313 project. That they offered the Supreme Leader any fighter to reverse engineer in their possession including F-14, but that the SL said to make a brand new fighter.

Then Iran decided to go with F-313, which seemed like a weird version of China’s J-20.

I still think the F-313 would ultimately go under a major revamp if it ever reaches mass production.

But the real reason it won’t get to mass production is that the Iranian airforce is extremely picky about their fighter jets and they won’t commit to a unproven platform. They won’t even accept Chinese fighters do to their inferiority to western and Russian fighters.

Only IRGC is willing to take risks when it comes to new projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> To develop a 5th generation F-14 inspired fighter jet. It would
> be smaller in size, but as the picture demonstrates would still have swept Wing capability for fast interception during supersonic flight.



Wing design has reached a point where a fixed wing on an F-15 can go up to Mach 2.5. And anyway the main reason the F-14 has swing wings was because it was very heavy and needed straight wings to fly slow enough to land on the deck of a carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> Wing design has reached a point where a fixed wing on an F-15 can go up to Mach 2.5. And anyway the main reason the F-14 has swing wings was because it was very heavy and needed straight wings to fly slow enough to land on the deck of a carrier.


Well I doubt an f15 deriviate design ever be able to land on a carrier even f35 could not do it without vtol .

By the way I always taught when you land on a carrier you must hit the deck at a reasonably fast speed otherwise if you miss the wire you are heading for a nice diving into ocean because there is no time to power up engine if you are too slow .


----------



## sanel1412

Hello..for those people who still don't know ..Iran Military Forum is live ,everyone is welcome to join..forum also has general military forum section for topics non-related to Iran military..also it has non-military forum section...Ther is also suggestion topic opened where users can suggest forum sections for other armed forces or forum section for anything they think we should add.Any way I have few cupons for domains left at my registrar and these are 100% discounts for first year so I would give those domains for free in next few days to our users and users who join in in next few days so I would call anyone who wants free domain for one year ...you need only register and members will be awarded randomly(program will pull user IDs from database)..only requirement is that user has minimum 1 post...Domain extensions available are .it , .pl , .eu , co.uk and also will be one or two newTLDs .Also this is not all I will open giveways for some software licenses and also for online programming academies and few other things...so if you need domain join and register http://iran-military.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

Hack-Hook said:


> Well I doubt an f15 deriviate design ever be able to land on a carrier even f35 could not do it without vtol .



Actually the F-35C can, but that is besides the point. Carrier capability is not exactly a pressing concern for Iran.


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> Actually the F-35C can, but that is besides the point. Carrier capability is not exactly a pressing concern for Iran.


Agree that its not a pressing matter for Iran . but don't forget the shorter runway your plane can use to flight then your mission planner can be more creative and its harder for enemy to disable your air force.
By the way not all carrier can be used with f35c your carrier must be able to support airplanes that need CATOBAR equipment and I guess not all of them come with the options it means it can only operate from Nimitz, Gerald R. Ford and Charles du Gaulle and well currently they plane to use it in only Gerald R. Ford.


----------



## Parsipride

sanel1412 said:


> Hello..for those people who still don't know ..Iran Military Forum is live ,everyone is welcome to join..forum also has general military forum section for topics non-related to Iran military..also it has non-military forum section...Ther is also suggestion topic opened where users can suggest forum sections for other armed forces or forum section for anything they think we should add.Any way I have few cupons for domains left at my registrar and these are 100% discounts for first year so I would give those domains for free in next few days to our users and users who join in in next few days so I would call anyone who wants free domain for one year ...you need only register and members will be awarded randomly(program will pull user IDs from database)..only requirement is that user has minimum 1 post...Domain extensions available are .it , .pl , .eu , co.uk and also will be one or two newTLDs .Also this is not all I will open giveways for some software licenses and also for online programming academies and few other things...so if you need domain join and register http://iran-military.com



Something is wrong with the formatting in the new forum. I have tried to post but it turns my posts into HTML

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Parsipride said:


> Something is wrong with the formatting in the new forum. I have tried to post but it turns my posts into HTML


Post some screenshots of the posting editor in this thread and we should be able to help you. You can just send an Imgur link or upload them if the standard method also turns them to HTML.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parsipride

AmirPatriot said:


> Post some screenshots of the posting editor in this thread and we should be able to help you. You can just send an Imgur link or upload them if the standard method also turns them to HTML.


----------



## AmirPatriot

Parsipride said:


> View attachment 475467



We're going off topic in this thread... go to this thread: http://iran-military.com/thread-59.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Parsipride said:


> Something is wrong with the formatting in the new forum. I have tried to post but it turns my posts into HTML


Hello,nothing is wrong..it is just option "HTML in posts" is allowed and if you copy/paste formated content you just need click source before pasting because when you copy content,it also copy html tags..but I will propably disable HTML in posts any way since no one use it and...also tonight I will add 2 reaponsive themes and some new features


----------



## Draco.IMF

I read that Iranians deployed Air Defense Systems in Syria, allegedly very effective
Curious which one, rumors say 3rd Khordad (RAAD)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Draco.IMF said:


> I read that Iranians deployed Air Defense Systems in Syria, allegedly very effective
> Curious which one, rumors say 3rd Khordad (RAAD)


And how do they describe effective? What has it shot down? Do you know?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> And how do they describe effective? What has it shot down? Do you know?



It is based on the BUK system, go look up BUK system capabilities and track record.

But again the AA system is only as good as the radars it uses to locate and target the enemy along with the competency of the air defense crew.

But anyway rumors are Israel has destroyed Iranian BUK, Tor-M1, and even Bavar 373.

No way to verify claims.

I would expect Iranian BUK variants to make a debut that is realistic. Tor-m1 and Bavar is propaganda. Iran has only a limited amount of Tor systems and they are protecting high value sights in Iran as a last line of defense (since it’s a short range system). 

And Bavar is not yet complete and Iran moving a prototype system into a contested war theater would be pretty aggressive move.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> It is based on the BUK system, go look up BUK system capabilities and track record.
> 
> But again the AA system is only as good as the radars it uses to locate and target the enemy along with the competency of the air defense crew.
> 
> But anyway rumors are Israel has destroyed Iranian BUK, Tor-M1, and even Bavar 373.
> 
> No way to verify claims.
> 
> I would expect Iranian BUK variants to make a debut that is realistic. Tor-m1 and Bavar is propaganda. Iran has only a limited amount of Tor systems and they are protecting high value sights in Iran as a last line of defense (since it’s a short range system).
> 
> And Bavar is not yet complete and Iran moving a prototype system into a contested war theater would be pretty aggressive move.


If they have hit any bavar or tor or any other iranian airdefence missile we had seen photos of it just like the pants or photo they spread over the net.



Draco.IMF said:


> I read that Iranians deployed Air Defense Systems in Syria, allegedly very effective
> Curious which one, rumors say 3rd Khordad (RAAD)


They really need to use the vehicle for a system like herz-9 and put 8-10 missile over it instead of 2 missile.

Really a system with only two missiles is really ineffective against modern threats .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> If they have hit any bavar or tor or any other iranian airdefence missile we had seen photos of it just like the pants or photo they spread over the net.
> 
> 
> They really need to use the vehicle for a system like herz-9 and put 8-10 missile over it instead of 2 missile.
> 
> Really a system with only two missiles is really ineffective against modern threats .



That is simply the angle of the picture makes it appear as two, pretty sure most BUKs can carry 4 missiles. And they are meant to operate with other BUKs just like any other air defense system. So if you have 4 or 5 BUKs in a formation, they can target 16-20 targets before reloading.

You are also confusing the purpose of anBUK with a short range system like TOR-M1/Pantsir.

Furthermore, if Israel did target a BUK Iranian variant or Bavar prototype then there would not be pictures. Iran would quickly remove any evidence of the damaged system and since Israel is generally pretty secretive about air strikes they probably wouldn’t release any footage (if they had any).


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/860003/سوابق-فرمانده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-عکس

http://snn.ir/fa/news/688248/فرماند...ایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-آجا-را-بیشتر-بشناسید-تصاویر


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/860003/سوابق-فرمانده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-عکس
> 
> http://snn.ir/fa/news/688248/فرمانده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-آجا-را-بیشتر-بشناسید-تصاویر


Utter retardation from SL

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> That is simply the angle of the picture makes it appear as two, pretty sure most BUKs can carry 4 missiles. And they are meant to operate with other BUKs just like any other air defense system. So if you have 4 or 5 BUKs in a formation, they can target 16-20 targets before reloading.
> 
> You are also confusing the purpose of anBUK with a short range system like TOR-M1/Pantsir.
> 
> Furthermore, if Israel did target a BUK Iranian variant or Bavar prototype then there would not be pictures. Iran would quickly remove any evidence of the damaged system and since Israel is generally pretty secretive about air strikes they probably wouldn’t release any footage (if they had any).


there is no confusing I'm talking about using the vehicle for Herz-9 which can carry only 2 missile





and the video will be taken by the missile itself or the aircraft which fired the missile at the time there wont be any time to remove the remain of the system.


----------



## VEVAK

AmirPatriot said:


> We're going off topic in this thread... go to this thread: http://iran-military.com/thread-59.html



Cherra "Banned" shodi?


----------



## N_Al40

Stryker1982 said:


> Utter retardation from SL



Agreed, I'm absolutely perplexed


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> there is no confusing I'm talking about using the vehicle for Herz-9 which can carry only 2 missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the video will be taken by the missile itself or the aircraft which fired the missile at the time there wont be any time to remove the remain of the system.


Well seems you're confused. ..Herz9 use same luncher as Fm80/Croatle/Ya-Zahra and it carry 4 missiles not 2...just you see 2 containers it doesn't mean it is full capacity. .

Here is image from Herz9 unveiling ceremony,as you can see it carry 4 missile tubes but you can attach 1,2,3 or 4
https://s33.postimg.cc/u9b3uxl67/ir...rce_uav_fighter_jet_sophisticated_air_def.jpg
And that is not so important, most important fact is how many targets it can engage simultaneously.., how many lunchers can be controlled with one fire unit...everything else is built based on these facts...There is reason why one Buk battery has 4 Tels...one with radar and 3 without(just like you saw Iranian raad..some with radar and rest without).This is due fact that one FCS unit control.4 TELs.. .and you need only one TEL with FCS radar to control 4 TELs...but for redundancy mostly 2 or even all carry radars in combat...also one Kasta 2M or Protivnik radar are placed on battalion level as search and acquisition radar.So one tel is not really that important as long you have system capable to engage simultaneously many targets...you can always add more TELs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Well seems you're confused. ..Herz9 use same luncher as Fm80/Croatle/Ya-Zahra and it carry 4 missiles not 2...just you see 2 containers it doesn't mean it is full capacity. .
> 
> Here is image from Herz9 unveiling ceremony,as you can see it carry 4 missile tubes but you can attach 1,2,3 or 4
> https://s33.postimg.cc/u9b3uxl67/ir...rce_uav_fighter_jet_sophisticated_air_def.jpg
> And that is not so important, most important fact is how many targets it can engage simultaneously.., how many lunchers can be controlled with one fire unit...everything else is built based on these facts...There is reason why one Buk battery has 4 Tels...one with radar and 3 without(just like you saw Iranian raad..some with radar and rest without).This is due fact that one FCS unit control.4 TELs.. .and you need only one TEL with FCS radar to control 4 TELs...but for redundancy mostly 2 or even all carry radars in combat...also one Kasta 2M or Protivnik radar are placed on battalion level as search and acquisition radar.So one tel is not really that important as long you have system capable to engage simultaneously many targets...you can always add more TELs


Please don't confuse Ya-Zahra with Herz-9 
Ya-Zahra is a towed system with 4 missile while Herz-9 is a self propelled system with only 2 missile .


----------



## azbaroj

TheImmortal said:


> That is simply the angle of the picture makes it appear as two, pretty sure most BUKs can carry 4 missiles. And they are meant to operate with other BUKs just like any other air defense system. So if you have 4 or 5 BUKs in a formation, they can target 16-20 targets before reloading.
> 
> You are also confusing the purpose of anBUK with a short range system like TOR-M1/Pantsir.
> 
> Furthermore, if Israel did target a BUK Iranian variant or Bavar prototype then there would not be pictures. Iran would quickly remove any evidence of the damaged system and since Israel is generally pretty secretive about air strikes they probably wouldn’t release any footage (if they had any).


Israelis proudly release the footage of hitting a pantsir , they will do the same in case of IR air defence systems .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

The Herz-9 can obviously carry more missiles. That's just a given. The one shown is obviously a prototype or something



Hack-Hook said:


> there is no confusing I'm talking about using the vehicle for Herz-9 which can carry only 2 missile


----------



## Hack-Hook

sha ah said:


> The Herz-9 can obviously carry more missiles. That's just a given. The one shown is obviously a prototype or something


maybe the system can support more , but here the limit is truck itself .


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/860003/سوابق-فرمانده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-عکس
> 
> http://snn.ir/fa/news/688248/فرمانده-جدید-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیاء-آجا-را-بیشتر-بشناسید-تصاویر

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Are Herz-9 and Ya-Zahra were mobile platform SAM?


----------



## timmy_area51

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Are Herz-9 and Ya-Zahra were mobile platform SAM?



Rather towed not self propelled.



07_SeppDietrich said:


> Are Herz-9 and Ya-Zahra were mobile platform SAM?


everything in iran is towed .
with your euro trucks of course .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Lol


----------



## Hack-Hook

timmy_area51 said:


> Rather towed not self propelled.
> 
> 
> everything in iran is towed .
> with your euro trucks of course .


Herz-9 is self propelled and the truck look chinese


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

What does he said @yavar ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Lol almost 2 years, they said B-373 will put in service in next persian new year and we already pass 2 persian new year but IRI just said it's still being tested,so when it will put in service?2020?2035???


----------



## OldTwilight

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Lol almost 2 years, they said B-373 will put in service in next persian new year and we already pass 2 persian new year but IRI just said it's still being tested,so when it will put in service?2020?2035???



We have a Persian verb which typical translation of it is : " A Real man won't change his words " /// look like IR politicians are REAL MAN ... they don't change their first words in past 38 years ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Lol almost 2 years, they said B-373 will put in service in next persian new year and we already pass 2 persian new year but IRI just said it's still being tested,so when it will put in service?2020?2035???


due to lack of funds *all of defensive projects are delayed*, nonetheless the last news was that construction of B373 is finished and defense ministry and Army are working together to make it operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Lol almost 2 years, they said B-373 will put in service in next persian new year and we already pass 2 persian new year but IRI just said it's still being tested,so when it will put in service?2020?2035???



When it's ready!!!


----------



## TheImmortal

Based on everything that is shown the Bavar 373 is clearly a real and functioning project.

But people have unrealistic expectations, to expect a sophisticated air defense system to be ready in under a decade is UNREALISTIC.

No doubt there are some prototypes in service right now with Iran’s air defense force, but many bugs and kinks need to be worked out before mass deployment. Not to mention the training of air defense crews on an entirely new system. 

Just look at Turkey! It has a well developed arms industry. Yet It’s armed forces gave up trying to develop a long range air defense system and opted for S-400.

Nonetheless Bavar will be deployed, but it is probably a few years away from mass production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Iran should move these to Syria to test the accuracy of weapons





















Anti Ship Weapons

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Iran should move these to Syria to test the accuracy of weapons
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anti Ship Weapons



Iran simply does not have the transport capability to deliver a battalion of air defense systems and supporting equipment and supply. Russia did it using both airplane and ships.

Plus Iran doesn’t have any true military base inside Syria. Thus it can not dictate who comes in and out. Spies exist in the SAA for sure.

Iran has already tried bringing in air defense systems, but With israel watching all Iranian flights into syria it’s hard to conceal such shipments from strikes.


----------



## TheMightyBender

B@KH said:


> Congrats Islamic IRAN and allies.
> 
> After failings in wars, Enemies amassed GCC to counter Islamic Iran that was their very bad strategy and later realized their mistake as Islamic IRAN is not comparable to that level. they thought of turkey and pak which is again wrong. even if the enemies bring in 100 turk and pak they cannot compete the capabilities of Islamic IRAN. That is the reason for the enemies to worry. Hope Islamic IRAN will go on with more advancement and is already continuing breaking the millennium old siege of the enemy everywhere and forcing and confusing enemy to change and redraw map again and again. there will be no catch up to Islamic IRAN.
> 
> Hats off for those working day and night to strengthen and progress the Islamic Revolution.


You said "Islamic Iran" so many times that now I wonder if there is a second Iran that is not Islamic.
Also, as a side note: muahahahahhaha

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

Bavar needs at least three more years to be ready something like that wont be ready that fast 
Iran doesn't have Russias capability in making sophisticated AD in less than 10 years no way
yet they made it to some level

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Malik Alashter said:


> Iran doesn't have Russias capability in making sophisticated AD in less than 10 years no way
> yet they made it to some level



It is ready. R&D and testing is done. All that remains now is deployment and mass production.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> It is ready. R&D and testing is done. All that remains now is deployment and mass production.



Bavar is as ready as then Fateh, which has been ready for the past 4 years.

You can’t tell anything from iranian press releases as they are merely propaganda.

Given the fact we haven’t even recieved the footage of it intercepting a BM missile yet (per Rouhanis requirements). It’s still in testing stages with senior units of the AD force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

07_SeppDietrich said:


> What does he said @yavar ?


Nothing special!!!!!!!!!! Just that the MOD is working towards producing a few Air Defense systems and Bavar is one of them and will soon be delivered! 
No clear timetable! and soon in Iran could mean anything!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar is as ready as then Fateh, which has been ready for the past 4 years.



Actually, there has been talk of some structural issues with the Fateh (I'm sure @VEVAK would tell you all about them very enthusiastically), but no such issues for Bavar as per latest statements by military officials.



TheImmortal said:


> You can’t tell anything from iranian press releases as they are merely propaganda.



You are partially right. Iranian press is often very unreliable, but the statements of actual high ranking military officials, especially the defence minister, are a good indication. For example, for Bavar-373 I think then-commander of the IRIADF, Farzad Esmaili, said that all tests had been completed and the IRIADF was waiting for MODAFL to produce the systems. SAIRAN at least seems to be able to make radars quite rapidly, judging by the number of radars visible outside their production centre.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

AmirPatriot said:


> You are partially right. Iranian press is often very unreliable, but the statements of actual high ranking military officials, especially the defence minister, are a good indication. For example, for Bavar-373 I think then-commander of the IRIADF, *Farzad Esmaili*, said that all tests had been completed and the IRIADF was waiting for MODAFL to produce the systems. SAIRAN at least seems to be able to make radars quite rapidly, judging by the number of radars visible outside their production centre.


He was faired after Israelis F35 flied over Iran in silence ...


----------



## raptor22

OldTwilight said:


> He was faired after Israelis F35 flied over Iran in silence ...


What is your proof?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

raptor22 said:


> What is your proof?


A rumor in Zionist/Wahhabi media, since they are broadcasting truth specially about Iran on 24/7 basis!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

raptor22 said:


> What is your proof?


First Israel claims that their F35 was flying over Iran , then 3 weeks later commander of our Army Air Defence department was replaced in silence .... 
if you except me to show some official signed paper about this issue , then I should say : " I don't have this kind of proofs "

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

OldTwilight said:


> First Israel claims that their F35 was flying over Iran , then 3 weeks later commander of our Army Air Defence department was replaced in silence ....
> if you except me to show some official signed paper about this issue , then I should say : " I don't have this kind of proofs "


Iran would not do that, I mean even if what you say about "F35 flying over Iran" be true then Iran would not rush to change commander of our Army Air Defense due to the fact that it would be a sign of acknowledging israel claims ...and he was actually promoted ..


----------



## OldTwilight

raptor22 said:


> Iran would not do that, I mean even if what you say about "F35 flying over Iran" be true then Iran would not rush to change commander of our Army Air Defense due to the fact that it would be a sign of acknowledging israel claims ...and he was actually promoted ..



promoted to lesser position !?


----------



## Muhammed45

OldTwilight said:


> promoted to lesser position !?


Highly likely he will be the next commander in chief of Artesh. He is progressing with an amazing speed


----------



## Sineva

OldTwilight said:


> He was faired after Israelis F35 flied over Iran in silence ...


Have you actually looked at a map of the distances that would involve?.Not to mention that even by the reckless standards of the israelis it would be an utterly foolhardy and pointless risk with virtually no gain apart from some extremely dubious propaganda value,so why bother risking one of the wests most state of the art aircraft,which by the way the israeli airforce is still in the process of working up on,when you`ll have nothing to show for it apart from some dubious rumors.The israelis may be reckless idiots on occasion,but they arent totally stupid idiots either.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar is as ready as then Fateh, which has been ready for the past 4 years.
> 
> You can’t tell anything from iranian press releases as they are merely propaganda.
> 
> Given the fact we haven’t even recieved the footage of it intercepting a BM missile yet (per Rouhanis requirements). It’s still in testing stages with senior units of the AD force.





AmirPatriot said:


> Actually, there has been talk of some structural issues with the Fateh (I'm sure @VEVAK would tell you all about them very enthusiastically), but no such issues for Bavar as per latest statements by military officials.
> 
> 
> 
> You are partially right. Iranian press is often very unreliable, but the statements of actual high ranking military officials, especially the defence minister, are a good indication. For example, for Bavar-373 I think then-commander of the IRIADF, Farzad Esmaili, said that all tests had been completed and the IRIADF was waiting for MODAFL to produce the systems. SAIRAN at least seems to be able to make radars quite rapidly, judging by the number of radars visible outside their production centre.




1st Fatteh started it's testing ~5 years ago in 2013 and it was concluded that the lower cost materials picked for the hull was not fit for the sub (structural issues) so Iran took the sub back and disassembled it and reassembled it's components in a NEW hull and the New Fatteh started it's Testing in March of 2017 NOT 4 years ago!

Right now the Fatteh can be fielded for battel if needed but as long as it's not a necessity clearly they would rather do more testing, adjustments, gather more data for simulators, due extensive crew training, push and set limits.....

That's why I say it was a mistake to build the 2nd one and they should have just moved on to a larger sized hull for a force multiplier....

As for Bavar being able to take on Ballistic Missiles I also think it's a grave mistake to try to build 1 type of system that can take on both fighters and Ballistic Missiles! 

Ballistic Missiles upon reentry can't change their trajectory and the newer RV that can still can't change their trajectory by all that much where as fighter can hit the break turn around and drop chaff but fly at far lower speeds.
The flight path of BM by the most part is in areas with little to no oxygen so your warhead requirements are going to be different
The trajectory you SAM missiles need to fly at to engage fighters beyond 100km will also be completely different than the trajectory you'll need to intercept BM and a lot of the other specs are also different.….

Also modern BM have decoys so you need different systems for tracking and targeting because you don't want decoy's released by BM to effect your ability to detect, track & target fighters and other aircrafts within the atmosphere.

I think Iran should build two completely separate systems that are networked with each other rather than one system tasked to do everything.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

If IRAN can move few units out to Syria some live testing can ensure , improvements can be made if necessary


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> As for Bavar being able to take on Ballistic Missiles I also think it's a grave mistake to try to build 1 type of system that can take on both fighters and Ballistic Missiles!



Wrong!

S-300, S-400, and S-500 all beg to differ with your absurd logic.

Iran Bavar follows same formula it uses 3 DIFFERENT missiles to engage different types of targets.

So the missile that engages a BM is not the same as the missle that engages an aircraft or a cruise missile.

The S series of Russian air defense system shows operate in similar fashion, they incorporate new missile and some additional components (radar, fire and control, etc) instead of reinventing the wheel.

And considering Russia is considered world wide to have the best air defense technology I think they know more than you do.



VEVAK said:


> Ballistic Missiles upon reentry can't change their trajectory and the newer RV that can still can't change their trajectory by all that much where as fighter can hit the break turn around and drop chaff but fly at far lower speeds.





WRONG!

Modern day RV’s can change trajectory and at the upper limits of the atmosphere (where most anti-BM’s seak interception) a simple deviation can throw the trajectory off by many KM’s!

And if you know physics you know a interceptor missile that is going supersonic to intercept the Warhead has to contend with EXTREME G-forces that could potentially tear the interceptor missile apart if it needs to deviate from its own trajectory.



VEVAK said:


> where as fighter can hit the break turn around and drop chaff but fly at far lower speeds.



LOL! You are talking about a UFO at that point. What modern aircraft can go from supersonic speeds or high speeds stop quickly and turn around? You watch too much Hollywood movies.

Lastly even saying a fighter jet can out maneuver An advanced interceptor is just funny. At such an altitude (35,000 feet) an interceptor can withstand much more G-force manuveurs to catch the fighter than a human pilot can withstand before passing out. Hence why most pilots rely on EW,jamming, afterburners rather than dog fighting a interceptor.




VEVAK said:


> I think Iran should build two completely separate systems that are networked with each other rather than one system tasked to do everything.....



Two completely separate systems is expensive and wasteful spending! This is money/resources/time that Iran doesn’t have!

Iran can simply use the Bavar system and add new radar and sub systems and new type of interceptor missile and achieve the same thing (Bavar-2)! That is what Russia does with the S-300, S-350, and S-400 and now S-500 (hypersonic vehicle interceptor).


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Wrong!
> 
> S-300, S-400, and S-500 all beg to differ with your absurd logic.
> 
> Iran Bavar follows same formula it uses 3 DIFFERENT missiles to engage different types of targets.
> 
> So the missile that engages a BM is not the same as the missle that engages an aircraft or a cruise missile.
> 
> The S series of Russian air defense system shows operate in similar fashion, they incorporate new missile and some additional components (radar, fire and control, etc) instead of reinventing the wheel.
> 
> And considering Russia is considered world wide to have the best air defense technology I think they know more than you do.
> 
> 
> WRONG!
> 
> Modern day RV’s can change trajectory and at the upper limits of the atmosphere (where most anti-BM’s seak interception) a simple deviation can throw the trajectory off by many KM’s!
> 
> And if you know physics you know a interceptor missile that is going supersonic to intercept the Warhead has to contend with EXTREME G-forces that could potentially tear the interceptor missile apart if it needs to deviate from its own trajectory.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! You are talking about a UFO at that point. What modern aircraft can go from supersonic speeds or high speeds stop quickly and turn around? You watch too much Hollywood movies.
> 
> Lastly even saying a fighter jet can out maneuver An advanced interceptor is just funny. At such an altitude (35,000 feet) an interceptor can withstand much more G-force manuveurs to catch the fighter than a human pilot can withstand before passing out. Hence why most pilots rely on EW,jamming, afterburners rather than dog fighting a interceptor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two completely separate systems is expensive and wasteful spending! This is money/resources/time that Iran doesn’t have!
> 
> Iran can simply use the Bavar system and add new radar and sub systems and new type of interceptor missile and achieve the same thing (Bavar-2)! That is what Russia does with the S-300, S-350, and S-400 and now S-500 (hypersonic vehicle interceptor).




So now your claiming to know everything about a system Iran hasn't even made public yet!!!!! Yes they showed a few part and components but entire system has not been made public!

And who do you think does more testing of their systems the U.S. or the Russians???

Yes the U.S. Patriot system can also intercept crude BM so what? I can't comment on the S-500 because I just don't know much about it! For all I know they also have a totally independent tracking specialized for and specifically made for BM I DONT KNOW!
And it's not about reinventing the wheel!!!!!!! Right now the RCS of modern aircrafts are as small as birds so you need to use speed and altitude to remove clutter from real threats because there will always be a limit to the number of targets you can track and it becomes much harder with longer ranged systems

And a real life scenario is completely different than controlled tests! In real life you'll have BM's with decoys + Fighters + Cruise Missiles + UCAV's + Decoy UAV's... coming at you! And that's just too many threats with different specs (Like attitude and speed) coming at you for one radar tracking system at Iran's technological capabilities to handle!


As for modern RV as I said "UP ON RE-Entry" They can't change their trajectory or speed by all that much & yes a small change in trajectory at high altitude will make a lot of difference as to where they land but the actual trajectory does not change by all that much! so the requirements for your missiles ability to change it's speed and trajectory are completely different than a fighter that can easily turn around and can constantly change it's speed, heading, altitude & release chaff especially when fired upon from over 100km away!

And the fact that fighters can turn is nothing NEW I honesty don't know of any fighter that can't turn!! The Bavar 373 is not a short range system equipped with Scramjet engines! So a modern fighter equipped with modern sensors and a sensor fuzzed network will have ample time to detect your launch and react to it!
And no trained fighter pilot fly's straight towards an incoming SAM or A2A missile! They turn and release chaff & or flairs depending on the threat!

Bavar is meant to be a long rang system with a wide field of view and you have to be picky as to what you plan on tracking and if try to put it all into one tracking system you'll end up with something like the Patriot system which is a fine system as long there are a limited number of threats it has to face and if you try to throw too much at it, it will come up short & that's why the U.S. developed the THAAD to focus on higher altitude threats with specially designed missiles to deal with them

Now the U.S. could have networked the THAAD into the Patriot and called it the New Patriot and for all I know that's how the new S-500 works!!!!!!!!!! Names do NOT matter but the various types of Radars, Sensors, Missiles,... you have do!
And I'm telling you at Iran's technological capabilities trying to put all that responsibility on one system from what I have seen of the Bavar 373 so far is too much! And I could be wrong there could be a different fire control systems and altitude detection radar that hasn't been made public so far I DONT KNOW

but so far I haven't seen 3 different type of missiles for the Bavar 373 I have only seen 1!!!!


----------



## AmirPatriot

OldTwilight said:


> He was faired after Israelis F35 flied over Iran in silence ...


Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1015786466935386112

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## R Wing

It is my wish, and I hope the wish of all Pakistanis, that Iran has an ironclad defense against Israeli aggression. 

Why isn't Iran going for the S400 instead of the S300? 

With the Israeli F-35 in the mix, things can get tricky.


----------



## TheImmortal

R Wing said:


> It is my wish, and I hope the wish of all Pakistanis, that Iran has an ironclad defense against Israeli aggression.
> 
> Why isn't Iran going for the S400 instead of the S300?
> 
> With the Israeli F-35 in the mix, things can get tricky.



The S-300 that Iran got is heavily upgraded and designed to Iran’s specifications and is probably closer in capability to S-400 than S-300 as Russia stopped production in S-300 a few years ago.

While Iran could talk with Russia for S-400 or maybe even S-500 future delivery. I doubt the Russians can be counted on to deliver. Just look at how long it is taking Turkey and Saudi Arabia to recieve S-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

TheImmortal said:


> The S-300 that Iran got is heavily upgraded and designed to Iran’s specifications and is probably closer in capability to S-400 than S-300 as Russia stopped production in S-300 a few years ago.
> 
> While Iran could talk with Russia for S-400 or maybe even S-500 future delivery. I doubt the Russians can be counted on to deliver. Just look at how long it is taking Turkey and Saudi Arabia to recieve S-400.



Lol why should Iran spent money for buy new S-400 while Iran could upgrade their S-300PMU-2 to S-400 with Russian request,S-400 is just a development of S-300PMU-2'

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

exactly, S-400 is "just" S-300 PMU-3 (better radars....)

Afaik Iran technologically surpassed S-300 PMU-2, so for Iran only S-500 would make sense to purchase, if necessary, but I doubt Iran will go for it, instead they will pump the money in its own R&D

Anyway, short and medium AD systems are more important, I hope we will see Irans breakthrough in this fields:

Raad-Family (3rd Kordad, Tabas....)
Talash-Family (Sayyad....)
Mersad
Herz-9
Ya Zahra
..
...
...
..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## R Wing

TheImmortal said:


> The S-300 that Iran got is heavily upgraded and designed to Iran’s specifications and is probably closer in capability to S-400 than S-300 as Russia stopped production in S-300 a few years ago.
> 
> While Iran could talk with Russia for S-400 or maybe even S-500 future delivery. I doubt the Russians can be counted on to deliver. Just look at how long it is taking Turkey and Saudi Arabia to recieve S-400.



Good points. 

When is the S-300 supposed to be delivered?


----------



## Sineva

R Wing said:


> Good points.
> 
> When is the S-300 supposed to be delivered?


It was delivered back in late 2016,only 9 years late,altho by russian standards this was actually a quick delivery[lol!]

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## R Wing

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Lol why should Iran spent money for buy new S-400 while Iran could upgrade their S-300PMU-2 to S-400 with Russian request,S-400 is just a development of S-300PMU-2'





Draco.IMF said:


> exactly, S-400 is "just" S-300 PMU-3 (better radars....)
> 
> Afaik Iran technologically surpassed S-300 PMU-2, so for Iran only S-500 would make sense to purchase, if necessary, but I doubt Iran will go for it, instead they will pump the money in its own R&D
> 
> Anyway, short and medium AD systems are more important, I hope we will see Irans breakthrough in this fields:
> 
> Raad-Family (3rd Kordad, Tabas....)
> Talash-Family (Sayyad....)
> Mersad
> Herz-9
> Ya Zahra
> ..
> ...
> ...
> ..





Sineva said:


> It was delivered back in late 2016,only 9 years late,altho by russian standards this was actually a quick delivery[lol!]



I think one battery of these needs to be installed in the T4 airbase to protect Iranian interests in the Homs region of Syria. That should change Israeli calculations quite a bit


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Sineva said:


> It was delivered back in late 2016,only 9 years late,altho by russian standards this was actually a quick delivery[lol!]



Russia is the most reliable ally ever


----------



## VEVAK

R Wing said:


> I think one battery of these needs to be installed in the T4 airbase to protect Iranian interests in the Homs region of Syria. That should change Israeli calculations quite a bit



T4 Airbase is what -250km from Israeli Territory????????? Iran could transfer it's S-300's + Raad + Talash & Sayyad-3 there and it still wouldn't matter!!!!!!!!!! The Israeli's would still have the advantage and would be able to overwhelm them without putting lives at risk using relatively lower cost ground and air launched missiles..... 

Unless Iran puts a retaliatory capability that would attack sites from where these attacks originate Iran would clearly be at a large disadvantage so Iran would also need to install a networked radar capability that covers all of Syria & Israel and SAM capability and a willingness to hit Israeli Aircraft inside Israeli territory and attack launch sites and Airbases inside Israeli territory where these attacks originate from!!!!!! 

And that's if the Israeli's stand by and let you not only transport and unload them but also install them!!!!

Just as Iran would have the advantage if Israeli's started installing weapons systems 250km from Iranian territory the Israeli's clearly have the advantage over Iran in Syria today

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scimitar19

Sineva said:


> It was delivered back in late 2016,only 9 years late,altho by russian standards this was actually a quick delivery[lol!]


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> Please don't confuse Ya-Zahra with Herz-9
> Ya-Zahra is a towed system with 4 missile while Herz-9 is a self propelled system with only 2 missile .


Again I'm not confusing anything...you are,that image is hearz9 ,snap shot from unveling ceremony...here you can see that same 4 countainers luncher behind hearz9.
I know very well what I,m talking about...also when you look these lunchers on trucks from behind you can see squre placeholders used to attach two more containers just like it is designed on sayyad containers...you can find images of original FM -80/90 with 2 containers also but it doesn't mean you can't attach 2 more containers...every Air defense system battery is design so it represent hardware/software limits...there is reason why BUK battery has 4 tels...it is how many can be controled by one FCS...also same goes for S-300...and every other system.
These shorad systems in Iran are mostly linked with automated AAA and controled by central unit and sometimes you will use two tels with 4 comtaimers...sometimes 4 with two...it depends of the terrain...and many other things..but max number of missiles you can control are what limits ad system...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Again I'm not confusing anything...you are,that image is hearz9 ,snap shot from unveling ceremony...here you can see that same 4 countainers luncher behind hearz9.
> I know very well what I,m talking about...also when you look these lunchers on trucks from behind you can see squre placeholders used to attach two more containers just like it is designed on sayyad containers...you can find images of original FM -80/90 with 2 containers also but it doesn't mean you can't attach 2 more containers...every Air defense system battery is design so it represent hardware/software limits...there is reason why BUK battery has 4 tels...it is how many can be controled by one FCS...also same goes for S-300...and every other system.
> These shorad systems in Iran are mostly linked with automated AAA and controled by central unit and sometimes you will use two tels with 4 comtaimers...sometimes 4 with two...it depends of the terrain...and many other things..but max number of missiles you can control are what limits ad system...


I'm looking at the Herz-9 from your photo and only see two place holder . by the way maybe it will help you to see what's in the background





you think they build them in different facilities ?


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> I'm looking at the Herz-9 from your photo and only see two place holder . by the way maybe it will help you to see what's in the background
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you think they build them in different facilities ?


I show you two images of herz9 luncher with 4 containers ...images I myself take snap shots from official heaz9 delivery ceremony...I'm telling you third time....you can have only one container on luncher if you want...or two or three or four...I sow FM-80 with only one container on military drils but it doesn't mean it carry one missile.Also you are looking from wrong perspective...one TEL is not air defense system...you can have one TEL with 2 containers and one or more with 4 containers in same air defense unit(battery).How it will be.handled depend from many factors...for example weight...because one TEL in battery can include more equipment than rest than it can carry less containers...or simple they want add redundancy or been able to lumch from different angle ...only thing what is important is ... How many can track and engage simultaneously...how many missiles can control....And I don't think that one battery will include more than one luncher on truck...it would be,waste of resources to put every luncher on such big truck since there is no need for such big truck for fm-80/90 kind system when one jeep can carry it and provide even better mobility just like orginal fm80/90.I think truck variant is probably control unit and rest lunchers will be towed or something smaller.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> I show you two images of herz9 luncher with 4 containers ...images I myself take snap shots from official heaz9 delivery ceremony...I'm telling you third time....you can have only one container on luncher if you want...or two or three or four...I sow FM-80 with only one container on military drils but it doesn't mean it carry one missile.Also you are looking from wrong perspective...one TEL is not air defense system...you can have one TEL with 2 containers and one or more with 4 containers in same air defense unit(battery).How it will be.handled depend from many factors...for example weight...because one TEL in battery can include more equipment than rest than it can carry less containers...or simple they want add redundancy or been able to lumch from different angle ...only thing what is important is ... How many can track and engage simultaneously...how many missiles can control....And I don't think that one battery will include more than one luncher on truck...it would be,waste of resources to put every luncher on such big truck since there is no need for such big truck for fm-80/90 kind system when one jeep can carry it and provide even better mobility just like orginal fm80/90.I think truck variant is probably control unit and rest lunchers will be towed or something smaller.


You don't show herz-9 picture with 4 missile .
You show it with 2 missile and a 4 missile launcher in background that I believe belong to ya Zahra .
If you show us Herz-9 with 4 missile it'd be appreciated.


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Salam everyone.

Any news on bavar 373? Also, what's the difference between hot/cold launches of missiles?



Sineva said:


> It was delivered back in late 2016,only 9 years late,altho by russian standards this was actually a quick delivery[lol!]


And even that was only after UNSC sanctions were lifted and Iran threatened to sue Russia for $4 billion.


----------



## TheImmortal

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> Salam everyone.
> 
> Any news on bavar 373? Also, what's the difference between hot/cold launches of missiles?



Hot launch - the missile engine ignites within the launch canister and missile is propelled outward by the exhaust.

Cold launch - the missile is ejected out of the launcher using a gas, then the engine ignites outside of the launch canister and missile takes flight.

Bavar is hot launch system
S-300 is cold launch system


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD I've been thinking - don't you think Sayyad-2 has an odd position right now? Sayyad-3 has a much improved range, and seems to be able to fit on the same size TELs. Is there any reason for a Talash battery to be equipped with Sayyad-2s, other than possibly cost (if there is even an appreciable difference)?

To me, Sayyad-2 seems redundant.


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

Sayyad-2 is a mid range system optimized for lower altitudes than Sayyad-3.

So if the interception takes place within 70km and the target in a maneuverable one you better take the Sayyad-2 to have a higher (kinetic) Pk. Of course you also have lower costs when using Sayyad-2 --> lower rated equipment such as batteries and INS.

So the Sayyad-2 has its firm place in the mix and I expect it to fill that role in the future Bavar-373 battery too.
A valid question would rather be why Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 are built as both fill about the same role. There to could be sane reasons such as the higher ABM capability of one of the two.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD I've been thinking - don't you think Sayyad-2 has an odd position right now? Sayyad-3 has a much improved range, and seems to be able to fit on the same size TELs. Is there any reason for a Talash battery to be equipped with Sayyad-2s, other than possibly cost (if there is even an appreciable difference)?
> 
> To me, Sayyad-2 seems redundant.



you mean Sayyad 2 is obsolete compare to Sayyad 3 and other sams?


----------



## timmy_area51

07_SeppDietrich said:


> you mean Sayyad 2 is obsolete compare to Sayyad 3 and other sams?



Here's a picture of sayyad-2 







it is obviously an anti-ship missile launched from the southern coastlines of iran in a guerilla warfare fashion . i seriously doubt if iran's sayyad 3 can countermanuver the US aegis systems like Ciwes . so no it's not outdated.


----------



## Sineva

timmy_area51 said:


> Here's a picture of sayyad-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it is obviously an anti-ship missile launched from the southern coastlines of iran in a guerilla warfare fashion . i seriously doubt if iran's sayyad 3 can countermanuver the US aegis systems like Ciwes . so no it's not outdated.


No,it isnt.Its a stretched version of the rim66 naval sam that iran got from the us waaay back in the 70s.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> Sayyad-2 is a mid range system optimized for lower altitudes than Sayyad-3.
> 
> So if the interception takes place within 70km and the target in a maneuverable one you better take the Sayyad-2 to have a higher (kinetic) Pk. Of course you also have lower costs when using Sayyad-2 --> lower rated equipment such as batteries and INS.
> 
> So the Sayyad-2 has its firm place in the mix and I expect it to fill that role in the future Bavar-373 battery too.
> A valid question would rather be why Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 are built as both fill about the same role. There to could be sane reasons such as the higher ABM capability of one of the two.



I suppose so, Sayyad-2 with more control surfaces would have a higher Pk. I must wonder what the battery structure would be... IIRC they said 3 TELs (which I don't think is enough. Come on Iran, at least 4) per system, as each system can track engage 12 targets simultaneously. So would that mean a single Talash system with a mix of Sayyad-2/3, or are they in 2 separate systems, making 6 TELs? 

As for the Taer, I think it's simply a case of development. They Taer seems to only be used by the IRGC-ASF so it may be developed by the IRGC.



timmy_area51 said:


> Here's a picture of sayyad-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it is obviously an anti-ship missile launched from the southern coastlines of iran in a guerilla warfare fashion . i seriously doubt if iran's sayyad 3 can countermanuver the US aegis systems like Ciwes . so no it's not outdated.



...no. Sayyad-1/2/3 are all surface to air missiles.


----------



## timmy_area51

AmirPatriot said:


> ...no. Sayyad-1/2/3 are all surface to air missiles.



maybe to you they are



Sineva said:


> No,it isnt.Its a stretched version of the rim66 naval sam that iran got from the us waaay back in the 70s.



well if missiles were to be "stretched" and reproduced i guess i could make one in my garage too .


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> I suppose so, Sayyad-2 with more control surfaces would have a higher Pk. I must wonder what the battery structure would be... IIRC they said 3 TELs (which I don't think is enough. Come on Iran, at least 4) per system, as each system can track engage 12 targets simultaneously. So would that mean a single Talash system with a mix of Sayyad-2/3, or are they in 2 separate systems, making 6 TELs?
> 
> As for the Taer, I think it's simply a case of development. They Taer seems to only be used by the IRGC-ASF so it may be developed by the IRGC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...no. Sayyad-1/2/3 are all surface to air missiles.


go back to bed.


----------



## timmy_area51

in case you don't realize Russia does the reverse-engineering for iran . iran sends their 70's american equipment to russia , so that people like putin bark for iran at some points every now and then. all that internet misinformation is to deceive sheeple just like yourself.


----------



## Blue In Green

timmy_area51 said:


> in case you don't realize Russia does the reverse-engineering for iran . iran sends their 70's american equipment to russia , so that people like putin bark for iran at some points every now and then. all that internet misinformation is to deceive sheeple just like yourself.



This is news to me.


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> You don't show herz-9 picture with 4 missile .
> You show it with 2 missile and a 4 missile launcher in background that I believe belong to ya Zahra .
> If you show us Herz-9 with 4 missile it'd be appreciated.


That in background is also hearz9 but just not mounted...ya zahra has differently placed EO devices and attached luncher and countainers than herz9,it is very easy to make difference ,like Iran always do..when.they introduce new system...they show system in parts also and that is why you see that luncher non mounted...and.why would they show ya zahra on herz9 unveling ceremony...again there is difference bettween ya zahra and herz9 lunchers
Again,from what I sow herz9 system include only one trucked TEL which also serve as comand and control unit...rest TELs would be either towed or fully mobile on something smaller like original fm80/90...There is no need for such big truck for TELs...As I succeed to catch from many different images and video clips of all Iranian versions of FM/80/90 I could see there are at least two different size of containers which suggest more missile variants and also there are two different lunchers..almost the same but with different mechanism for container attachement...
One example of Shaqab-thaqeb missile test (first image)

Here is what I am talking about,this is also fully mobile version on truck but without big container on truck that holds control and command room and it is 4 countainer version(second image)


----------



## Sineva

timmy_area51 said:


> maybe to you they are
> 
> 
> 
> well if missiles were to be "stretched" and reproduced i guess i could make one in my garage too .



Frankly I would tend to very seriously doubt that,as not only would actually getting a hold of an example of a sam be rather difficult,but the sort of advanced re-engineering/reverse engineering capabilities required to do this sort of modification/production tend only to belong to the military industrial complexes of nation states,not guys working in the family garage with chinese made dremels bought on sale at the local hardware store....no offence to your dremel or its abilities.
The fact is that the sayyad 2 is clearly either a physical stretch of an existing irin mehrab/rim66 missile or a new build stretched copy of that airframe,there is some debate over whether the mehrab missiles on the irin warships are refurbed rim66s or new build mehrabs with all new internals,regardless its pretty clear that the airframe is rim66 based with a stretch at the front and a smaller one at the rear,possibly for a longer motor,also the tips of the rear fins have been clipped off square for some reason.
Lastly iran has a very long and well documented history of reverse/reengineering and extensively modifying weapons systems,especially missiles of all types.




Rim66 




Sayyad 2


----------



## Sineva

timmy_area51 said:


> in case you don't realize Russia does the reverse-engineering for iran . iran sends their 70's american equipment to russia , so that people like putin bark for iran at some points every now and then. all that internet misinformation is to deceive sheeple just like yourself.


WOW!!,so Uncle Puuty was really actually helping iran out all along....Well,I`m shocked,shocked I tell you,shocked.Did I also mention that I`m shocked?,well I am...shocked!,utterly,utterly shocked at this utterly shocking turn of events,and further more I am shocked,because this is just so,so....so shocking....






I take it you obviously have some totally irrefutable gold standard iron clad proof to back up this rather...shall we say "audacious" statement,because if you didnt you will have just made a complete and total world class utter d!ck of yourself on this forum.Personally I cant wait to hear all about it......I`m literally sitting on the edge of my seat as I`m typing this........
sorry about that pause I was just putting on my tinfoil hat,gotta watch out for those gay microwaves dontcha know,because I get the feeling we`re getting into that sort of territory with this poster.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

timmy_area51 said:


> Here's a picture of sayyad-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it is obviously an anti-ship missile launched from the southern coastlines of iran in a guerilla warfare fashion . i seriously doubt if iran's sayyad 3 can countermanuver the US aegis systems like Ciwes . so no it's not outdated.


It is an anti air missile. There are footages of its tests too.


----------



## TheImmortal

timmy_area51 said:


> in case you don't realize Russia does the reverse-engineering for iran . iran sends their 70's american equipment to russia , so that people like putin bark for iran at some points every now and then. all that internet misinformation is to deceive sheeple just like yourself.



This is one of the dumbest things, I have ever read.

Congrats


----------



## sanel1412

Arminkh said:


> It is an anti air missile. There are footages of its tests too.


Of.course it is an anti aircraft missile...he doesn't know what he is talking about..any way Sayyad newer missile is almost same as Chinese PL12 and considering many advanced Iranian new radars are based on Chinese advanced technology designs I would bet they also transfer some missile technology...Missile external design like Standard missile are implemented on bunch of Air defense missiles...for example SA-11 BUK-M1(older missiles)....Chinese PL12 ...There are even air lunched anti radiation and antiship variant but not used widely.When it comes to air defense missiles they could very easily be converted to balistic or even antiship missiles...for example Sayad 1 and Sayad 1A use same missile design like HQ2 and also same missile is used as Tondar balistic missile...so

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Of.course it is an anti aircraft missile...he doesn't know what he is talking about..any way Sayyad newer missile is almost same as Chinese PL12 and considering many advanced Iranian new radars are based on Chinese advanced technology designs I would bet they also transfer some missile technology...Missile external design like Standard missile are implemented on bunch of Air defense missiles...for example SA-11 BUK-M1(older missiles)....Chinese PL12 ...There are even air lunched anti radiation and antiship variant but not used widely.When it comes to air defense missiles they could very easily be converted to balistic or even antiship missiles...for example Sayad 1 and Sayad 1A use same missile design like HQ2 and also same missile is used as Tondar balistic missile...so



Considering most of the Chinese military is simple Soviet/Russian knock offs. You are mistaken.

Most new radars are of Russian origin. Radars is an area that Russia and iran have done arms transfer for years.

So please explain which of the following “many new advanced radars” are Chinese origin?


----------



## Arminkh

sanel1412 said:


> Of.course it is an anti aircraft missile...he doesn't know what he is talking about..any way Sayyad newer missile is almost same as Chinese PL12 and considering many advanced Iranian new radars are based on Chinese advanced technology designs I would bet they also transfer some missile technology...Missile external design like Standard missile are implemented on bunch of Air defense missiles...for example SA-11 BUK-M1(older missiles)....Chinese PL12 ...There are even air lunched anti radiation and antiship variant but not used widely.When it comes to air defense missiles they could very easily be converted to balistic or even antiship missiles...for example Sayad 1 and Sayad 1A use same missile design like HQ2 and also same missile is used as Tondar balistic missile...so


I think eventually, just like drones, all same role missiles are going to look more and less the same as the optimum physical shape for any type of duty couldn't be more than one or two different variations. Given that, I think judging about technology transfer just based on the shape of the missile is not correct.


----------



## sanel1412

TheImmortal said:


> Considering most of the Chinese military is simple Soviet/Russian knock offs. You are mistaken.
> 
> Most new radars are of Russian origin. Radars is an area that Russia and iran have done arms transfer for years.
> 
> So please explain which of the following “many new advanced radars” are Chinese origin?


My god,you really don't know what you talk about....first most Chinese military is not simple Russian knock of...they revererse engenered Russian technology at beginning but also bunch of US,UK,Israel and France tech also...later they started to mix it and there are bunch of hybrids system use both west/east and domestic technology.Second while Iran did buy many radars from Russia actually technology transfer was mostly came from China... when it comes to Radars but also other weapons China was major source for technology transfer not Russia even some are Russian origin or based on...there are Chinese trace where ever you look..for example UAV control systems,software......Iran first imported bunch,of Chinese radaras like Ylc 14 , Ylc 8, YLC-6M than start transfer of advanced tech ..some advanced radars didnt even produced in China but.can be found on Chinese.company catalogs...some represent Chinese counter parts...JY-10,JY-11B,YLC-6M, JYL-1and many more can be reckognized.
Chinese s300 knock of for example is hybrid,use bunch of west tech...F-7N aircrafts Iran buyed originally used western avionics and since Iran didn't wanted F7N with western technology it gets aircrafts with Chinese avionics...and missiles Iran got with F7 are French tech knock of ....so F7 was mig21 knock of but it ended to be more of that...even J-10 airframe is literary mig 21 with different air intakes...if you remove nose and intakes you will got mig 21 airframe....F8 is mig21/23 Airframe but isn't simple knock of...Some one really think you can get from '70 technology level to Meraj 4 radar(for which,even,western experts agree it is amazing peace of hardware) in few years without technology transfer?And for Iran China was and still is major source for technology transfer...You can litterary find same control units or almost same for Iran UAVs and Chinese...even in civil technology there is big Chinese trace...And this is natural,China was was one of the first and major source of technology transfer from Iran-Iraq war...first missile tech tranafers and missile plants were came from China...from HQ-2,Silkworm ...up to C7xx,C8xx ASM missiles,HQ-7 AD system,fast attack and patrol boats and bunch of other

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201808171067282645-iran-missles-spring-2019/

*MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Iran will unveil a domestic version of the Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile system, dubbed Bavar 373, by the end of the current Iranian year, meaning by March 20, 2019, local media reported on Friday, citing Iran's deputy defense minister for international affairs.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201808171067282645-iran-missles-spring-2019/
> 
> *MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Iran will unveil a domestic version of the Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile system, dubbed Bavar 373, by the end of the current Iranian year, meaning by March 20, 2019, local media reported on Friday, citing Iran's deputy defense minister for international affairs.*



“By end of current Iranian year”

Dear lord not this again

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> “By end of current Iranian year”
> 
> Dear lord not this again


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-new-defense-system-on-warship-idUSKBN1L305Z

*Iran says navy mounts new defense system on warship*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 07_SeppDietrich

Guys,wanna bet it won't being shown by that year?



skyshadow said:


> https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201808171067282645-iran-missles-spring-2019/
> 
> *MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Iran will unveil a domestic version of the Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile system, dubbed Bavar 373, by the end of the current Iranian year, meaning by March 20, 2019, local media reported on Friday, citing Iran's deputy defense minister for international affairs.*


----------



## skyshadow

07_SeppDietrich said:


> Guys,wanna bet it won't being shown by that year?



i bet on this year


----------



## Hindustani78

Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Amir Hatami during inauguration of its production line at an undisclosed location, Iran. (Iranian Defense Ministry via AP)


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1031535129565515777

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1031535129565515777


Final stage of what,tho?.Does he mean testing?,preproduction?,military acceptance?,or.....?


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Sineva said:


> Final stage of what,tho?.Does he mean testing?,preproduction?,military acceptance?,or.....?


testing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Lying kunte.....


----------



## yavar

Sineva said:


> Final stage of what,tho?.Does he mean testing?,preproduction?,military acceptance?,or.....?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



what he is saying about B-373? Final tests?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

He says: we are going to unveil a very advanced 100% Iranian designed and made anti aircraft missile. It will look identical to a 1950s Scud missile.... but don't be fooled.... it is very advanced inside, I wish I could show you, but it's top secret. Also, it is very expensive to make, so we will have to devaluate the national currency by 50% again, but if you do sinezani tonight, we will give out free abgoosht!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Draco.IMF said:


> what he is saying about B-373? Final tests?


It says it's been already produced and now is under various types of tests in different weather and geographies to see its performance and if its sub systems and components functions wouldn't be satisfactory we'd try to replace them with better ones...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

Raghfarm007 said:


> He says: we are going to unveil a very advanced 100% Iranian designed and made anti aircraft missile. It will look identical to a 1950s Scud missile.... but don't be fooled.... it is very advanced inside, I wish I could show you, but it's top secret. Also, it is very expensive to make, so we will have to devaluate the national currency by 50% again, but if you do sinezani tonight, we will give out free abgoosht!





Cool down bro ... You won't get disappointed !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Just to get an idea about systems with such high complexity:

Soviets started research on S-300 1966 --- Iran estimated 2009 on Bavar
Soviets started serious development 1969 --- Iran estimated 2011
Soviets started testing 1978 --- Iran estimated 2015
Soviets put it into operation 1983 --- Iran expected 2019

So Soviets with their vast experience needed 17 years from idea to operational service.
Iran is expected to approximately do this in 10 years.

This stuff is no joke.

Talk is about the real S-300PS requested in 1966.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Just to get an idea about systems with such high complexity:
> 
> Soviets started research on S-300 1966 --- Iran estimated 2009 on Bavar
> Soviets started serious development 1969 --- Iran estimated 2011
> Soviets started testing 1978 --- Iran estimated 2015
> Soviets put it into operation 1983 --- Iran expected 2019
> 
> So Soviets with their vast experience needed 17 years from idea to operational service.
> Iran is expected to approximately do this in 10 years.
> 
> This stuff is no joke.
> 
> Talk is about the real S-300PS requested in 1966.



well, to be fair @PeeD , soviets started from scratch, from 0, Iran started already on imported stuff, so they had already access to something

and I think Iran had access to S-300 much earlier than 2009 (~2005 ?)
I read something about importing from Belarus

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

The Soviet work was groundbreaking and revolutionary. Its not about who is better or faster.

Iran had no S-300 to start from, as far as we know. All goes back to the SM-1, missile wise, and the radar suite is completely/fundamentally different.

Soviets tested the system 5 years before they put it into service. We should hence not be sad that the plan was to complete testing by 2016 for Bavar-373 but now this has become 2019 or even later. The complexity of this things cause such long testing and refinement phases.

North Koreans just coped the S-300PS, albeit on new trucks. Compared to that Bavar-373 is a complete new indigenous development.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

For me i think Bavar is not some copy of S-300, actually Bavar is The result of PAC-3 and S-300PMU-2 having mate,it use hot launch same as PAC series not cold launch on S-300 to S-400 series but the range almost more than 3 times of PAC abm series


----------



## WinterNights

RedEfffect said:


> For me i think Bavar is not some copy of S-300, actually Bavar is The result of PAC-3 and S-300PMU-2 having mate,it use hot launch same as PAC series not cold launch on S-300 to S-400 series but the range almost more than 3 times of PAC abm series



Bavar is a completely new design. Everything from its radars to missiles. I am sure Iran utilise what it learned from other systems in making it, but bavar itself is indeed an indigenous design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Testing of Bavar-373 components has increased (visible on Google Eart).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Testing of Bavar-373 components has increased (visible on Google Eart).


Where?


----------



## skyshadow

http://etemaadonline.ir/content/229...ادار-دوربرد-و-موشک-بردبلند-را-رونمایی-می-کنیم

*بزودی پیشرفته‌ترین رادار دوربرد و موشک بردبلند را رونمایی می‌کنیم*

http://www.ghatreh.com/news/nn44097158/رونمایی-پیشرفته-ترین-رادار-دوربرد-موشک-بردبلند-بزودی


----------



## WinterNights

It seems they are talking about Seperh radar. It is going to unveiled to public after all these years that it's been operational. It has a range of at least 3000km!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035548950412046336

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...-new-warplane-and-domestic-made-s-300-report/


----------



## skyshadow

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/70445

*Iran May Have the S-400 in All But Name; What Russia Really Delivered in 2016 and Why it Matters*


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/70445
> 
> *Iran May Have the S-400 in All But Name; What Russia Really Delivered in 2016 and Why it Matters*



Pretty much old news.

There were no longer any s-300 PMU assembly lines anymore when Russia eventually agreed to deliver S-300 to Iran, even Russia said this.

Based on radars included in the package Iran got a PMU2 or something similar to S400.

Since Russia is now moving production slowly towards S-500, any further air defense purchase should be for S-500.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

S400 = S-300 PMU3

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Sepehr Cosmic Radar with a range of 2500 km

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> Sepehr Cosmic Radar with a range of 2500 km
> View attachment 496429


Looks like scenes out of sci-fi movies. Is this a new design?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

That's an interesting design, it does not look like what we thought was Sepehr. According to Janes, they thought this was Sepehr:






Looks like alarger version of ghadir radars.

But I love this new design if it is the real Seperh. There's something about it. Looks somehow futuristic like @Arminkh said.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

That is the Nazir radar, first photos.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> That is the Nazir radar, first photos.



I think you are right, it fits the description, especially it being on a high altitude land

Old vid about Nzir:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Iranian "Nazir" and "keyhan" OTH radars











800 km range

3000 m Height

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar




----------



## skyshadow

Iranian "Nazir" OTH radar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> Iranian "Nazir" OTH radar
> 
> View attachment 496600
> View attachment 496601
> View attachment 496602
> View attachment 496603
> View attachment 496604
> View attachment 496605
> View attachment 496606
> View attachment 496607



Intresting, what about the south and the West? Iran needs coverage in those areas.

Also it needs to increase the range of their OTH radars.


----------



## PeeD

The Nazir is the second known multi-static radar system in the world of this kind. It is not an OTH-B radar, the Iranian OTH radar in operation is still unknown.

The closest system to it is the Russian Struna-1, but the Nariz Bina combi have a much larger range.

It is kind of a path to a solution for Irans biggest problem and advantage: Mountainous terrain.

OTH-B is one solution, a multi-static network radar another solution.

The Nazir is in so far unique that it is kind of the first "hardened" radar. The circle pattern emitter site can take the punch of enemy weapons and still remain operational or partially so. Almost no other radar offers this and it is a important improvement for a large early warning radar.

The Kayhan radar does the same job, is mobile but lower ranged.

Its low level and anti-stealth capabilities are its most important ones. Each Nazir node could cover a circle of 300-600km. With a dozen Nazir and Binas most of Iranian terrain could be covered.

Honestly speaking, I thought the Keyhan is the mysterious OTH-B operating in Iran. It is not the Ghadir and the Sepehr should be a future ballistic missile early warning radar, not a OTH-B.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ashool

*آزمایش موفق سامانه موشکی باور 373*

برد این سیستم 200 کیلومتر و سقف پروازی موشک آن 27 کیلومتر است، موشک این سیستم، ورزیده، چابک و با تکنولوژی نوین ساخت داخل است.

The successful testing of the Missile System bavar 373

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran deputy defense min hails Bavar-373 air defense system*

http://www.irna.ir/en/News/83025073

http://www.iran-daily.com/News/230912.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

finally some info about BAVAR 373 was revealed.
range: 200km
max altitude: 27km

*آزمایش موفق سامانه موشکی باور 373*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

mohsen said:


> finally some info about BAVAR 373 was revealed.
> range: 200km
> max altitude: 27km
> 
> *آزمایش موفق سامانه موشکی باور 373*



Is it only using one missile?
Tbh I was hoping for missile with longer range and altitude...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

WinterNights said:


> Is it only using one missile?
> Tbh I was hoping for missile with longer range and altitude...


that's ‪88582 feet not many airplane can fly at that altitude and the ones who can are not that maneuverable there.
that's good statistic for the missile , what really is important is how much resilient it is against enemy counter measures ,and how good it s at engaging low RCS targets.
by the way 200kmm is not something to be passed away so easily , you want more range with bigger more expensive missiles or you go at 200km and build more system instead .

also you always can build a bigger missile later , why wait several years for the missile ,while you can build the system with this specification right now and introduce that missile when it became ready.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

WinterNights said:


> Is it only using one missile?
> Tbh I was hoping for missile with longer range and altitude...



It is sufficient for now. The altitude is above the service ceiling of any aircraft that can attack Iran. And the range is good enough to space them out about 100 km apart. I would alternate them with the Talaash. And protect them with Herz-9, Raad, 2k12, Pantsir and Tor. With some air defense artillery too. You can't have just one air defense system protecting your assets in a local region. As proven in Syria. 200 km is a minimally good range to set up a vast network of air defenses to stop any cruise missile or air attack. Layers of defenses is what is needed. Even having spotters with man-portable air defense SAM along the coast in a wide chain of coastal air/sea defenses.

Just having one BAVAR 373 to protect a region and have a few cruise missiles pass the defense means a lost Bavar 373 and a hole in your air defense. Man portable SAMs should be mass produced and are cheap. The goal is to protect the airspace of the vital long range SAMs, so nothing ever passes them.

An attack happens at night so light house bright lights like in the Berlin air defenses during wwii would be needed for coastal defense to spot the cruise missiles. The lights turned on when the radar detects cruise missiles over the sea.

Layers upon layers, upon layers of air defense is needed. And if they can't dominate the sky, they can't invade Iran.

Single air defenses with hit ratios of .6 or .8 will never cut it. Enough of an air attack will overwhelm the single solitary air defense and will knock out Iran's air defenses. Iran needs to overwhelm the attack with high and low tech defenses to get every last plane and cruise missile out of commission.

Iran would also need Bavars further inland to protect from ballistic missiles attacking cities and military assets. Again with short range air defenses to protect the long range air defenses.

Iran should produce as many modern up-to-date Iranian versions of ZSU-23-4 Shilkas as possible too. High tech to low tech, missiles to artillery. If stealth cruise missiles are ever invented, artillery would be an added required tool. Where the missiles would be picked up on radar and difficult to hit with defense missiles. Overwhelming the sky with bullets aimed at the target knocks out any stealth missile. Also useful against UAV and 6th gen swarms. Air artillery is designed to not run out of bullets and fire all day and all night.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SALMAN F

How come the Iranians make weapons that toke Russians years to make??!


----------



## WinterNights

SALMAN F said:


> How come the Iranians make weapons that toke Russians years to make??!



Iran has been developing this systems for more than decade now, so it has also taken Iran years, it's not like they developed it overnight. Also, bare in mind Iran has developed many other air defence systems. Bavar is not the first.

Iran has a very robust missile and electronic industry, so it's no surprise Iran could do it. Developing a missiles systems like this naturally takes many years.



zectech said:


> It is sufficient for now. The altitude is above the service ceiling of any aircraft that can attack Iran. And the range is good enough to space them out about 100 km apart. I would alternate them with the Talaash. And protect them with Herz-9, Raad, 2k12, Pantsir and Tor. With some air defense artillery too. You can't have just one air defense system protecting your assets in a local region. As proven in Syria. 200 km is a minimally good range to set up a vast network of air defenses to stop any cruise missile or air attack. Layers of defenses is what is needed. Even having spotters with man-portable air defense SAM along the coast in a wide chain of coastal air/sea defenses.
> 
> Just having one BAVAR 373 to protect a region and have a few cruise missiles pass the defense means a lost Bavar 373 and a hole in your air defense. Man portable SAMs should be mass produced and are cheap. The goal is to protect the airspace of the vital long range SAMs, so nothing ever passes them.
> 
> An attack happens at night so light house bright lights like in the Berlin air defenses during wwii would be needed for coastal defense to spot the cruise missiles. The lights turned on when the radar detects cruise missiles over the sea.
> 
> Layers upon layers, upon layers of air defense is needed. And if they can't dominate the sky, they can't invade Iran.
> 
> Single air defenses with hit ratios of .6 or .8 will never cut it. Enough of an air attack will overwhelm the single solitary air defense and will knock out Iran's air defenses. Iran needs to overwhelm the attack with high and low tech defenses to get every last plane and cruise missile out of commission.
> 
> Iran would also need Bavars further inland to protect from ballistic missiles atacking cities and military assets. Again with short range air defenses to protect the long range air defenses.



I understand all of that. The future threats will be hypersonic systems, I truly hope developers of Bavar takes those systems into account. Bavar systems combined with the other array of Iranian systems can deal with Israelis and Persian gulf states, heck even without bavar we could deal with them with relative ease. But our number 1 threat is obviously the yankees. I hope the future version of Bavar can handle objects in near space etc. Hypersonic ( including cruise missile, glide weapons, UCAVS) swarm attacks will probably be the weapons of the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

SALMAN F said:


> How come the Iranians make weapons that toke Russians years to make??!



1) Russians made everyting from scratch, they had nothing to "look at" or something to "reverse engineer"

2) Iran had technology from some elements of the SA-10 already since Jeltsin era (90s) as documents were declassified (communication between Jeltsin & Clinton)

Regarding some people here complainig about the 200km range
Remember, Iran also says its missiles has range of 2000km, but we know the real deal...
Dont take everything too serious whats coming from defence ministry, they cant tell everything

lets hope B-373 can deal with Ballistic missiles, intercepting drones is no big deal....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## zectech

Hypersonic cruise missile can be hit by the developing s-500s. Iran is at S-300s tech. Get some Chinese hackers. 

I wonder if an radar directed air artillery system could potentially hit a HCM before a SAM one could be developed. HCM are picked up on radar, it is just very hard to hit them. If their path is known, just flood the area with bullets and watch 5 million dollars explode.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

zectech said:


> Hypersonic cruise missile can be hit by the developing s-500s. Iran is at S-300s tech. Get some Chinese hackers.
> 
> I wonder if an radar directed air artillery system could potentially hit a HCM before a SAM one could be developed. HCM are picked up on radar, it is just very hard to hit them. If their path is known, just flood the area with bullets and watch 5 million dollars explode.



If we had to compare, I would say Iran is higher end of s-300 technology and very close to s-400. Iranians are already top hackers, we don't need others. If Chinese do have the stolen information, we could buy/trade them.
With regards to these hyper sonic systems, the other issue is not just they are very fast but also that they will be coming in swarms. There many different types of them too i.e unmanned UCAV, glide weapons and cruise missile version.

An AA gun could work. I think a good defence against them will be ground based, electromagnetic AA guns that can fire bullets at hyper sonic speed to high altitudes. Americans have such things on their ships, we need them on ground. Obviously other defence is offence, i.e having our own hyper sonic weapons to strike with.

Like I said, these hyper-sonic systems are the future, Iran needs to start giving some serious attention to them.

@VEVAK @PeeD what do you think?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

another devastating thread merge!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Is it only using one missile?
> Tbh I was hoping for missile with longer range and altitude...



I've read in few places that bavar will use several missiles like the s300 system

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1396/06/15/1511833/با-وجود-سامانه-باور-هیچ-هواپیمای-اسرائیلی-جرات-نزدیک-شدن-به-آسمان-ایران-را-نخواهد-داشت
بنابراین من شخصا *موشک‌های «باور»* را «برادر تنی» موشک‌های اس-300 می نامم. و در همینجا باید به دانشمندان و مهندسین ایرانی تبریک گفت که موفق شده اند چنین سلاح ملی را بسازنند.»

https://donya-e-eqtesad.com/بخش-سایت-خوان-62/3091713-رمزگشایی-از-مشخصات-فنی-سامانه-پدافند-باور

*برای این سامانه موشکی، ۳ نوع موشک مختلف برای شکار اهداف در بردها و ارتفاع‌های مختلف تولید شده* (مشابه S۴۰۰ با بردی کمتر از آن) است. باور ۳۷۳ از یک پست ارتباطی و یک پست فرماندهی جداگانه نیز بهره می‌برد.



zectech said:


> It is sufficient for now. The altitude is above the service ceiling of any aircraft that can attack Iran. And the range is good enough to space them out about 100 km apart. I would alternate them with the Talaash. And protect them with Herz-9, Raad, 2k12, Pantsir and Tor. With some air defense artillery too. You can't have just one air defense system protecting your assets in a local region. As proven in Syria. 200 km is a minimally good range to set up a vast network of air defenses to stop any cruise missile or air attack. Layers of defenses is what is needed. Even having spotters with man-portable air defense SAM along the coast in a wide chain of coastal air/sea defenses.
> 
> Just having one BAVAR 373 to protect a region and have a few cruise missiles pass the defense means a lost Bavar 373 and a hole in your air defense. Man portable SAMs should be mass produced and are cheap. The goal is to protect the airspace of the vital long range SAMs, so nothing ever passes them.
> 
> An attack happens at night so light house bright lights like in the Berlin air defenses during wwii would be needed for coastal defense to spot the cruise missiles. The lights turned on when the radar detects cruise missiles over the sea.
> 
> Layers upon layers, upon layers of air defense is needed. And if they can't dominate the sky, they can't invade Iran.
> 
> Single air defenses with hit ratios of .6 or .8 will never cut it. Enough of an air attack will overwhelm the single solitary air defense and will knock out Iran's air defenses. Iran needs to overwhelm the attack with high and low tech defenses to get every last plane and cruise missile out of commission.
> 
> Iran would also need Bavars further inland to protect from ballistic missiles attacking cities and military assets. Again with short range air defenses to protect the long range air defenses.
> 
> Iran should produce as many modern up-to-date Iranian versions of ZSU-23-4 Shilkas as possible too. High tech to low tech, missiles to artillery. If stealth cruise missiles are ever invented, artillery would be an added required tool. Where the missiles would be picked up on radar and difficult to hit with defense missiles. Overwhelming the sky with bullets aimed at the target knocks out any stealth missile. Also useful against UAV and 6th gen swarms. Air artillery is designed to not run out of bullets and fire all day and all night.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> With regards to these hyper sonic systems, the other issue is not just they are very fast but also that they will be coming in swarms.



That’s not true at all. First of all Hypersonic systems use hypersonic scram jet engines and thus have to be released at a sufficiently altitude in order to have plenty of oxygen for oxidization.

Currently almost all developing HGV (hypersonic glide vehicles) are being used on BM’s and as a nuclear deterrent.

I am not sure how “cheap” the technology is at this point for “swarm” use. Even accurate BM’s are not sufficiently “cheap” for swarm use.

Furthermore, the S-500 taking out HGV is just a marketing ploy at this term. Modern air defense systems struggle at this current day to intecrept ICBMs, yet I am supposed to believe that the S-500 is somehow going to intercept a reduced RCS HGV warhead coming in at Mach 10+?

Lol that’s hilarious really.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

WinterNights said:


> If we had to compare, I would say Iran is higher end of s-300 technology and very close to s-400. Iranians are already top hackers, we don't need others. If Chinese do have the stolen information, we could buy/trade them.



From wikipedia



> Main characteristics of the S-400[81]
> Max. target speed 4.8 kilometres per second (17,000 km/h; 11,000 mph; Mach 14)



The best missile of the S-400s can hit hypersonic objects (Mach 5+) according to the missile characteristics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_missile_system#Quantitative_analysis

If Iran is not far away from S-400s and close to making something similar to the 48N6E2, which can hit targets moving at Mach 8.2, then Iran is close to defending from hypersonic cruise missiles in the low range of hypersonic speed. Once they get a missile like the 40N6 and a deployment system like the S-400s and S-500s, Iran is as good as Russia.


----------



## T-72B

mohsen said:


> finally some info about BAVAR 373 was revealed.
> range: 200km
> max altitude: 27km
> 
> *آزمایش موفق سامانه موشکی باور 373*


So as capable as S-300PMU-2?
I see Iran follow the Russian doctrine on air defence,Iran know that it's air force would be turn to smoke if USAF and IAF attack so they concentrated on their air defence

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

WinterNights said:


> If we had to compare, I would say Iran is higher end of s-300 technology and very close to s-400. Iranians are already top hackers, we don't need others. If Chinese do have the stolen information, we could buy/trade them.
> With regards to these hyper sonic systems, the other issue is not just they are very fast but also that they will be coming in swarms. There many different types of them too i.e unmanned UCAV, glide weapons and cruise missile version.
> 
> An AA gun could work. I think a good defence against them will be ground based, electromagnetic AA guns that can fire bullets at hyper sonic speed to high altitudes. Americans have such things on their ships, we need them on ground. Obviously other defence is offence, i.e having our own hyper sonic weapons to strike with.
> 
> Like I said, these hyper-sonic systems are the future, Iran needs to start giving some serious attention to them.
> 
> @VEVAK @PeeD what do you think?



Hypersonic weapons would be too expensive for SAM's or for offensive weapons for the immediate future but will be needed within the next 20-30 years But for now we should stick to R&D because we will need it in the future! 

If Iran had the guts to deploy them I would personally prefer orbital sat capable of deploying multiple highly accurate kinetic projectiles over a high cost scramjet platform 

For Iran the top priority for now needs to be offensive missile MASS production from cruise to ballistic of all shapes and sizes, after that Air Defense equipment from advanced AAA systems to SAM to interceptors then mass production of UCAV's with various types of munitions and then heavy strike Aircraft 
Also computers, electronics, optics & sensors from producing our own high end processor to advanced batteries to more advanced imaging software and hardware from thermal to standard optics in terms of radars Iran needs to develop more high end radars and mass produce doppler SAR radars in high numbers so they become cheaper, we also need more advanced and more capable BLDC motors to more secure and more advanced coms & jamming equipment.... (Computers, electronics and sensors effect a wide array of weapons systems so we need a good size budget for them) 

Iran should also produce a very large fleet of semi autonomous quadcopters that can be armed with guns or rockets or missiles or be used to deploy large number of mines at sea or on the ground.... And a large fleet of armed UGV's of all sizes


----------



## SOHEIL

SALMAN F said:


> How come the Iranians make weapons that toke Russians years to make??!



More than a decade !

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SubWater

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/891987/آغاز-تحقیقات-برای-ساخت-سامانه-موشکی-پانتسیر-ایرانی
Bavar 373 tested on Ballistic missile and Iran have plan to build indigenous pantsir



SubWater said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/891987/آغاز-تحقیقات-برای-ساخت-سامانه-موشکی-پانتسیر-ایرانی
> Bavar 373 tested on Ballistic missile and Iran wanted to build indigenous pantsir


for short range low altitude
Good system against Cruise and Drones

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## N_Al40

*Giggles excitedly in Iranian*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1039040170044084224

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

SubWater said:


> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/891987/آغاز-تحقیقات-برای-ساخت-سامانه-موشکی-پانتسیر-ایرانی
> Bavar 373 tested on Ballistic missile and Iran have plan to build indigenous pantsir
> 
> 
> for short range low altitude
> Good system against Cruise and Drones


they didn't ask about one very important threat that we face in future and that's hyper-sonic weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

Can't these fools stop calling bavar "homegrown s-300"? It has nothing to do with s-300.

Also, have they said they are going to make a pantsir like system or are copying the pantsir? I've read multiple sources and each seems to write something different.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Intresting, what about the south and the West? Iran needs coverage in those areas.
> 
> Also it needs to increase the range of their OTH radars.



If they do not have radars in other areas, then they will cover it with Sephar Radar that has a 3000-km-range


----------



## Sineva

WinterNights said:


> Can't these fools stop calling bavar "homegrown s-300"? It has nothing to do with s-300.
> 
> Also, have they said they are going to make a pantsir like system or are copying the pantsir? I've read multiple sources and each seems to write something different.


Its a pantsir like system not a direct copy of it.We`ve seen a picture of a wind tunnel model of the probable sam already.





We can see that the model on the far right of the picture is a 2 stage sam that looks quite a bit like the pantsir sam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zathura



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

Sineva said:


> Its a pantsir like system not a direct copy of it.We`ve seen a picture of a wind tunnel model of the probable sam already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can see that the model on the far right of the picture is a 2 stage sam that looks quite a bit like the pantsir sam.



The media made it seem like Iran is copying the pantsir. These piece of sh.. media outlets are the cause of most problems we've had regarding Iranian military news. 

As for the pic you posted, it seems slowly everything there is coming to fruition which makes me think if that fighter jet is also something they're making.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Hack-Hook said:


> they didn't ask about one very important threat that we face in future and that's hyper-sonic weapons.



Yes. Hypersonic Weapons are the main thread in near future. Due to their speed and non ballistic incoming normal AD with missiles will have a lot of difficulties to take them on. So only option is to produce LASER weapons which can bring magawatts energie on the point in very short time. This weapons already exists, also they can already be integrated in a AD theater. But range and power arent enough at the moment. Best i heard is 100 KW over a distance of 4 Km. So this weapons work for CRAM. But needed is 1000+ KW over distance of 50+ Km. But the progress of these weapons is rapidly and sure we will see distance of 20+ Km within the next 5-8 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

N_Al40 said:


> *Giggles excitedly in Iranian*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1039040170044084224

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



damn, I wish those clips had english subtitles
btw, I think Iran is working already some years on "domestic Pantsir" systems


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Yes. Hypersonic Weapons are the main thread in near future. Due to their speed and non ballistic incoming normal AD with missiles will have a lot of difficulties to take them on. So only option is to produce LASER weapons which can bring magawatts energie on the point in very short time. This weapons already exists, also they can already be integrated in a AD theater. But range and power arent enough at the moment. Best i heard is 100 KW over a distance of 4 Km. So this weapons work for CRAM. But needed is 1000+ KW over distance of 50+ Km. But the progress of these weapons is rapidly and sure we will see distance of 20+ Km within the next 5-8 years.


laser weaponry have a very concerning short coming , they loose power over distance (they loss would be worse in Iran environment with its high 2.5-10micron particle pollution) and they only can engage in line of sight so at best they can be considered point defense unless some day we manage to install them on satellite or airplanes .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> Yes. Hypersonic Weapons are the main thread in near future. Due to their speed and non ballistic incoming normal AD with missiles will have a lot of difficulties to take them on. So only option is to produce LASER weapons which can bring magawatts energie on the point in very short time. This weapons already exists, also they can already be integrated in a AD theater. But range and power arent enough at the moment. Best i heard is 100 KW over a distance of 4 Km. So this weapons work for CRAM. But needed is 1000+ KW over distance of 50+ Km. But the progress of these weapons is rapidly and sure we will see distance of 20+ Km within the next 5-8 years.



Hypersonic missiles are an extension of MAD (mutual assured destruction) China, Russia, US will have their hypersonic missiles equipped with MIRV nuclear warheads. Russia already has an active Hypersonic missile project, was shown off recently.

For conventional use the technology is not cost effective at this stage. But who knows how “cheap” it becomes in say 30-40 years.

Thus for Iran, defending against Hypersonic Glide vehicles are the least of their concern in the next two decades.


----------



## PeeD

So the reporter asked whether Iran has a Pantsir-like system in development and he said yes we have such a system in development.

He didn't say it's a Pantsir copy, could also be a Tor-M1 copy.
Furthermore the wind tunnel model of the Pantsir like missile is significantly different to the Pantsir missile design.

Remains to be seen. Plus we still have the IRIADF and the IRGC-ASF, maybe two short range SAM projects are ongoing.
Both have a short range SAM against aircrafts in production, the Ya-Zahra. But for a anti-PGM/CM SAM something like the Tor/Pantsir is needed that is highly cost effective.


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Hypersonic missiles are an extension of MAD (mutual assured destruction) China, Russia, US will have their hypersonic missiles equipped with MIRV nuclear warheads. Russia already has an active Hypersonic missile project, was shown off recently.
> 
> For conventional use the technology is not cost effective at this stage. But who knows how “cheap” it becomes in say 30-40 years.
> 
> Thus for Iran, defending against Hypersonic Glide vehicles are the least of their concern in the next two decades.


wrong , by increased rate of advancement in technologies and science we see today at most it will be 5-10 years and developing a solution against that problem (from scratch) also take at least a decade


----------



## PeeD

Another point from the interview:
Talash-3 is not yet operational.

The Talash-1 was the first step, a fire control radar for the S-200 batteries to add the Sayyad-2 missile to it.
It was replaced by the Talash-2 before entering widespread service.
The Talash-2 could guide the improved Sayyad-2 to its max. range of 70km (the Talash-1 was limited to 50km).
The Talash-2 is for some technical reasons quite unique and very cost effective, it was also taken into service by the IRGC-ASF.

The Talash-3 is the mobile replacement for the S-200's Square Pair radar. It was shown once I believe but is not yet in service. It is more complex and expensive than the Talash-2 and is probably used to guide Sayyad-3 and the S-200 to their max. range of 150-200km.

With all stages operational the IRIADF S-200 sites will have the follwing systems:
- Sayyad-2/Talash-2 combination for high altitude targets up to 70km
- Sayyad-2/Talash-3 combination for targets up to 120km away
- Talash-3 as mobile survivable radar for the S-200 for ranges of 150-200km
- Sqaire Pair static fire control radar for back-up of Talash-3 radar and very long range engagements of 200-250km.

That makes at least 3 independent fire control radars at a single site, of which two are mobile.
Thats 3 different missiles each optimized for a special envelope of an engagement.
In most cases the "city/base defense SAM system", the HAWK/Mersad will offer those "strategic" S-200-Talash SAM sites with an additional layer of mid-altitude mid range cost effective SAM defense.

This will complete the IRIADF's static 24/7 SAM structure for the future.

The future mobile component will be made of Bavar-373 and Sayyad-2/3. In that scenario, the Bavar-373's Sayyad-4 missile can be used as extra or replacement of S-200 missiles, once they can't be kept in service anymore. A semi-truck based launcher with Sayyad-4 working in combination with Talash-3 fire control radar would then end the S-200's career, while not being the complex, high performance Bavar-373 yet.

Now something about the IRGC-ASF. The replacement of their Sayyad-1/HQ-2 sites with Sayyad-2/Talash-2 is wise, improving range and missile load ~ 2 times while adding mobility and smaller system size.
So as Iran is not a capitalist system, they will probably concentrate the replaced batteries at a single site. Either keep them in service and form a Tehran super battery of 6-8 batteries, which would make a 8 channel, 48 launcher super site, or as individual sites. That super-site would still be a good capability for today's standard against high altitude targets, similar to the SA-1 for Moscow. That could free up one of the two Tehran S-300 sites for Bandar Abbas. The point is that the HQ-2 is a complex system to operate, better keep one unit proficient with this legacy system than keep existing units trained with it, plus all the trouble with the old support infrastructure.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The Talash-2 is for some technical reasons quite unique and very cost effective, it was also taken into service by the IRGC-ASF.



It's been deployed at least 3 sites already. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/irans-sam-coverage.510086/page-6#post-10780537



PeeD said:


> So as Iran is not a capitalist system, they will probably concentrate the replaced batteries at a single site. Either keep them in service and form a Tehran super battery of 6-8 batteries, which would make a 8 channel, 48 launcher super site, or as individual sites. That super-site would still be a good capability for today's standard against high altitude targets, similar to the SA-1 for Moscow. That could free up one of the two Tehran S-300 sites for Bandar Abbas. The point is that the HQ-2 is a complex system to operate, better keep one unit proficient with this legacy system than keep existing units trained with it, plus all the trouble with the old support infrastructure.



Why even keep this very old system active? Surely it would be far more effective to remove it from service completely, and replace it with Sayyad-2 which is better in every way?


----------



## PeeD

If you are not a capitalist system with a strong military industrial complex it makes no sense to replace a system if you have manpower that could man and maintain the legacy system.

Iran has the manpower to keep the HQ-2/Sayyad-1 in service. Why do it? Because any target that would make it into Tehran region airspace and fly above ~10km would be cost effectively dealt with a Sayyad-1. Anything lower is for the HAWK/Mersad. Anything beyond the borders of the Tehran region above medium altitude is dealt with Sayyad-2/3/4 and S-200/300.

So the Sayyad-1 takes a small portion of the IADS envelope, that of targets that make it above Tehran airspace and fly at high altitudes and high speeds. For that portion a 8 channel, 48 ready to fire missile battery would be quite suited.

The IADS will automatically select when it would be a waste of resources to use a S-300 or Sayyad-2 and use a Sayyad-1 instead.
Be sure that the IRGC-ASF has modified the HQ-2/Sayyad-1 until now, so that it has chances to do such a job.
Maybe it will be put into storage for a desperate war scenario where other systems are knocked out.

The portion described for a Sayyad-1 super battery would maybe just make 8% of wartime engagements and for that task, a upgraded legacy system could be well sufficient. Don't underestimate the Sayyad-1 upgraded and inside a modern IADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> If you are not a capitalist system with a strong military industrial complex it makes no sense to replace a system if you have manpower that could man and maintain the legacy system.
> 
> Iran has the manpower to keep the HQ-2/Sayyad-1 in service. Why do it? Because any target that would make it into Tehran region airspace and fly above ~10km would be cost effectively dealt with a Sayyad-1. Anything lower is for the HAWK/Mersad. Anything beyond the borders of the Tehran region above medium altitude is dealt with Sayyad-2/3/4 and S-200/300.
> 
> So the Sayyad-1 takes a small portion of the IADS envelope, that of targets that make it above Tehran airspace and fly at high altitudes and high speeds. For that portion a 8 channel, 48 ready to fire missile battery would be quite suited.
> 
> The IADS will automatically select when it would be a waste of resources to use a S-300 or Sayyad-2 and use a Sayyad-1 instead.
> Be sure that the IRGC-ASF has modified the HQ-2/Sayyad-1 until now, so that it has chances to do such a job.
> Maybe it will be put into storage for a desperate war scenario where other systems are knocked out.
> 
> The portion described for a Sayyad-1 super battery would maybe just make 8% of wartime engagements and for that task, a upgraded legacy system could be well sufficient. Don't underestimate the Sayyad-1 upgraded and inside a modern IADS.



Considering the Sayyad-1 upgrade was made in 1999, don't you think it would be vulnerable to ECM and jamming?


----------



## PeeD

First and foremost it is a kinematically strong missile in its rather small operation envelope. At high speeds and high altitude it can make up for its maneuverability deficits.
Plus it is command guided, which means that it can work with other radars as guidance source or even better, ground based optical/TI guidance.
So if upgraded well, and we know that they did works in that direction (Sayyad-1A), ECM can be countered to a good extend.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*بنظر میرسد که سامانه های پدافندی اچ کیو دو در حال جایگزین شدن با سامانه پدافندی صیاد هستند...*

















*استقرار سامانه پدافنی تلاش بصورت ترکیبی با سامانه اس-۲۰۰*
*






*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> First and foremost it is a kinematically strong missile in its rather small operation envelope. At high speeds and high altitude it can make up for its maneuverability deficits.
> Plus it is command guided, which means that it can work with other radars as guidance source or even better, ground based optical/TI guidance.
> So if upgraded well, and we know that they did works in that direction (Sayyad-1A), ECM can be countered to a good extend.



Command guided only system means they rely on frequencies to guide them post launch for most of the way at least which would make them highly susceptible to any kind of jamming and for all we know the U.S. could have Sat's in space with massive directional antenna's capable of flooding every area their fighters go too with massive data going to every within range frequency imaginable except the specific ones used by them and have Aircraft's in the air escorting their fighter that do the same for short wave frequencies.

For an SA-2 type system that at max is used for targets within 25km of the launch site that has a large fixed launcher that can point towards the target and is equipped with missiles that can get to most targets within 30 seconds with a missile with a diameter over 2ft the best upgrade would be various type of expensive internal sensors with fire and forget capability 

But I don't think Iran should produce the Sayyad at all!!!!!! Just upgrade the ones we already have because they are simply too big for the capability they have and lack of mobility makes them susceptible to cheaper and or longer ranged systems


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran wouldn’t risk stoking Russian anger by reverse engineering TOR-m1 or Pantsir system.

Furthermore, I assume there are contract clauses that would prevent Iran from reverse engineering TOR system for at least X amount of years.

I think Iran would worry about the political fallout of such a move especially in future arms deals with russia.


----------



## skyshadow

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...defense-test-as-israel-builds-a-missile-corps


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

For short ranges command guidance is good enough. The Tor and Pantsir are also command guided with no fear of any kind of satellite-borne jamming.

They simply loose accuracy at long ranges and the farther they are away from the command emitter, the weaker single could get prone to jamming. Still S-300PS and 2000-vintage KS-1 were command guided to much longer distances than a Sayyad-1 would be.

30km is robust enough and a TI guidance to that range is also no issue, which means no need to use the old ECM prone x-band guidance radar (the weakpoint for ECM in the system).

No. The Sayyad-1/HQ-2 are good as they are for that specific task and whats needed is a TI camera at the radar, a upgrade that (if not already done), is cheap and easy for Iran.
The airspace directly above the Tehran region is most protected and at best some stealth asset would try their chance, no heavy ECM support expected in those phases.

The command guided SA-1 protected Moscow airspace for 25 years, only replaced by the S-300. The role would be the same as Sayyad-2 in Tehran, a limited task.


----------



## WinterNights

@PeeD This is regarding Talash systems and Bavar.
It seems to me the Bavar-373 will only use one missile i.e a sayyad-4. What's the point of having a separate long range air defence system called Talash-3. Why not just incorporate the sayyad-3 into the Bavar system? Is there some other "uniqueness" about this whole Talash system to merit it being an entire separate system? Is the main difference simply a matter of range?

I much rather them develop some dedicated anti missile systems like david's sling and combine this with bavar than have 2 long range air defence systems with both focusing mainly on anti aircraft etc. Unless, like I said, I am missing something about Talash.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> For short ranges command guidance is good enough. The Tor and Pantsir are also command guided with no fear of any kind of satellite-borne jamming.
> 
> They simply loose accuracy at long ranges and the farther they are away from the command emitter, the weaker single could get prone to jamming. Still S-300PS and 2000-vintage KS-1 were command guided to much longer distances than a Sayyad-1 would be.
> 
> 30km is robust enough and a TI guidance to that range is also no issue, which means no need to use the old ECM prone x-band guidance radar (the weakpoint for ECM in the system).
> 
> No. The Sayyad-1/HQ-2 are good as they are for that specific task and whats needed is a TI camera at the radar, a upgrade that (if not already done), is cheap and easy for Iran.
> The airspace directly above the Tehran region is most protected and at best some stealth asset would try their chance, no heavy ECM support expected in those phases.
> 
> The command guided SA-1 protected Moscow airspace for 25 years, only replaced by the S-300. The role would be the same as Sayyad-2 in Tehran, a limited task.



They may be good enough to upgrade with the right upgrade but NOT really good enough to produce!

Fact is for it's size, range and capabilities the missile is too large and requires a massive launcher which is NOT a system that's worth taking into production and the main reason against it would be lack of mobility.

In a war with any country with the capability of going to war with Iran the enemy would conduct detailed analysis of where our systems are located and what the range capability of each system is and they'll upgrade the maps of their Aircraft and Cruise Missiles to take countermeasures and unless you use the time given to you by your early warning systems to take countermeasures of your own and move your systems to a 2ndary location previously planed to lay traps you will be in trouble 

And systems like the Tor & Pantsir's are highly mobile short ranged systems mainly meant for low altitude engagement like a volley of cruise missiles before the fighters come, intercepting projectiles fired from aircraft, helo's & lower altitude UAV's and in that role they can do their job adequately and cheaper command guidance backed by high processing capability is sufficient at their range and what they'll be used against but it is NOT sufficient for aircrafts that will NOT even attempt to enter a high threat area like Tehran unless backed by various type of jammers and countermeasures

+ The SA-1 or Sayyad-1 is 35ft long & 28 inches in diameter the dam thing is a good 6 inches wider in diameter and well over 10ft longer than a Tomahawk cruise missile which means they are 5ft longer and 8 inches wider than the Fateh-110 and with that size they are usually engaged within 25km of their which would have been OK if they were a mobile system capable of laying traps but they are NOT!

And if your a Un-bunkered high value fixed target that can't lay traps, you can't be well hidden due to a lack of mobility and your engagement range against fighters is less than 60km then fighters can simply use relatively low cost glide bombs like the SDB and a single F-15 can carry 18 of them or 14 & external fuel without breaking a sweet 

Which makes them a ridicules SAM to produce at this day and age! Iran would be far better off just building another Zolfaghar factory to allow us to go after more targets and hit their aircraft where they land because Sayyads are just too easy to take out for various reasons which can't even intercept cruise missiles & even if they could they are far too big of a missile for such a task 

Plus it's time Iran starts mass producing various types of sensors & electronics with automated factories so they come out cheaper for the military to install them on wide range of platforms from pulse doppler SAR radars to thermal imaging to HD camera's to our own advance processor and memory storage devices & SSD and we need to get our hands on an AESA radars or have our engineers try to develop our own by gathering as much data on them as they can


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Iran wouldn’t risk stoking Russian anger by reverse engineering TOR-m1 or Pantsir system.
> 
> Furthermore, I assume there are contract clauses that would prevent Iran from reverse engineering TOR system for at least X amount of years.
> 
> I think Iran would worry about the political fallout of such a move especially in future arms deals with russia.



Right, Iran would never do what now???

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> They may be good enough to upgrade with the right upgrade but NOT really good enough to produce!
> 
> Fact is for it's size, range and capabilities the missile is too large and requires a massive launcher which is NOT a system that's worth taking into production and the main reason against it would be lack of mobility.
> 
> In a war with any country with the capability of going to war with Iran the enemy would conduct detailed analysis of where our systems are located and what the range capability of each system is and they'll upgrade the maps of their Aircraft and Cruise Missiles to take countermeasures and unless you use the time given to you by your early warning systems to take countermeasures of your own and move your systems to a 2ndary location previously planed to lay traps you will be in trouble
> 
> And systems like the Tor & Pantsir's are highly mobile short ranged systems mainly meant for low altitude engagement like a volley of cruise missiles before the fighters come, intercepting projectiles fired from aircraft, helo's & lower altitude UAV's and in that role they can do their job adequately and cheaper command guidance backed by high processing capability is sufficient at their range and what they'll be used against but it is NOT sufficient for aircrafts that will NOT even attempt to enter a high threat area like Tehran unless backed by various type of jammers and countermeasures
> 
> + The SA-1 or Sayyad-1 is 35ft long & 28 inches in diameter the dam thing is a good 6 inches wider in diameter and well over 10ft longer than a Tomahawk cruise missile which means they are 5ft longer and 8 inches wider than the Fateh-110 and with that size they are usually engaged within 25km of their which would have been OK if they were a mobile system capable of laying traps but they are NOT!
> 
> And if your a Un-bunkered high value fixed target that can't lay traps, you can't be well hidden due to a lack of mobility and your engagement range against fighters is less than 60km then fighters can simply use relatively low cost glide bombs like the SDB and a single F-15 can carry 18 of them or 14 & external fuel without breaking a sweet
> 
> Which makes them a ridicules SAM to produce at this day and age! Iran would be far better off just building another Zolfaghar factory to allow us to go after more targets and hit their aircraft where they land because Sayyads are just too easy to take out for various reasons which can't even intercept cruise missiles & even if they could they are far too big of a missile for such a task
> 
> Plus it's time Iran starts mass producing various types of sensors & electronics with automated factories so they come out cheaper for the military to install them on wide range of platforms from pulse doppler SAR radars to thermal imaging to HD camera's to our own advance processor and memory storage devices & SSD and we need to get our hands on an AESA radars or have our engineers try to develop our own by gathering as much data on them as they can



No one would produce the Sayyad-1 today. Iran has a large stockpile and the manpower to use the systems.
The task for it is very limited --> high speed, high altitude, only Tehran airspace.
That is its percentage of the war. Not more, it won't be used to intercept any SDB or low level maneuverable fighters. Anything that falls into its criteria will receive, everything that is not, not.

One of the main goals of an air campaign is to take out the high altitude capability to allow high altitude bombing. Loosing the high altitude assets is the start of the end.
The Sayyad-1 is static but is protected by all other IADS elements to fullfil its small portion of the warfare.


----------



## PeeD

The Pantsir design is genius in its missile design, better than the Tor with its omni-directional cold launch system.

However if Iran really wants a Pantsir stype "all-in-one" system it should move the AAA component to something like the new Chinese 76mm SA2 AAA system with Oerlikon AHEAD like sensor fused submunition rounds. Iran has the 76mm gun technology in production albeit for naval use and the Russians have also realized that this is the way to go by developing their 57mm equivalent.

Alternatively Iran could go the Russian path and further develop the 57mm S-60 AAA as basis. However the 76mm gun has more potential but would be harder to change into a land version and the size can also cause problems.

A 76mm gun, plus the TOR guidance radar on top of it as well as a compact search radar at the rear with 3-6 of those Iranian Pantsir-like SAMs at each side? The size of such a hybrid would be very large, larger than the Pantsir. Technically possible and a suitable truck is available too but I would distribute the system on 2-3 trucks each dedicated to either 76mm/57mm AHEAD AAA or missiles.

The missile component would then have 12-16 Iranian Pantsir. The Iranian Pantsir seems to have a powered second stage, which would make it more expensive but also longer ranged than the original Pantsir. The powered second stage forbids a more robust laser guidance as in the new Russian Sosna, but could allow a range of around 25km at higher cost per round.

The question whether Tor or Pantsir guidance radar is simpler: The Pantsir radar system while more expensive is smaller and capable for longer ranges. If instead of the traditional 30mm guns of the Pantsir, a giant like the 76mm gun with AHEAD-munition is used, compactness of the radar is of high importance. The question is whether Iran has access to the Pantsir radar technology.

The search radar needs to be compact and high power too. A expensive high power system could be the solution like on the newest Pantsir variants, they offer the range necessary for the longer ranged missiles.
But much more cost effective could be the thermal camera (4x) equipped passive search system which Iran presented 2014 but I can imagine that it would get problems if deployed on the same truck as a 76mm gun when it fires. 

A completely different scenario would be of course a copy of the Tor on a wheeled system. The display of the Pantsir-like windtunnel model speaks against this, as well as the relatively higher price per round compared to the Pantsir. But in total it would do the job well and be a lower-risk development than those scenarios above.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

WinterNights said:


> @PeeD This is regarding Talash systems and Bavar.
> It seems to me the Bavar-373 will only use one missile i.e a sayyad-4. What's the point of having a separate long range air defence system called Talash-3. Why not just incorporate the sayyad-3 into the Bavar system? Is there some other "uniqueness" about this whole Talash system to merit it being an entire separate system? Is the main difference simply a matter of range?
> 
> I much rather them develop some dedicated anti missile systems like david's sling and combine this with bavar than have 2 long range air defence systems with both focusing mainly on anti aircraft etc. Unless, like I said, I am missing something about Talash.



Talash is basically an upgrade to the S-200. Talash-3 would provide a mobile, more sophisticated radar at existing S-200 sites, as well as medium range Sayyad-2/3 missiles to protect the static S-200 launch rails from tactical aircraft.



PeeD said:


> The Pantsir design is genius in its missile design, better than the Tor with its omni-directional cold launch system.
> 
> However if Iran really wants a Pantsir stype "all-in-one" system it should move the AAA component to something like the new Chinese 76mm SA2 AAA system with Oerlikon AHEAD like sensor fused submunition rounds. Iran has the 76mm gun technology in production albeit for naval use and the Russians have also realized that this is the way to go by developing their 57mm equivalent.
> 
> Alternatively Iran could go the Russian path and further develop the 57mm S-60 AAA as basis. However the 76mm gun has more potential but would be harder to change into a land version and the size can also cause problems.
> 
> A 76mm gun, plus the TOR guidance radar on top of it as well as a compact search radar at the rear with 3-6 of those Iranian Pantsir-like SAMs at each side? The size of such a hybrid would be very large, larger than the Pantsir. Technically possible and a suitable truck is available too but I would distribute the system on 2-3 trucks each dedicated to either 76mm/57mm AHEAD AAA or missiles.
> 
> The missile component would then have 12-16 Iranian Pantsir. The Iranian Pantsir seems to have a powered second stage, which would make it more expensive but also longer ranged than the original Pantsir. The powered second stage forbids a more robust laser guidance as in the new Russian Sosna, but could allow a range of around 25km at higher cost per round.
> 
> The question whether Tor or Pantsir guidance radar is simpler: The Pantsir radar system while more expensive is smaller and capable for longer ranges. If instead of the traditional 30mm guns of the Pantsir, a giant like the 76mm gun with AHEAD-munition is used, compactness of the radar is of high importance. The question is whether Iran has access to the Pantsir radar technology.
> 
> The search radar needs to be compact and high power too. A expensive high power system could be the solution like on the newest Pantsir variants, they offer the range necessary for the longer ranged missiles.
> But much more cost effective could be the thermal camera (4x) equipped passive search system which Iran presented 2014 but I can imagine that it would get problems if deployed on the same truck as a 76mm gun when it fires.
> 
> A completely different scenario would be of course a copy of the Tor on a wheeled system. The display of the Pantsir-like windtunnel model speaks against this, as well as the relatively higher price per round compared to the Pantsir. But in total it would do the job well and be a lower-risk development than those scenarios above.



I think it's better to contain the system into one vehicle (a Zafar 8x8 or at most a Zoljanah 10x10). This way it is less cumbersome, has a shorter supply chain and is just easier to position. You want a small footprint. Because say you want to protect a Bavar-373 battery with 2 Iranian Pantsirs, you only need 2 vehicles not 4 or 6.

For this the 76 mm is waay too big (don't forgot the ammo!) and you have to also consider traverse rate as the gun will be the last line of defence. You don't need a big gun since you want the missiles to fire at targets at range. So there are a multitude of weapons you can consider. I think even the 35 mm Samavat would be good for the job considering reach round of the Oerlikon's AHEAD ammo fires 152 tungsten sub-penetrators. I'd think the high traverse and fire rate of the Oerlikon guns coupled with its effective AHEAD ammo are enough as the "last, last" line of defence.

Anyway I hope Iran gets out of its strange habit of equipping systems with few missiles... Fateh-110 with 1 per truck, Crotale copy with 4, only 4 Qader ASCMs on Mowj class even though 8 can be fitted, 3 instead of 6 Hawk launchers at Hawk sites, 4 TELs at S-300 sites instead of the normal 6, 2 S-200 missiles instead of 6... etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

AmirPatriot said:


> Talash is basically an upgrade to the S-200. Talash-3 would provide a mobile, more sophisticated radar at existing S-200 sites, as well as medium range Sayyad-2/3 missiles to protect the static S-200 launch rails from tactical aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's better to contain the system into one vehicle (a Zafar 8x8 or at most a Zoljanah 10x10). This way it is less cumbersome, has a shorter supply chain and is just easier to position. You want a small footprint. Because say you want to protect a Bavar-373 battery with 2 Iranian Pantsirs, you only need 2 vehicles not 4 or 6.
> 
> For this the 76 mm is waay too big (don't forgot the ammo!) and you have to also consider traverse rate as the gun will be the last line of defence. You don't need a big gun since you want the missiles to fire arat There targets at range. So there are a multitude of weapons you can consider. I think even the 35 mm Samavat would be good for the job considering reach round of the Oerlikon's AHEAD ammo fires 152 tungsten sub-penetrators. I'd think the high traverse and fire rate of the Oerlikon guns coupled with its effective AHEAD ammo are enough as the "last, last" line of defence.
> 
> Anyway I hope Iran gets out of its strange habit of equipping systems with few missiles... Fateh-110 with 1 per truck, Crotale copy with 4, only 4 Qader ASCMs on Mowj class even though 4 can be fitted, 3 instead of 6 Hawk launchers at Hawk sites, 4 TELs at S-300 sites instead of the normal 6, 2 S-200 missiles instead of 6... etc.



"arat"


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

With systems like the Bavar-373 the footprint factor is already gone, you can't disguise it as civilian trucks anymore. So a compact Iranian Pantsir with twin 35mm guns on Zafar is one option and a large Iranian Pantsir on Zoljanah another more expensive and capable.







The point is that in the future with UAVs, you need a cost effective weapon to kill at extended ranges.
The 35mm gun has a max. range of 3,5km. It was a wise decision by Iran to move to the 100mm KS-19 to be able to engage targets at extended ranges.
The 76mm gun is mastered and in service, plus it offers broadly similar range and altitude capability to the KS-19. It is also large enough to be upgraded to a guided round, something Russians are moving to with their 57mm system.

So the idea that the AAA component is a last ditch mean for protection is from the past. The AAA component should be the tool to kill anything not worth a missile; UAVs, CM, Helicopters, unpowered bombs like SDB...
For those targets a single 76mm AHEAD munition could be sufficient, whole probably needing a salvo of some 6 35mm AHEAD munitions or 25 normal 30mm Pantsir cannon rounds.

The 8 barrel Mesbah does a very good job out to 2,5km, but needs the investment for 8 23mm guns. A 76mm AHEAD round would need one gun, and extend the engagement range 3 times, plus only need one round instead of 30 for a assured kill.
Anything that wants to kill a Bavar-373 site needs to get into that 2,5km zone of the Mesbah at some point in time (like anything that wants to kill a CIWS equipped ship has to go past it). But if you want a system that can kill crossing targets to protect area targets like cities, you use a chain of 4-5 such systems. 
We can't underestimate the incoming UAV threat or that of weapons like the SDB. Iranians were wise enough to realize this 10 years ago with the 100mm autogun, it basically does the same job as a potential 76mm AHEAD round (but limited in magazine size and rate of fire).
Iran should not go below 57mm. It has naval 40mm Bofors, 35mm Oerlikon, 30mm autocannon, 23mm ZSU and 20mm "Vulcan" as smaller caliber options, all mastered and ready for production.
But I advocate larger calibers for cost effectiveness and larger coverage area.
Technically it is a challenge to house it but mechanical speed issues are no showstopper. The killing capability of 2 such 76mm guns on two Zafar trucks plus a missile component with 16 missiles on a single Zafar would be much higher than two Pantsir, while still cheaper.
Russian mechanized warfare has sometimes requirements like moving and shooting which requires much extra resources, not really worth the extra investment.

At the end, we might see two completely different "Pantsir-like" systems, one from the IRIADF and one from the IRGC-ASF. The IRGC was innovative enough 10 years ago to go for the 100mm gun when nobody else worked in that direction.
So basically my wish for a 76mm AHEAD AAA was already fulfilled 10 years ago, but I want the "Iranian Pantsir" to benefit from these developments and not move back to smaller calibers with high rate of fire. I know that the engineering problems to integrate such a big gun into a Pantsir like system is enormous, but it would be the best possible.


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Right, Iran would never do what now???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 498837



You forgot Russian Torpedo as well.

But you fail to realize 2 basic points

1) BUK and KH-55 are Cold War era systems. Not the recent in Russian technology.

2) Karrar is not a direct copy of T-90 noticeable differences including engine. Furthermore, I believe this project had russian support and even input. It’s an modernization program for Iran’s T-72 tanks in essence.

You don’t think it’s fishy that Iran announces they want to buy T-90 and then few months later reveals a T-90 similar tank? Not to mention Iran introducing Russian T-90 tanks into Syria so it can test their battlefield effectiveness?

One just needs to look at recent Russia-China arms deals and Russia wanting stronger protection for IP technology and reverse engineering clauses.

So a reverse engineered TOR-M1 or S-300 might happen one day down the road, but so far Iran has had TOR system for over a decade and no indications of any reverse engineering.

Furthermore, I am not sure Iran has any domestic system that uses cold launch technology. So Iran will need to master that if it wishes to copy TOR or S-300.

Iran can build a pantsir equivalent using Its owns technology and expertise. It doesn’t NEED to reverse engineer pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

WinterNights said:


> The media made it seem like Iran is copying the pantsir. These piece of sh.. media outlets are the cause of most problems we've had regarding Iranian military news.
> 
> As for the pic you posted, it seems slowly everything there is coming to fruition which makes me think if that fighter jet is also something they're making.


Heres a pic of the iranian pantsir type from another angle.




And here is the russian pantsir




There are some similarities but also clearly some differences as well,so definitely not a direct copy just the same concept.The second stage of the iranian sam reminds me a little of the rapier sam in its layout,whereas the second stage of the pantsir sam reminds me more of the sidewinder a2a missile in its layout.



PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> With systems like the Bavar-373 the footprint factor is already gone, you can't disguise it as civilian trucks anymore. So a compact Iranian Pantsir with twin 35mm guns on Zafar is one option and a large Iranian Pantsir on Zoljanah another more expensive and capable.


Thats a good idea,something like an iranian truck mounted Tunguska sam system equivalent,mounting say 8 missiles and 2 35mm rapid fire cannons.And a heavy pantsir type mounting anything from 16-24 missiles with the ability to guide at least 6 at any one time.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> With systems like the Bavar-373 the footprint factor is already gone, you can't disguise it as civilian trucks anymore. So a compact Iranian Pantsir with twin 35mm guns on Zafar is one option and a large Iranian Pantsir on Zoljanah another more expensive and capable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that in the future with UAVs, you need a cost effective weapon to kill at extended ranges.
> The 35mm gun has a max. range of 3,5km. It was a wise decision by Iran to move to the 100mm KS-19 to be able to engage targets at extended ranges.
> The 76mm gun is mastered and in service, plus it offers broadly similar range and altitude capability to the KS-19. It is also large enough to be upgraded to a guided round, something Russians are moving to with their 57mm system.
> 
> So the idea that the AAA component is a last ditch mean for protection is from the past. The AAA component should be the tool to kill anything not worth a missile; UAVs, CM, Helicopters, unpowered bombs like SDB...
> For those targets a single 76mm AHEAD munition could be sufficient, whole probably needing a salvo of some 6 35mm AHEAD munitions or 25 normal 30mm Pantsir cannon rounds.
> 
> The 8 barrel Mesbah does a very good job out to 2,5km, but needs the investment for 8 23mm guns. A 76mm AHEAD round would need one gun, and extend the engagement range 3 times, plus only need one round instead of 30 for a assured kill.
> Anything that wants to kill a Bavar-373 site needs to get into that 2,5km zone of the Mesbah at some point in time (like anything that wants to kill a CIWS equipped ship has to go past it). But if you want a system that can kill crossing targets to protect area targets like cities, you use a chain of 4-5 such systems.
> We can't underestimate the incoming UAV threat or that of weapons like the SDB. Iranians were wise enough to realize this 10 years ago with the 100mm autogun, it basically does the same job as a potential 76mm AHEAD round (but limited in magazine size and rate of fire).
> Iran should not go below 57mm. It has naval 40mm Bofors, 35mm Oerlikon, 30mm autocannon, 23mm ZSU and 20mm "Vulcan" as smaller caliber options, all mastered and ready for production.
> But I advocate larger calibers for cost effectiveness and larger coverage area.
> Technically it is a challenge to house it but mechanical speed issues are no showstopper. The killing capability of 2 such 76mm guns on two Zafar trucks plus a missile component with 16 missiles on a single Zafar would be much higher than two Pantsir, while still cheaper.
> Russian mechanized warfare has sometimes requirements like moving and shooting which requires much extra resources, not really worth the extra investment.
> 
> At the end, we might see two completely different "Pantsir-like" systems, one from the IRIADF and one from the IRGC-ASF. The IRGC was innovative enough 10 years ago to go for the 100mm gun when nobody else worked in that direction.
> So basically my wish for a 76mm AHEAD AAA was already fulfilled 10 years ago, but I want the "Iranian Pantsir" to benefit from these developments and not move back to smaller calibers with high rate of fire. I know that the engineering problems to integrate such a big gun into a Pantsir like system is enormous, but it would be the best possible.



Let's be real here. The primary use of a Pantsir is to protect high value installations or air defence systems from cruise missiles and PGMs (glide bombs. SDB, JSOW etc). Helicopters and UAVs are not its mission. Helicopters are fought on the battlefield where SPAA, the guns on APC/IFVs and MANPADS can deal with it. In any case, an unarmoured truck has no place on the battlefield. And it's not really appropriate to bring "future" UAVs into the discussion because we don't know what they will do. Once the UAV threat (to long range air defences like S-300, Bavar???) is defined, it's countermeasures can also be defined.

So if it's job is to protect against cruise missiles and PGMs, we know what each threat is and what can be used against it. Cruise missiles, with relatively high speed and therefore rate of closure, should be targeted by the missile part of the system. This is what was happening in Syria, and navies are adopting a similar approach with systems like the RIM-116 replacing/augmenting gun CIWS systems. The gun part of the Pantsir is very effective at destroying threats like the SDB or JSOW, because they are slow moving glide bombs launched in numbers. Radar/optically guided guns are perfect for taking these out since they can hit such slow moving targets and they have plenty of ammunition. These are the sober and logical solutions to known threats. Do you actually see any problems with the Pantsir? I think it is a great system for what it is meant to do in all aspects. Financially, logistically, operationally.

I think you'd agree that when the enemy has sent half a dozen cruise missiles (or more) at a strategic site or long range air defence system, you don't want to take any chances. You want to destroy them with the best you've got, which is the interceptor missiles.

A huge 76 mm gun is just overly complex and unnecessary. When the target is just some glide bombs, the 30-40 mm calibre is more than good enough.


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> The Pantsir design is genius in its missile design, better than the Tor with its omni-directional cold launch system.
> 
> However if Iran really wants a Pantsir stype "all-in-one" system it should move the AAA component to something like the new Chinese 76mm SA2 AAA system with Oerlikon AHEAD like sensor fused submunition rounds. Iran has the 76mm gun technology in production albeit for naval use and the Russians have also realized that this is the way to go by developing their 57mm equivalent.
> 
> Alternatively Iran could go the Russian path and further develop the 57mm S-60 AAA as basis. However the 76mm gun has more potential but would be harder to change into a land version and the size can also cause problems.
> 
> A 76mm gun, plus the TOR guidance radar on top of it as well as a compact search radar at the rear with 3-6 of those Iranian Pantsir-like SAMs at each side? The size of such a hybrid would be very large, larger than the Pantsir. Technically possible and a suitable truck is available too but I would distribute the system on 2-3 trucks each dedicated to either 76mm/57mm AHEAD AAA or missiles.
> 
> The missile component would then have 12-16 Iranian Pantsir. The Iranian Pantsir seems to have a powered second stage, which would make it more expensive but also longer ranged than the original Pantsir. The powered second stage forbids a more robust laser guidance as in the new Russian Sosna, but could allow a range of around 25km at higher cost per round.
> 
> The question whether Tor or Pantsir guidance radar is simpler: The Pantsir radar system while more expensive is smaller and capable for longer ranges. If instead of the traditional 30mm guns of the Pantsir, a giant like the 76mm gun with AHEAD-munition is used, compactness of the radar is of high importance. The question is whether Iran has access to the Pantsir radar technology.
> 
> The search radar needs to be compact and high power too. A expensive high power system could be the solution like on the newest Pantsir variants, they offer the range necessary for the longer ranged missiles.
> But much more cost effective could be the thermal camera (4x) equipped passive search system which Iran presented 2014 but I can imagine that it would get problems if deployed on the same truck as a 76mm gun when it fires.
> 
> A completely different scenario would be of course a copy of the Tor on a wheeled system. The display of the Pantsir-like windtunnel model speaks against this, as well as the relatively higher price per round compared to the Pantsir. But in total it would do the job well and be a lower-risk development than those scenarios above.



Israel wiped a pantisr off the map and posted the video in Syria recently.

It’s a capable system, but not the end all be all of short range air defense systems.

Iran needs quantity just as much as quality. If a Pantsir system in hands of Syria struggles againtst a fairly minor Israeli Air raid, then Iran needs to take that into account.

For example the quantity order Iran placed for S-300 was too low to fully cover a nation the size of Iran against an saturation attack from an airforce that is going to give you all it’s got.

The rumor was that the Pantsir in Syria was reloading when it hit got. So just goes to show you if you don’t have quantity then the systems you do have are vulnerable when they are preparing for the next wave.

BTW it’s important to note that in 2010, Syria had a more formidable air defense envelope than Iran.


----------



## PeeD

Pantsir in Syria were attacked by small drones.
The cost-effectiveness proved too poor.
The Russians developed a solution of a miniature interceptor missile that is in development.

Lesson learned: If you start to engage the target just at 3km and need 15-30 rounds for each target, you can be cost effectively saturated by low cost drones.

One solution is the 57mm AAA system the Russians are working on: Engage targets at twice the distance with a single AHEAD round instead of 15-30 rounds.

So either you learn from such lessons or stick to old ideas.
Plus: Guided rounds are coming, a 76mm round can be modified to a guided round, a 35mm round hardly.

Another point: Pantsir is moving away from a point defense system to one that can protect area targets. With a 20km missile, a AAA component with 6-8km range is better than a self defense, low altitude 3km one (retained from Tunguska era).

But I want to be real here as requested: The technical difficulties in terms of miniaturization and final size will most certainly avoid the development of such a potent system.






The Chinese Pantsir-Tor hybrid is huge in size...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

for protecting high value targets i prefer south Africans products such as :
ZA35 SPAAG









by what we already have made:
mesbah 3D phased array radar and IR/Optical sensors tracking system








or this site




*Samavat 35mm*





*on a Tabas* TELAR




for second layer which full fit our needs in *NAVY *as close range SAM for ships + used as infrared homing (Umkhonto-ER-IR) and a beyond-visual-range radar homing version (Umkhonto-R) air to air missile for *AIR FORCE* + Umkhonto GBL for protecting high value targets in *Air Defense Forces* and *Ground Forces* + as a P#o#r#n For *PeeD* (im just kidding  )
Umkhonto

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> No one would produce the Sayyad-1 today. Iran has a large stockpile and the manpower to use the systems.
> The task for it is very limited --> high speed, high altitude, only Tehran airspace.
> That is its percentage of the war. Not more, it won't be used to intercept any SDB or low level maneuverable fighters. Anything that falls into its criteria will receive, everything that is not, not.
> 
> One of the main goals of an air campaign is to take out the high altitude capability to allow high altitude bombing. Loosing the high altitude assets is the start of the end.
> The Sayyad-1 is static but is protected by all other IADS elements to fullfil its small portion of the warfare.



Baraks azizam since we have a large stock and 300 or more launcher then we would need to build more launchers and spread them within 100km of Boarder and Coastal area's spread across better hidden locations and spread on the outside of specific cities like Tahran, Esfahan, Shiraz.... 
And one of the plus side of it being command guided is that with a few simple light weight upgrades they can be modified to go after ground targets especially since they carry a relatively large payload for a SAM & big enough wings to give it good glide capability so worst comes to worst if they prove ineffective against modern fighters they will at least be good for something 

From high altitude, fighters can drop relatively low cost GBU-39's or if forced too (due to GPS jamming) GBU-53's from at least 70km out if not more (Wiki has it at 110km) so they wouldn't even need to get within 25km & if we were to believe WiKI even cheaper JDAM's can be dropped from 28km out hell even Iran's Qassed-2 can be dropped from 50km out 





And if even we can drop 2000lb Qassed-1's glide bombs that are out dated by our own standards from 35km out then why would a modern Air Force even try to get within 50km of Tehran's Air Space before all Air Defense equipment are dealt with?

So in my opinion any type of SAM system with a range of under 60km needs to be spread +30km outside of cities and the main systems you would need at Air Bases are +70km SAM's & a vast number of short range systems capable of intercepting anything from projectiles to fighters and cruise missiles 

As for the Sayyad-1 unless you can either upgrade them to a point where they can intercept either Ballistic Missiles or intercept low altitude fighters from as least 20km out then I don't really see the point of keeping any more than 2 launchers "inside Air Bases" unless in fortified bunkers capable of taking a hit from a SDB light bunker buster that can be towed out relatively quickly 

And another thing I don't understand is why Iran keeps such a large portion of it's helo force un bunkered

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

This line about B-373 I couldn't find on Farsi websites!
*The Iranian version has superior features over the original Russian model as it enjoys increased mobility, agility and reduced launch-preparation time.
*
*Iran's Home-Made Air Defense System Tested on Ballistic Missiles - defapress.ir*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Pantsir in Syria were attacked by small drones.
> The cost-effectiveness proved too poor.
> The Russians developed a solution of a miniature interceptor missile that is in development.
> 
> Lesson learned: If you start to engage the target just at 3km and need 15-30 rounds for each target, you can be cost effectively saturated by low cost drones.
> 
> One solution is the 57mm AAA system the Russians are working on: Engage targets at twice the distance with a single AHEAD round instead of 15-30 rounds.
> 
> So either you learn from such lessons or stick to old ideas.
> Plus: Guided rounds are coming, a 76mm round can be modified to a guided round, a 35mm round hardly.
> 
> Another point: Pantsir is moving away from a point defense system to one that can protect area targets. With a 20km missile, a AAA component with 6-8km range is better than a self defense, low altitude 3km one (retained from Tunguska era).
> 
> But I want to be real here as requested: The technical difficulties in terms of miniaturization and final size will most certainly avoid the development of such a potent system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese Pantsir-Tor hybrid is huge in size...



It likely has a less effective Guns than the pantsir with less advanced launch system than the TOR in terms of tech behind the launcher but a more effective launch system 

I think Iran should develop a multi vehicle more effective short ranged system that covers various ranges under 0-25km one vehicle carrying a more effective high powered gun with a large stock of ammo with various optical sensor One vehicle that's Radar based and equipped with a missile capable of going after Jammers, one vehicle that's Command based that's also assisted by radar or IR or cheaper Optically assisted with image processing for daytime, one vehicle that algorithm based that again is Optically assisted with image processing and a few UV LED's for night versions equipped with large number of lower cost missiles with every vehicle with it's own targeting and capable of operating independently if force to + vehicles for command & targeting, early warning sensors, radar's, more capable optical radars,.... with the ability of secure wireless networking between all vehicles + an add on options of vehicles for short ranged ground targets with light cheap low payload cruise missiles 0-50km & armed Quads to quickly engage any special forces that may be deployed near your location


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Pantsir in Syria were attacked by small drones.
> The cost-effectiveness proved too poor.
> The Russians developed a solution of a miniature interceptor missile that is in development.
> 
> Lesson learned: If you start to engage the target just at 3km and need 15-30 rounds for each target, you can be cost effectively saturated by low cost drones.



Engagement range is 4 km.

The Pantsir in Syria was struck because it was reloading its missiles. If it had engaged the drones with its guns it would have been fine. With your own numbers, if the Pantsir only uses 15-30 rounds to shoot down a drone, then its 1400 round ammo capacity would allow it to kill 46 to 93 drones. Pretty good if you ask me. Though to be fair, wikipedia says the Pantsir fires 83-250 round bursts depending on target type. So assuming low-cost drones only take 83 rounds, that's 16 drones that can be taken out. It still seems good to me, considering the Pantsir has 12 missiles to take out missiles (going by the videos I've seen 1 is fired at each target, which is surprising since usual protocol for SAMs is 2 per target), and I'd hope there would be at least 2 TLARs guarding HVTs like long range SAMs and strategic sites.



PeeD said:


> One solution is the 57mm AAA system the Russians are working on: Engage targets at twice the distance with a single AHEAD round instead of 15-30 rounds.



57 mm might be an option, but I'm not sure 2 could fit. The Pantsir uses 2 twin 30 mm guns, so 4 guns. It has a combined cyclic rate of 5000 rpm. I don't think Iran has a comparable gun to that (all the Su-25s which use the GSh-30-2 have been gifted to Iraq) unless they use the AK-630's Gatling cannon which would be... ridiculous.



PeeD said:


> The Chinese Pantsir-Tor hybrid is huge in size...



And that only uses 23 mm guns. No way is a 76 mm fitting on the same vehicle as the missiles + radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot

The Pantsir destroyed in Syria was most likely by Spike NLOS, not drones.

I'm talking about the mass attack by cheap drones that forced Russians to develop a miniature missile to counter such threats.
I say use 76mm AHEAD rounds instead a miniature missile.

The Spike NLOS attack is another case: Such slow missiles could have been engaged by the 76mm AHEAD round instead spending missiles on it.



AmirPatriot said:


> And that only uses 23 mm guns. No way is a 76 mm fitting on the same vehicle as the missiles + radar.



Everything is possible, maybe too difficult for Iran at this point but this would be the best possible approach.

Iranians are smart and know that this is the best solution, not high fire rate guns, they proved this by going for the 100mm KS-19 with large time fused round a decade ago.

I can only hope that they at least tried the same for the Pantsir(s) project and not going for outdated concept of a high fire rate gun. In reality they probably will be forced attach two machine guns at each side to to space restrictions but lets hope.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## un4given.1991

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> 
> I say use 76mm AHEAD rounds instead a miniature missile.
> 
> The Spike NLOS attack is another case: Such slow missiles could have been engaged by the 76mm AHEAD round instead spending missiles on it.
> 
> .


u mean something like this?
*Otomatic*
76-mm self-propelled anti-aircraft gun
*




*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Anyone got any info on this rather interesting looking system?
It looks to be a remotely operated mounting for a multi-shot manpad based sam.
Also could someone provide a translation for the caption please.




I found it along with some other interesting stuff below:
https://www.pintaram.com/u/iranian_defensive_power?uid=2016887485


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> Baraks azizam since we have a large stock and 300 or more launcher then we would need to build more launchers and spread them within 100km of Boarder and Coastal area's spread across better hidden locations and spread on the outside of specific cities like Tahran, Esfahan, Shiraz....
> And one of the plus side of it being command guided is that with a few simple light weight upgrades they can be modified to go after ground targets especially since they carry a relatively large payload for a SAM & big enough wings to give it good glide capability so worst comes to worst if they prove ineffective against modern fighters they will at least be good for something
> 
> From high altitude, fighters can drop relatively low cost GBU-39's or if forced too (due to GPS jamming) GBU-53's from at least 70km out if not more (Wiki has it at 110km) so they wouldn't even need to get within 25km & if we were to believe WiKI even cheaper JDAM's can be dropped from 28km out hell even Iran's Qassed-2 can be dropped from 50km out
> View attachment 499014
> 
> 
> And if even we can drop 2000lb Qassed-1's glide bombs that are out dated by our own standards from 35km out then why would a modern Air Force even try to get within 50km of Tehran's Air Space before all Air Defense equipment are dealt with?
> 
> So in my opinion any type of SAM system with a range of under 60km needs to be spread +30km outside of cities and the main systems you would need at Air Bases are +70km SAM's & a vast number of short range systems capable of intercepting anything from projectiles to fighters and cruise missiles
> 
> As for the Sayyad-1 unless you can either upgrade them to a point where they can intercept either Ballistic Missiles or intercept low altitude fighters from as least 20km out then I don't really see the point of keeping any more than 2 launchers "inside Air Bases" unless in fortified bunkers capable of taking a hit from a SDB light bunker buster that can be towed out relatively quickly
> 
> And another thing I don't understand is why Iran keeps such a large portion of it's helo force un bunkered



As you realized correctly initially no aircraft will enter Tehran airspace, only their stand-off weapons. Unpowered stand-off weapons like the bombs you mentioned will initially only be able to hit periphery targets, the high altitude release necessary for them would bring the carrying aircraft right into the envelope of S-200/-300,Bavar-373 and Sayyad-3.

So the pool of targets for Sayyad-1 would be very small single digit percentage. But you want that small envelope to be cost effectively covered and don't be forced to use more useful SAMs of the IADS.

The ideal envelope for the Sayyad-1 would be as already said the 10km altitude plus and very fast target one.
However it remains useful for other low priority targets in mid to very high altitude such as decoy drones that can't be declared as decoys by the IADS with sufficient confidence (something that starts to happen after sufficient IADS degradation). In such cases the old arsenal of HQ-2/SA-2/Sayyad-1 can be used without wasting state of the art resources.
Having a system with virtually infinite altitude capability in the IADS is always welcome. I agree that it won't eventually shot down B-52 doing high altitude bombing of Tehran at the end of a conflict, but they will fill the niche described.

One 8 channel super-site with 48 launchers or two 4 channel 24 launcher super-sites east and west of Tehran to better cover the periphery. The point is that this is a old obsolete system and if you want to use it, better have just one or two units that are proficient on it and can maintain, salvaging and keep it working.

The BM capability is of course already built into the system, plus the Tondar-68 arsenal.


----------



## PeeD

un4given.1991 said:


> u mean something like this?
> *Otomatic*
> 76-mm self-propelled anti-aircraft gun
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



That system is from a era where no AHEAD like system was existing.
It need 4-6 76mm rounds to create a sufficiently dense fragmentation cloud to assure a kill at extended range (non-maneuvering target).

Irans automatic KS-19 100mm AAA has a larger caliber round and probably will do the job with 4x1 round from a battery of 4 guns.

The Chinese SA2 with the AHEAD system on the other hand has such a precise timing for "fragmentation" release, that 1-2 rounds could assure a kill. A reasonable number should be a equivalent of 3-4 35mm (expensive) AHEAD rounds for the price of a single larger 76mm round.

However the true future potential of this system are guided rounds. A 76mm round can be designed with a steering system, the Russian 57mm too, but already a 40mm Bofors would be to small to be cost effective. What is needed is a single round that has sufficient fragments to kill anything up to a bomber. The 76mm round in a guided AHEAD variant can do it efficiently with a single round, the 40mm Bofors and anything below NOT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> As you realized correctly initially no aircraft will enter Tehran airspace, only their stand-off weapons. Unpowered stand-off weapons like the bombs you mentioned will initially only be able to hit periphery targets, the high altitude release necessary for them would bring the carrying aircraft right into the envelope of S-200/-300,Bavar-373 and Sayyad-3.
> 
> So the pool of targets for Sayyad-1 would be very small single digit percentage. But you want that small envelope to be cost effectively covered and don't be forced to use more useful SAMs of the IADS.
> 
> The ideal envelope for the Sayyad-1 would be as already said the 10km altitude plus and very fast target one.
> However it remains useful for other low priority targets in mid to very high altitude such as decoy drones that can't be declared as decoys by the IADS with sufficient confidence (something that starts to happen after sufficient IADS degradation). In such cases the old arsenal of HQ-2/SA-2/Sayyad-1 can be used without wasting state of the art resources.
> Having a system with virtually infinite altitude capability in the IADS is always welcome. I agree that it won't eventually shot down B-52 doing high altitude bombing of Tehran at the end of a conflict, but they will fill the niche described.
> 
> One 8 channel super-site with 48 launchers or two 4 channel 24 launcher super-sites east and west of Tehran to better cover the periphery. The point is that this is a old obsolete system and if you want to use it, better have just one or two units that are proficient on it and can maintain, salvaging and keep it working.
> 
> The BM capability is of course already built into the system, plus the Tondar-68 arsenal.




If your sure of the command guidance capability of the systems with various redundancies and you have the manpower then why 2 super site? 
If you cluster them together they become a prime target location and if un-bunkered they become a prime location to use advanced cluster munitions and if just 1 fighter or UCAV gets through and drops 2 CBU-97, CBU-105 or some other advanced cluster munition then it's all over

For large fix sites on the outskirts Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz, Mashad,.... we should have 5 large sites (+10sq km) with each site no more than 50km from each other and each site equipped with 20 Sayyad-1 Launchers that come out of bunkers dug into hills and mountains and station themselves at a fix location automatically when commanded + Sayyad 2 missiles & Shahin or HAWK Missiles + various short ranged systems per site from AAA to Ya Zahra that can protect against subsonic projectiles 






But even in the Iran-Iraq war at the start of the war our Air Defense Systems proved ineffective until we started moving them around so using our early warning systems it would be preferable to be able to move a vast stock of highly mobile systems especially due to our lack of Air Power


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The Pantsir destroyed in Syria was most likely by Spike NLOS, not drones.
> 
> I'm talking about the mass attack by cheap drones that forced Russians to develop a miniature missile to counter such threats.
> I say use 76mm AHEAD rounds instead a miniature missile.
> 
> The Spike NLOS attack is another case: Such slow missiles could have been engaged by the 76mm AHEAD round instead spending missiles on it.



It is thought the Syrian Pantsir was actually destroyed by a Delilah cruise missile.

And you keep mentioning AHEAD ammo... I'm telling you the 35 mm can also pack AHEAD ammo. It just has to fire a few more rounds. Which is ok because they're far less of a logistical issue than a 76

Finally, Iran's threats from Israel, the US and Saudi Arabia aren't these:






They're these:











A pair of Pantsirs are more than capable of protecting a long range air defence system from those. The SDB and JSOW aren't much smaller. Besides, glide bombs would only be released at low altitude (otherwise long range air defence would destroy them), for which they'd have to be very close to the target. A proper air force would help out a lot in stopping these low altitude approaches...  anyway.


PeeD said:


> Iranians are smart and know that this is the best solution, not high fire rate guns








Seeing the "Otomatic" convinces me a bit more but I still think it's unpractical and as you said Iran will probably use the higher fire rate guns.


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> If your sure of the command guidance capability of the systems with various redundancies and you have the manpower then why 2 super site?
> If you cluster them together they become a prime target location and if un-bunkered they become a prime location to use advanced cluster munitions and if just 1 fighter or UCAV gets through and drops 2 CBU-97, CBU-105 or some other advanced cluster munition then it's all over
> 
> For large fix sites on the outskirts Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz, Mashad,.... we should have 5 large sites (+10sq km) with each site no more than 50km from each other and each site equipped with 20 Sayyad-1 Launchers that come out of bunkers dug into hills and mountains and station themselves at a fix location automatically when commanded + Sayyad 2 missiles & Shahin or HAWK Missiles + various short ranged systems per site from AAA to Ya Zahra that can protect against subsonic projectiles
> View attachment 499210
> 
> 
> 
> But even in the Iran-Iraq war at the start of the war our Air Defense Systems proved ineffective until we started moving them around so using our early warning systems it would be preferable to be able to move a vast stock of highly mobile systems especially due to our lack of Air Power



The idea is not to spend anymore resources. No bunkers, no heavy modifications and not many units with their own support equipment. Keep it cheap: the replaced system is gathered at one or two units/locations and kept working. No need to train many people on this complicated liquid fueled system and enough old equipment for cannibalizing parts and salvaging.

Regarding the command guidance: I missed to mention that even S-300PMU2 and S-400, Patriot and others work with a data-link via their SAAG/TVM guidance system. Jamming this is very difficult. High resolution sensors of the IADS would provide necessary precise coordinates, so that there is even no need to use the Fan song X-band engagement radar, just the data link. This is the main reason why I propose this at all.

As you said: Mobile units are the way forward, the Sayyad-1 is just a extra, a limited useful relic that should not be mothballed.

@AmirPatriot 

In airdefense cost is a ultimate factor. How much do you think 6 35mm AHEAD round cost compared to one 76mm one? How much do you think the production of several guns instead of a single one costs?
I'm and was a big fan of the Mesbah-8, it is great to protect a point target, a HVT. But already back then it was clear that producing 8 ZSU-23 guns is costly.
Plus a CWIS role is nice but a area protection capability is better. 
Plus twice the engagement range means targets that would otherwise require a missile can be attacked by AAA early on.
Plus future guided round capability needs larger rounds for the systems.
Plus saturation will become more and more important to counter Pantsir like systems. Saving missiles for difficult targets will become more often the case and not wasting them on SDB-like targets by attacking those with cheap AAA will become the goal. NLOS missiles, cheap drones, professional quad-copters. As these get more numerous, the ideas from the 70's cold war, where the Pantsir ancestor, the Tunguska appeared, will at least get cost-ineffective. Cost, cost, cost, I can't repeat it other enough.

So I say, go for something with future potential for a new system of 2020.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> In airdefense cost is a ultimate factor. How much do you think 6 35mm AHEAD round cost compared to one 76mm one?



I'd say good practice would be to fire at least 2 shots with the 76, just like SAMs are fired in 2s to ensure destruction. And you cite guided rounds as the main benefit of the 76, and guided rounds are MUCH more expensive than AHEAD. AHEAD is just a shotgun-airburst on a time fuse. Not complicated. These rounds aren't going to be fired in the millions.



PeeD said:


> How much do you think the production of several guns instead of a single one costs?



The 76 is by far more complex, expensive and demanding, both to manufacture and keep running (logistics). You know one Oto Malera (the gun by itself) weighs 7.5 tons without ammo? The twin gun Oerlikon GDF with 280 rounds weights 6.7 tons. And that includes the towed chassis.



PeeD said:


> Plus twice the engagement range means targets that would otherwise require a missile can be attacked by AAA early on.



We're dealing with glide bombs and UAVs here. Engagement time is not an issue.



PeeD said:


> NLOS missiles, cheap drones, professional quad-copters



In what sort of conflict would Saudi Arabia, Israel or the US use them? This isn't Syria.



PeeD said:


> Plus saturation will become more and more important to counter Pantsir like systems



So just have them in pairs. Considering the targets they have to protect, it's not a big deal.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I'd say good practice would be to fire at least 2 shots with the 76, just like SAMs are fired in 2s to ensure destruction. And you cite guided rounds as the main benefit of the 76, and guided rounds are MUCH more expensive than AHEAD. AHEAD is just a shotgun-airburst on a time fuse. Not complicated. These rounds aren't going to be fired in the millions.



It is complex enough to be relatively expensive. 6 35mm AHEAD round will be at least times as expensive than a 76mm AHEAD round. That is basically a death penalty, you go for the system that has half the munition cost for the same bang.

Guided rounds will still be cheaper than missiles and allow high PK engagements at longer ranges. Plus they can be used against maneuvering targets with high PK.
Guided rounds are a must if you want to engage targets at extended ranges and will always stay cheaper than missiles.



AmirPatriot said:


> The 76 is by far more complex, expensive and demanding, both to manufacture and keep running (logistics). You know one Oto Malera (the gun by itself) weighs 7.5 tons without ammo? The twin gun Oerlikon GDF with 280 rounds weights 6.7 tons. And that includes the towed chassis.
> 
> We're dealing with glide bombs and UAVs here. Engagement time is not an issue.



The naval version is something different. The point is not that the 76mm gun is more complex or not. The point is how many other guns you need to create a similar killing power.

A scenario:
3 F-15 launch each 20 SDB against a Talash-2/Sayyad-2 site protected by a Pantsir: 12 of the 60 SDB will be taken out at 10km by the missiles --> system waits till the 48 others come withing 3,5km. At 500km/h avarage speed each SDB will fly 138m per second or better said: all SDB will hit in 25 seconds. If we count 1 second for engaging and another for a burst of ~50 rounds you can engage 12 of the SDBs before being killed by 36 SDB.

Now the 76mm scenario:
3 F-15 launch each 20 SDB against a Talash-2/Sayyad-2 site protected by a 76mm AHEAD "Pantsir".
Missiles spend early as in the first example. Then the 76mm gun starts to engage at 6,5km. You do the calculation.

SDB is one thing, a mass drone attack to soften the job and saturate the system early on another.
This is how killing power is measured. Back in the 70's when the Tunguska was designed, such saturation scenarios were no threat at all.
I hope it's clear now.



AmirPatriot said:


> In what sort of conflict would Saudi Arabia, Israel or the US use them? This isn't Syria.



Harpy drone is one such example. Future drone swarms another... You prepare now for the future.
A Pantsir with 57mm or 76mm AHEAD gun has the capacity to be upgraded with a guided round. If the upgrade is done 2025, the range of both previously AHEAD equipped guns will increase to 8km and 10km at least. Now imagine you start killing your attackers from 10km with a high PK... you are able to engage roughly 3 times more than the 12 described for the Pantsir. Performance wise a 200% increase in killing power is regraded as groundbreaking for such systems.



AmirPatriot said:


> So just have them in pairs. Considering the targets they have to protect, it's not a big deal.



If I say that a 76mm AHEAD Pantsir with guided rounds will cost 1,3 times a Pantsir and have 2 times the killing performance than 2 Pantsir, the choice is clear.
Cost is everything in air defense game as said.


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1042927736954601472
Still unknown if its a S-300 or a S-300 "equivalent" (B-373, 3rd Khordad....)

My personal opinion, Iran only has 4 S-300 PMU-2 systems, and every single one is indispensable, even for its most important allies, so I think it will be a "equivalent".

If this report is true, IDF will do its best to eliminate this system in Syria, so Iran should be very cautious (Hide it underground, change location on a daily basis...)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-72B

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1042927736954601472
> Still unknown if its a S-300 or a S-300 "equivalent" (B-373, 3rd Khordad....)
> 
> My personal opinion, Iran only has 4 S-300 PMU-2 systems, and every single one is indispensable, even for its most important allies, so I think it will be a "equivalent".
> 
> If this report is true, IDF will do its best to eliminate this system in Syria, so Iran should be very cautious (Hide it underground, change location on a daily basis...)


It will be 3rd Khordad because Iran wouldn't be risking it's S-300PMU-2 to Syria that system is to valuable for Iran and it's job is protecting Bushehr,Tehran and Bandar Abbas and B-373 is will be entered services at 2019 and you already know the word of "at the end of current Iranian year"

Speaking of 3rd Khordad, do you know the exact range of this system, it is true that it has range of 100km?


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> *I say use 76mm AHEAD rounds instead a miniature missile.*


I hop your assets are not anywhere near civilization!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

https://qz.com/1387960/irans-ayatol...urface-to-air-missile-with-him-on-long-trips/


----------



## T-72B

How many Iranian S-300PMu-2 missile launchers that Iran has btw?


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> How many Iranian S-300PMu-2 missile launchers that Iran has btw?


4


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1042927736954601472
> Still unknown if its a S-300 or a S-300 "equivalent" (B-373, 3rd Khordad....)
> 
> My personal opinion, Iran only has 4 S-300 PMU-2 systems, and every single one is indispensable, even for its most important allies, so I think it will be a "equivalent".
> 
> If this report is true, IDF will do its best to eliminate this system in Syria, so Iran should be very cautious (Hide it underground, change location on a daily basis...)



This is propaganda at it’s finest.

Iran doesn’t even have enough S-300’s to adequately cover Iran. But yet it’s going to risk its main air defense system and put it in Syria? 

Seriously who believes this stuff

If iran has tolerated air strikes for nearly 8 years, it’s going to continue to tolerate it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1043078877260775425


----------



## sanel1412

skyshadow said:


> 4


Iran ordered 5 S-300 battalions...not 4 and as I see most people mix this as 5 S-300 systems(s-300 system doesn't even exist as organsiation unit..)....so it is five battalions but truth is no one knows how many Iran got...order was around 850$ millions ..one battalion can be defferently configured but it should include at least 4 S-300 batteries/fire units(one battery has 4 TELs) ..s-300 can be deployed at battery level without deploying battalion in full ..we don't know what Iran ordered exactlly but order include 5 battalions..not 4

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

AmirPatriot said:


> In what sort of conflict would Saudi Arabia, Israel or the US use them? This isn't Syria.



It may not be Syria with cheap drones and such and used by insurgents or terrorists, but it will be more complex version of it.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Big news: The Mersad "HAWK" system is now a fully mobile system with a new mobile missile.

All main radar components, PAR and HPIR are now mobile.
Plus, the big news. A new mobile launcher with a new missile to replace the MIM-23/Shahin has been developed. It is from the outside basically a smaller Sayyad-2 launcher with 6 instead of 4 missiles! Means 3 launchers have the same number of ready to fire missiles as a full HAWK battery!

The range is probably the same as the MIM-23: 40km.

This basically means that the Mersad project can be continued, production line kept producing.

Thats the single biggest news of the parade.
I wonder whether this new missile is related to the Fakkur AAM or a miniaturized Sayyad-2/3.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Big news: The Mersad "HAWK" system is now a fully mobile system with a new mobile missile.
> 
> All main radar components, PAR and HPIR are now mobile.
> Plus, the big news. A new mobile launcher with a new missile to replace the MIM-23/Shahin has been developed. It is from the outside basically a smaller Sayyad-2 launcher with 6 instead of 4 missiles! Means 3 launchers have the same number of ready to fire missiles as a full HAWK battery!
> 
> The range is probably the same as the MIM-23: 40km.
> 
> This basically means that the Mersad project can be continued, production line kept producing.
> 
> Thats the single biggest news of the parade.
> I wonder whether this new missile is related to the Fakkur AAM or a miniaturized Sayyad-2/3.



Fantastic news! Any pics available?
Afaik they worked on the range of the *Shalamche *missile up to 60km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## un4given.1991



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

Nice truck systems but why is the gun manned....
It could be the precursor to the "Iranian pantsir".


----------



## PeeD

Draco.IMF said:


> Fantastic news! Any pics available?
> Afaik they worked on the range of the *Shalamche *missile up to 60km



Yes its visible in Yavars video posted here.

Meanwhile I think it is the Kamin-2 missile from april from which no photo made it to the internet back then.

As for the flat truck for the 35mm gun: Quite much effort to develop it... The IRGC has the flat Raad truck... it i also fragile for something Pantsir like.


----------



## WinterNights

I can't see this 6 tubed system in the video posted by Yavar. Post a snip if possible.


----------



## PeeD

Just reduced 3 containers, like Sayyad-2 launchers have nowadays just 2 containers ar parades.

As it seems to be the Kamin-2 and was described as Mersads short range missile, something like 25km now seems a better estimate as well as its not a replacement for Shahin/Shalamcheh.


----------



## mohsen

some new info announced in 31 Shahrivar parade:

3rd khordad ADS new specifications:
max range: 105km
max altitue:27km
simultaneous engagement of 4 targets with 8 missiles
(I wonder which missile they used for 105km range)


Tabas ADS
max range:75km
max altitue:27km
simultaneous guide of 2 missiles, with 9 seconds launch intervals

Bashir radar
Max range:300km
max altitude: 30km

Matla-ul-fajr radar
Max range: 500km
max altitude: 32km



PeeD said:


> Yes its visible in Yavars video posted here.
> 
> Meanwhile I think it is the Kamin-2 missile from april from which no photo made it to the internet back then.
> 
> As for the flat truck for the 35mm gun: Quite much effort to develop it... The IRGC has the flat Raad truck... it i also fragile for something Pantsir like.


Kamin is the name of a Mobile variant of Mersad ADS, and they did show it:




and since they said Kamin2 is a low altitude ADS, probably it doesn't include some radars.

announcer one again reminded that Talash is missile system (not air defense system) as a complement to S-200.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

That in the photo is the Ghader mobile HAWK.
The Kamin-2 is a missile system probably 30% smaller than a Sayyad-2 and based on the Sayyad-2 family, maybe Fakkur related.

As a low range element of the Sayyad-2 family, it certainly is guided by the radars of the Mersad system albeit it probably does not have a seeker, as this would be too expensive for such a lower tier system.

Now the Sayyad family has following make up:

1- Kamin-2 low range (<40km), low-mid altitude
2- Sayyad-2 mid range (70km), high altitude
3- Sayyad-3 long range (120km), high altitude
4- Sayyad-4 ling range (200km), high altitude

Looks good. Just a very long range (>300km), a SHORAD (<20km) and specialized ABM variant are lacking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> That in the photo is the Ghader mobile HAWK.
> The Kamin-2 is a missile system probably 30% smaller than a Sayyad-2 and based on the Sayyad-2 family, maybe Fakkur related.
> 
> As a low range element of the Sayyad-2 family, it certainly is guided by the radars of the Mersad system albeit it probably does not have a seeker, as this would be too expensive for such a lower tier system.
> 
> Now the Sayyad family has following make up:
> 
> 1- Kamin-2 low range (<40km), low-mid altitude
> 2- Sayyad-2 mid range (70km), high altitude
> 3- Sayyad-3 long range (120km), high altitude
> 4- Sayyad-4 ling range (200km), high altitude
> 
> Looks good. Just a very long range (>300km), a SHORAD (<20km) and specialized ABM variant are lacking.


Be realistic, if another missile existed, they would have shown it by now, considering their budget, and how they played with Hawk systems during these years, when they say Kamin is a mobile upgrade to Mersad, then you can be rest assured that there is no new nothing, they have decided to use the same old hawk missiles as a short range ADS.

What do you think of 105km range?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

mohsen said:


> some new info announced in 31 Shahrivar parade:
> 
> 3rd khordad ADS new specifications:
> max range: 105km
> max altitue:27km
> simultaneous engagement of 4 targets with 8 missiles
> (I wonder which missile they used for 105km range)
> 
> 
> Tabas ADS
> max range:75km
> max altitue:27km
> simultaneous guide of 2 missiles, with 9 seconds launch intervals
> 
> Bashir radar
> Max range:300km
> max altitude: 30km
> 
> Matla-ul-fajr radar
> Max range: 500km
> max altitude: 32km
> 
> 
> Kamin is the name of a Mobile variant of Mersad ADS, and they did show it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and since they said Kamin2 is a low altitude ADS, probably it doesn't include some radars.
> 
> announcer one again reminded that Talash is missile system (not air defense system) as a complement to S-200.


So @mohsen how many the range of the original 3rd Khordad that and also do all the 3rd Khordad shown in the video is 105km range?


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> Be realistic, if another missile existed, they would have shown it by now, considering their budget, and how they played with Hawk systems during these years, when they say Kamin is a mobile upgrade to Mersad, then you can be rest assured that there is no new nothing, they have decided to use the same old hawk missiles as a short range ADS.
> 
> What do you think of 105km range?



Its not about realistic or not, look at the video, the Kamin-2 and its TEL is visible and its new and 30% smaller than a Sayyad-2.

As for the 105km 3rd Khordad: Yes, with improved battery it would be able to attack a approaching AWACS, E-2, B-52 or tanker at mid altitude from that range. But a crossing supersonic fighter, highly unlikely.
Still a good to have capability upgrade.

Here some relevant pieces I wrote in another about the Tabas ADS and ADS in general:

I can say that the Tabas SAM system, with its mechanically steered radar, is probably one of the most cost effective ADS.
It is like a super slow, small Mig-29 with 3 BVR missiles. Tabas systems would drive to any area where the enemy would try to push through the IADS barrier. Contested, near hostile ground, where the enemy is trying to gain air superiority.

It just needs IADS information about something approaching, drive out of the warehouse or out from below the bridge, turn on its old school mechanically scanned radar, find the target, paint it with EM energy and it's SAM will go for the kill. It shoots and scoots in the matter of few minutes. A true BVR fighter on the ground probably for just 2-3 million $ a TELAR with 3 SAMs.

The Tabas has its fixed role in the Iranian IADS mix. 

-It will operate at the closest frontline where IFF is no big issue

-Its search capability is secondary (but there) as it will rely on IADS early warning data of identified targets that are worth to be attacked.

-As single TELAR with just one communication car assigned to it, it will have smallest possible footprint

-Once the IADS assigned target is locked, the mechanical Mig-29 style radar will put a high energy amount on the target for the SAM's SARH seeker. Job done, pulling the jacks up and back into hiding position.

The attack cycle is too short, too simple to expect a HARM counter attack.


As said a Mig-29 on the ground, just 10 times cheaper. Imagine how many system and what coverage such a low price and high systems numbers allow.

An example what the Tabas means for the IADS. Imagine you are protecting a city under siege with your SOF squad (3rd Khordad). You know that down the street you have a tank in defensive position with some infantry and mortars (Bavar-373). Suddenly your squad comes under attack by small arms from a certain direction, a unfavorably one. You take your radio and ask whether someone can take out the attacker. The rear tank and mortar unit says yes, I can turn that spot into rubble. But then a hiding Basiji sniper also answers and says that he is closest to that position, sees the attacker and can take them out by his old bolt action 7.62mm sniper rifle (Tabas).

Basijis bring numbers into the battle, same as the Tabas. You can't replace Basijis with SOF units or heavy armored/artillery units, not if you are fighting an much stronger enemy.


Missile accuracy is sufficient: The directional frag warheads work best at some distance to the target such a 10m, having a 30-60m kill radius.


The 3rd Khordad battery is a upper tier IADS asset to the Tabas: Bashir advanced PESA radar and 3-4 3rd Khordad TELARs with a slave TEL.


The Bashir PESA just has lower LPI capabilities than a AESA, in terms of "speed" and range it is like a AESA (you can replace the Bashir with a Najam-802 if you think AESAs are needed here).

This is a whole structured SAM system that can work without IADS support if needed. Some SHORAD and AAA is also welcome here because the Bashir radar of the system needs protection.


Now the difference to the Tabas: This is a single independent autonomous system it works at a lower tier-level than the 3rd Khordad battery structure.

The Tabas does not need a battery structure! It just need a Toyota communication vehicle, HF and UHF radio link is already sufficient.

It can drive and hide somewhere 20-30km from the next IADS communication node.

It can receive location of a identified target from:

- IADS

- 3rd Khordad battery

- Search with its own radar if necessary (here it has a risk of detection due to its old school radar)


The Tabas is the infantry soldier of Iranian SAMs. At $2-3m it is expandable (20 Tabas forthe price of a single Su-30). Due to its battery independent nature you can have many location along the frontline with single Tabas systems. This means very small footprint: No convoy of vehicles like a SAM battery.

If you realize what a capability this means, you understand that it is not outdated at all. It is more one of the genius asymmetrical approaches of the IRGC.

It shows that every technology, even older ones can have a valuable place.

Just to show what this means: 30 years ago, at the end of the war, the IRGC bought SA-2 batteries for million dollars. If you would have told them that in 25 years a single vehicle would do the same job at almost twice the range for 2-3 million $, just with half the missile load as penalty...


Its exactly systems like the Tabas that stop ideas like Su-30s to come true. Decision makers will take those 20 Tabas over one Su-30SM every day in Irans current threat situation.

A SAM concentration node like the 3rd Khordad can engage 16 targets at once, has 24 ready to fire missiles and would still cost cost probably half as much as a Su-30 at $35-40m. A S-300PMU-2 battalion able to engage 6 targets with 32 ready to fire missiles costs $150-200m. That's a price for which you can get more than 4 full size 3rd Khordad battery which create 4 circles with 150km radius protecting about the same area as a S-300 but with 64 guidance channels and 96 ready to fire missiles, each several times cheaper than a S-300 SAM.

So to conclude:

For 150-200 million dollars you can get following systems:

- 1 S-300 battalion, 6 simultaneous engagements, 36 ready to fire missiles, 400km protected circle area

- 3 Su-30SM with variable location, 8-10 simultaneous engagements with 8-10 missiles, a variable 120km circle protected. Secondary role as bomber.

- 4 3rd Khordad full size batteries, 64 simultaneous engagements, 96 ready to fire missiles protecting a circle area of about 300km

- 60 single vehicle autonomous Tabas systems, with 60 simultaneous engagements, 180 ready to fire missiles, protecting 60 circle areas of 100km

Protected square km ranking:

1- Tabas = 471 000km²

2- 3rd Khordad = 282 000km²

3- S-300 = 125 000km²

4- Su-30SM = 33 000km² (variable location)


System redundancy ranking (how many single critical systems to kill to knock out whole system complex)

1- Tabas = 60

2- 3rd Khordad = 16

3- Su-30SM = 3

4- S-300 = 1


The Tabas can only achieve this overall system performance by using the most cost effective technologies and avoid pitfalls like "AESA is a must". Thanks god there is no influential military industrial complex in Iran that dictates developments. IRGC ideas that allow Iran to protect itself against a enemy with 50-times high military budget.

Fun fact: Tabas or 3rd Khordad does not need to kill the enemy aircraft --> they just need to endanger them sufficiently that they feel necessary to fly at lower levels.

Once they are in that envelope, other systems such as SHORAD, MANPADs and AAA will become dangerous. Even if no kill can be achieved, low altitude means haff the range and half the speed… Figure out what adverse impact this has on airpower.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

un4given.1991 said:


>



What is the name of this weapons

that weapons need Rader


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> Its not about realistic or not, look at the video, the Kamin-2 and its TEL is visible and its new and 30% smaller than a Sayyad-2.
> 
> As for the 105km 3rd Khordad: Yes, with improved battery it would be able to attack a approaching AWACS, E-2, B-52 or tanker at mid altitude from that range. But a crossing supersonic fighter, highly unlikely.
> Still a good to have capability upgrade.
> 
> Here some relevant pieces I wrote in another about the Tabas ADS and ADS in general:
> 
> I can say that the Tabas SAM system, with its mechanically steered radar, is probably one of the most cost effective ADS.
> It is like a super slow, small Mig-29 with 3 BVR missiles. Tabas systems would drive to any area where the enemy would try to push through the IADS barrier. Contested, near hostile ground, where the enemy is trying to gain air superiority.
> 
> It just needs IADS information about something approaching, drive out of the warehouse or out from below the bridge, turn on its old school mechanically scanned radar, find the target, paint it with EM energy and it's SAM will go for the kill. It shoots and scoots in the matter of few minutes. A true BVR fighter on the ground probably for just 2-3 million $ a TELAR with 3 SAMs.
> 
> The Tabas has its fixed role in the Iranian IADS mix.
> 
> -It will operate at the closest frontline where IFF is no big issue
> 
> -Its search capability is secondary (but there) as it will rely on IADS early warning data of identified targets that are worth to be attacked.
> 
> -As single TELAR with just one communication car assigned to it, it will have smallest possible footprint
> 
> -Once the IADS assigned target is locked, the mechanical Mig-29 style radar will put a high energy amount on the target for the SAM's SARH seeker. Job done, pulling the jacks up and back into hiding position.
> 
> The attack cycle is too short, too simple to expect a HARM counter attack.
> 
> 
> As said a Mig-29 on the ground, just 10 times cheaper. Imagine how many system and what coverage such a low price and high systems numbers allow.
> 
> An example what the Tabas means for the IADS. Imagine you are protecting a city under siege with your SOF squad (3rd Khordad). You know that down the street you have a tank in defensive position with some infantry and mortars (Bavar-373). Suddenly your squad comes under attack by small arms from a certain direction, a unfavorably one. You take your radio and ask whether someone can take out the attacker. The rear tank and mortar unit says yes, I can turn that spot into rubble. But then a hiding Basiji sniper also answers and says that he is closest to that position, sees the attacker and can take them out by his old bolt action 7.62mm sniper rifle (Tabas).
> 
> Basijis bring numbers into the battle, same as the Tabas. You can't replace Basijis with SOF units or heavy armored/artillery units, not if you are fighting an much stronger enemy.
> 
> 
> Missile accuracy is sufficient: The directional frag warheads work best at some distance to the target such a 10m, having a 30-60m kill radius.
> 
> 
> The 3rd Khordad battery is a upper tier IADS asset to the Tabas: Bashir advanced PESA radar and 3-4 3rd Khordad TELARs with a slave TEL.
> 
> 
> The Bashir PESA just has lower LPI capabilities than a AESA, in terms of "speed" and range it is like a AESA (you can replace the Bashir with a Najam-802 if you think AESAs are needed here).
> 
> This is a whole structured SAM system that can work without IADS support if needed. Some SHORAD and AAA is also welcome here because the Bashir radar of the system needs protection.
> 
> 
> Now the difference to the Tabas: This is a single independent autonomous system it works at a lower tier-level than the 3rd Khordad battery structure.
> 
> The Tabas does not need a battery structure! It just need a Toyota communication vehicle, HF and UHF radio link is already sufficient.
> 
> It can drive and hide somewhere 20-30km from the next IADS communication node.
> 
> It can receive location of a identified target from:
> 
> - IADS
> 
> - 3rd Khordad battery
> 
> - Search with its own radar if necessary (here it has a risk of detection due to its old school radar)
> 
> 
> The Tabas is the infantry soldier of Iranian SAMs. At $2-3m it is expandable (20 Tabas forthe price of a single Su-30). Due to its battery independent nature you can have many location along the frontline with single Tabas systems. This means very small footprint: No convoy of vehicles like a SAM battery.
> 
> If you realize what a capability this means, you understand that it is not outdated at all. It is more one of the genius asymmetrical approaches of the IRGC.
> 
> It shows that every technology, even older ones can have a valuable place.
> 
> Just to show what this means: 30 years ago, at the end of the war, the IRGC bought SA-2 batteries for million dollars. If you would have told them that in 25 years a single vehicle would do the same job at almost twice the range for 2-3 million $, just with half the missile load as penalty...
> 
> 
> Its exactly systems like the Tabas that stop ideas like Su-30s to come true. Decision makers will take those 20 Tabas over one Su-30SM every day in Irans current threat situation.
> 
> A SAM concentration node like the 3rd Khordad can engage 16 targets at once, has 24 ready to fire missiles and would still cost cost probably half as much as a Su-30 at $35-40m. A S-300PMU-2 battalion able to engage 6 targets with 32 ready to fire missiles costs $150-200m. That's a price for which you can get more than 4 full size 3rd Khordad battery which create 4 circles with 150km radius protecting about the same area as a S-300 but with 64 guidance channels and 96 ready to fire missiles, each several times cheaper than a S-300 SAM.
> 
> So to conclude:
> 
> For 150-200 million dollars you can get following systems:
> 
> - 1 S-300 battalion, 6 simultaneous engagements, 36 ready to fire missiles, 400km protected circle area
> 
> - 3 Su-30SM with variable location, 8-10 simultaneous engagements with 8-10 missiles, a variable 120km circle protected. Secondary role as bomber.
> 
> - 4 3rd Khordad full size batteries, 64 simultaneous engagements, 96 ready to fire missiles protecting a circle area of about 300km
> 
> - 60 single vehicle autonomous Tabas systems, with 60 simultaneous engagements, 180 ready to fire missiles, protecting 60 circle areas of 100km
> 
> Protected square km ranking:
> 
> 1- Tabas = 471 000km²
> 
> 2- 3rd Khordad = 282 000km²
> 
> 3- S-300 = 125 000km²
> 
> 4- Su-30SM = 33 000km² (variable location)
> 
> 
> System redundancy ranking (how many single critical systems to kill to knock out whole system complex)
> 
> 1- Tabas = 60
> 
> 2- 3rd Khordad = 16
> 
> 3- Su-30SM = 3
> 
> 4- S-300 = 1
> 
> 
> The Tabas can only achieve this overall system performance by using the most cost effective technologies and avoid pitfalls like "AESA is a must". Thanks god there is no influential military industrial complex in Iran that dictates developments. IRGC ideas that allow Iran to protect itself against a enemy with 50-times high military budget.
> 
> Fun fact: Tabas or 3rd Khordad does not need to kill the enemy aircraft --> they just need to endanger them sufficiently that they feel necessary to fly at lower levels.
> 
> Once they are in that envelope, other systems such as SHORAD, MANPADs and AAA will become dangerous. Even if no kill can be achieved, low altitude means haff the range and half the speed… Figure out what adverse impact this has on airpower.


About Kamin, all news web sites published the same picture, jamejam was more blant on calling it the picture of Kamin:
امروز در مراسم روز ارتش
سامانه موشکی کمین 2 رونمایی شد +عکس

However this might be the correct picture, or early states:




Missiles mounted on the truck.
and the full description:
مهر گزارش می‌دهد؛
معرفی ۴ سامانه پدافندی متحرک/ سامانه‌هایی جهت دفاع موثر از آسمان

and about 3rd khordad, I meant which missile they have used, an upgraded Sayyad 2 or Taer?
Hajizadeh previously promised a new missile with 100km range for 3rd khordad.



T-72B said:


> So @mohsen how many the range of the original 3rd Khordad that and also do all the 3rd Khordad shown in the video is 105km range?


First gen had 50km range with Taer2B missile, second gen had 75km range with Sayyad2 missile and this one 105km range with unknown missile.
No info about quantity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Imran Khan

NADIM.NAZI said:


> What is the name of this weapons
> 
> that weapons need Rader


its Oerlikon GDF its famous AD system paksitan having some 250 of them made by switzerland yes it have radar too

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

mohsen said:


> About Kamin, all news web sites published the same picture, jamejam was more blant on calling it the picture of Kamin:
> امروز در مراسم روز ارتش
> سامانه موشکی کمین 2 رونمایی شد +عکس
> 
> However this might be the correct picture, or early states:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missiles mounted on the truck.
> and the full description:
> مهر گزارش می‌دهد؛
> معرفی ۴ سامانه پدافندی متحرک/ سامانه‌هایی جهت دفاع موثر از آسمان
> 
> and about 3rd khordad, I meant which missile they have used, an upgraded Sayyad 2 or Taer?
> Hajizadeh previously promised a new missile with 100km range for 3rd khordad.
> 
> 
> First gen had 50km range with Taer2B missile, second gen had 75km range with Sayyad2 missile and this one 105km range with unknown missile.
> No info about quantity.




I have a feeling, Sayyad 3 is the missile. I think we are going to see Sayyad series used across all air defence systems.


----------



## Sineva

Draco.IMF said:


> Fantastic news! Any pics available?


Its at the 5:00[5 minute] mark in yavars video,its basically 3 inline box launchers on what looks to be a rather high rotating/elevating mount.
Sadly it doesnt look to be the pantsir equivalent we were expecting,hopefully that is yet to come.....the sooner the better.

I decided to post some pics








And theres this rather interesting looking radar,possibly fire control from the looks of the other stuff attached to it,what sam system is it used with?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

mohsen said:


> About Kamin, all news web sites published the same picture, jamejam was more blant on calling it the picture of Kamin:
> امروز در مراسم روز ارتش
> سامانه موشکی کمین 2 رونمایی شد +عکس
> 
> However this might be the correct picture, or early states:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missiles mounted on the truck.
> and the full description:
> مهر گزارش می‌دهد؛
> معرفی ۴ سامانه پدافندی متحرک/ سامانه‌هایی جهت دفاع موثر از آسمان



Mersad system mounted on this truck is nothing new, we have seen it several times last years in parades, it must be something different



Sineva said:


> Its at the 5:00[5 minute] mark in yavars video,its basically 3 inline box launchers on what looks to be a rather high rotating/elevating mount.
> Sadly it doesnt look to be the pantsir equivalent we were expecting,hopefully that is yet to come.....the sooner the better.
> 
> I decided to post some pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And theres this rather interesting looking radar,possibly fire control from the looks of the other stuff attached to it,what sam system is it used with?



Thanks for the pics
Damn! Iran really is putting a lot of its resources into Air Defence, its definitely one of its priorities, great!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@Sineva 

The Kamin-2 is in a completely different class than the Pantsir SHORAD.

Plus look at the truck, it is the same as the Sayyad-2's which carries 4. Hence we can be sure that the Kamin-2 TEL carries more than those 3, namely 6.


----------



## zectech

Draco.IMF said:


> Damn! Iran really is putting a lot of its resources into Air Defence, its definitely one of its priorities, great!



That is the most important technological development. It protects everything else. 

It is what Saddam did not have enough of, it is what Qaddafi did not have enough of. When you are the insurgency, it is not as important, but as defender it is. Iran needs to develop a strategy on defending of swarms of drones, like Russia has for their bases in Syria. And with in 3 years hypersonic missiles will be in production in the States. Once enough hypersonic missiles are had by Amerika, Amerika under the wrong "president" will attack Iran. S-400s can defend against hypersonic objects, according to their missile specs.


----------



## PeeD

I make a prediction: The Kamin-2 is similar to the RIM-162 ESSM in appearance.

Another prediction: It is not really short ranged as described when compared to the Shahin/MIM-23.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

I remember a picture of a missile which looked like a miniaturized taer missile on a truck. The pic was a few years old now, I can't find it.


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Its not about realistic or not, look at the video, the Kamin-2 and its TEL is visible and its new and 30% smaller than a Sayyad-2.
> 
> As for the 105km 3rd Khordad: Yes, with improved battery it would be able to attack a approaching AWACS, E-2, B-52 or tanker at mid altitude from that range. But a crossing supersonic fighter, highly unlikely.
> Still a good to have capability upgrade.
> 
> Here some relevant pieces I wrote in another about the Tabas ADS and ADS in general:
> 
> I can say that the Tabas SAM system, with its mechanically steered radar, is probably one of the most cost effective ADS.
> It is like a super slow, small Mig-29 with 3 BVR missiles. Tabas systems would drive to any area where the enemy would try to push through the IADS barrier. Contested, near hostile ground, where the enemy is trying to gain air superiority.
> 
> It just needs IADS information about something approaching, drive out of the warehouse or out from below the bridge, turn on its old school mechanically scanned radar, find the target, paint it with EM energy and it's SAM will go for the kill. It shoots and scoots in the matter of few minutes. A true BVR fighter on the ground probably for just 2-3 million $ a TELAR with 3 SAMs.
> 
> The Tabas has its fixed role in the Iranian IADS mix.
> 
> -It will operate at the closest frontline where IFF is no big issue
> 
> -Its search capability is secondary (but there) as it will rely on IADS early warning data of identified targets that are worth to be attacked.
> 
> -As single TELAR with just one communication car assigned to it, it will have smallest possible footprint
> 
> -Once the IADS assigned target is locked, the mechanical Mig-29 style radar will put a high energy amount on the target for the SAM's SARH seeker. Job done, pulling the jacks up and back into hiding position.
> 
> The attack cycle is too short, too simple to expect a HARM counter attack.
> 
> 
> As said a Mig-29 on the ground, just 10 times cheaper. Imagine how many system and what coverage such a low price and high systems numbers allow.
> 
> An example what the Tabas means for the IADS. Imagine you are protecting a city under siege with your SOF squad (3rd Khordad). You know that down the street you have a tank in defensive position with some infantry and mortars (Bavar-373). Suddenly your squad comes under attack by small arms from a certain direction, a unfavorably one. You take your radio and ask whether someone can take out the attacker. The rear tank and mortar unit says yes, I can turn that spot into rubble. But then a hiding Basiji sniper also answers and says that he is closest to that position, sees the attacker and can take them out by his old bolt action 7.62mm sniper rifle (Tabas).
> 
> Basijis bring numbers into the battle, same as the Tabas. You can't replace Basijis with SOF units or heavy armored/artillery units, not if you are fighting an much stronger enemy.
> 
> 
> Missile accuracy is sufficient: The directional frag warheads work best at some distance to the target such a 10m, having a 30-60m kill radius.
> 
> 
> The 3rd Khordad battery is a upper tier IADS asset to the Tabas: Bashir advanced PESA radar and 3-4 3rd Khordad TELARs with a slave TEL.
> 
> 
> The Bashir PESA just has lower LPI capabilities than a AESA, in terms of "speed" and range it is like a AESA (you can replace the Bashir with a Najam-802 if you think AESAs are needed here).
> 
> This is a whole structured SAM system that can work without IADS support if needed. Some SHORAD and AAA is also welcome here because the Bashir radar of the system needs protection.
> 
> 
> Now the difference to the Tabas: This is a single independent autonomous system it works at a lower tier-level than the 3rd Khordad battery structure.
> 
> The Tabas does not need a battery structure! It just need a Toyota communication vehicle, HF and UHF radio link is already sufficient.
> 
> It can drive and hide somewhere 20-30km from the next IADS communication node.
> 
> It can receive location of a identified target from:
> 
> - IADS
> 
> - 3rd Khordad battery
> 
> - Search with its own radar if necessary (here it has a risk of detection due to its old school radar)
> 
> 
> The Tabas is the infantry soldier of Iranian SAMs. At $2-3m it is expandable (20 Tabas forthe price of a single Su-30). Due to its battery independent nature you can have many location along the frontline with single Tabas systems. This means very small footprint: No convoy of vehicles like a SAM battery.
> 
> If you realize what a capability this means, you understand that it is not outdated at all. It is more one of the genius asymmetrical approaches of the IRGC.
> 
> It shows that every technology, even older ones can have a valuable place.
> 
> Just to show what this means: 30 years ago, at the end of the war, the IRGC bought SA-2 batteries for million dollars. If you would have told them that in 25 years a single vehicle would do the same job at almost twice the range for 2-3 million $, just with half the missile load as penalty...
> 
> 
> Its exactly systems like the Tabas that stop ideas like Su-30s to come true. Decision makers will take those 20 Tabas over one Su-30SM every day in Irans current threat situation.
> 
> A SAM concentration node like the 3rd Khordad can engage 16 targets at once, has 24 ready to fire missiles and would still cost cost probably half as much as a Su-30 at $35-40m. A S-300PMU-2 battalion able to engage 6 targets with 32 ready to fire missiles costs $150-200m. That's a price for which you can get more than 4 full size 3rd Khordad battery which create 4 circles with 150km radius protecting about the same area as a S-300 but with 64 guidance channels and 96 ready to fire missiles, each several times cheaper than a S-300 SAM.
> 
> So to conclude:
> 
> For 150-200 million dollars you can get following systems:
> 
> - 1 S-300 battalion, 6 simultaneous engagements, 36 ready to fire missiles, 400km protected circle area
> 
> - 3 Su-30SM with variable location, 8-10 simultaneous engagements with 8-10 missiles, a variable 120km circle protected. Secondary role as bomber.
> 
> - 4 3rd Khordad full size batteries, 64 simultaneous engagements, 96 ready to fire missiles protecting a circle area of about 300km
> 
> - 60 single vehicle autonomous Tabas systems, with 60 simultaneous engagements, 180 ready to fire missiles, protecting 60 circle areas of 100km
> 
> Protected square km ranking:
> 
> 1- Tabas = 471 000km²
> 
> 2- 3rd Khordad = 282 000km²
> 
> 3- S-300 = 125 000km²
> 
> 4- Su-30SM = 33 000km² (variable location)
> 
> 
> System redundancy ranking (how many single critical systems to kill to knock out whole system complex)
> 
> 1- Tabas = 60
> 
> 2- 3rd Khordad = 16
> 
> 3- Su-30SM = 3
> 
> 4- S-300 = 1
> 
> 
> The Tabas can only achieve this overall system performance by using the most cost effective technologies and avoid pitfalls like "AESA is a must". Thanks god there is no influential military industrial complex in Iran that dictates developments. IRGC ideas that allow Iran to protect itself against a enemy with 50-times high military budget.
> 
> Fun fact: Tabas or 3rd Khordad does not need to kill the enemy aircraft --> they just need to endanger them sufficiently that they feel necessary to fly at lower levels.
> 
> Once they are in that envelope, other systems such as SHORAD, MANPADs and AAA will become dangerous. Even if no kill can be achieved, low altitude means haff the range and half the speed… Figure out what adverse impact this has on airpower.



you are calculating the cost of an 3rd Khordad AD system at ~ 40-50mln$?
Syria ordered 40-50 BUK-M2E for 1bln$, you calculate twice the price?
I think its around 10mln$ max, as its domestically produced


----------



## mohsen

based on the published info which was released before the parade and sequence matched.
S300 30N radar
S300 launchers and empty cans of fired missiles!
S300 TM ?(missile transporter)
Aftabaz passive radar (DDFS)
Aftabaz passive radar (IPS)
S200 TZM ?(TEL)
S200 missile on tilted stand
S200 2x tilted canisters
Talash launcher
Talash system
Sayyad2,3 missiles
Shalamcheh missile canisters x4 on titled stands
Tactical Mersad launcher
Kavosh radar of Tactical Mersad (missing?)
Hadi radar of tactical Mersad (two trucks?)
Seraj-1 radar
Hael system
Fakour mobile command and control system
Gama radar
Yavar radar (anti radar missiles deceiver)
Moragheb radar



Sineva said:


>


This must be the new TEL of *tactical Mersad*.




> And theres this rather interesting looking radar,possibly fire control from the looks of the other stuff attached to it,what sam system is it used with?


It's talash missile system, it's TEL was the front truck.



Draco.IMF said:


> Mersad system mounted on this truck is nothing new, we have seen it several times last years in parades, it must be something different


and that's what they said during so called unveiling, that it's operational and has been used in the past drills.
I guess we have no choice but to wait.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> based on the published info which was released before the parade and sequence matched.
> S300 30N radar
> S300 launchers and empty cans of fired missiles!
> S300 TM ?(missile transporter)
> Artabaz passive radar (DDFS)
> Aftabaz passive radar (IPS)
> S200 TZM ?(TEL)
> S200 missile on tilted stand
> S200 2x tilted canisters
> Talash launcher
> Talash system
> Sayyad2,3 missiles
> Shalamcheh missile canisters x4 on titled stands
> Tactical Mersad launcher
> Kavosh radar of Tactical Mersad (missing?)
> Hadi radar of tactical Mersad (two trucks?)
> Seraj-1 radar
> Hael system
> Fakour mobile command and control system
> Gama radar
> Yavar radar (anti radar missiles deceiver)
> Moragheb radar
> 
> 
> This must be the new TEL of *tactical Mersad*.
> 
> 
> 
> It's talash missile system, it's TEL was the front truck.
> 
> 
> and that's what they said during so called unveiling, that it's operational and has been used in the past drills.
> I guess we have no choice but to wait.



The new TEL for tactical Mersad system is probably the Kamin-2.

Sure is that a HAWK/Shahin/Shalamcheh would not fit inside that container.

So the mobile 35mm gun is called Heal.
Yavar counter-ARM system is also interesting.


The Mersad system is becoming quite vast, compatible to: Sayyad-2, Shalamcheh, Shahin/MIM-23B, Kamin-2, probably also that mobile Ya-Zahra/Crotale and protected by Hael mobile 35mm guns with their (towed) Seraj-1 (optical Skyguard).

@Draco.IMF 

They probably got 40 Buk-M2 TEL/TELAR, not batteries. That translates to 10 batteries for 100 million each (of course with an stock of missiles).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

PeeD said:


> @SinevaThe Kamin-2 is in a completely different class than the Pantsir SHORAD.
> Plus look at the truck, it is the same as the Sayyad-2's which carries 4. Hence we can be sure that the Kamin-2 TEL carries more than those 3, namely 6.


Yes,I realise that just from the size of the canisters,these are clearly larger missiles.However I do personally hope that at some point we will see an iranian pantsir equivalent,as we know that at a minimum a wind tunnel model of the proposed 2 stage pantsir like sam design was at least tested,in addition the pantsir is a good cheap design whos only real limitation,like all of the small point defence sams,is the limited number of guidance channels available and thus missiles that can be effectively fired at any one time.

Yes,you could possibly be right about it being a six shot rather than a triple,tho that would be a first for an iranian sam system,apart from the 6 shot remote manpad launcher I posted a pic of,that is.

Which system do you think the radar with the folded dish is from,the kamin-2 or the sayyad?,or perhaps its capable of being used for both.



mohsen said:


> It's talash missile system, it's TEL was the front truck.
> .


The other option is that it could also be for the Kamin-2 as that was right behind it in the parade.


----------



## Sineva

It turns out that the Kamin-2 had been seen once before but we missed it





Sadly tho we can only barely see the tip of the sam nosecone peeking out.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

There was a clear picture of the actual missile. It is definitely available online but I can't find it anymore.


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> *بنظر میرسد که سامانه های پدافندی اچ کیو دو در حال جایگزین شدن با سامانه پدافندی صیاد هستند...*
> 
> View attachment 498738
> View attachment 498739
> View attachment 498740
> View attachment 498741
> 
> 
> 
> *استقرار سامانه پدافنی تلاش بصورت ترکیبی با سامانه اس-۲۰۰
> 
> View attachment 498742
> View attachment 498743
> *


@skyshadow do you know where is the location of the each Sayyad-2 sites?


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> @skyshadow do you know where is the location of the each Sayyad-2 sites?


 no . sorry

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> Be realistic, if another missile existed, they would have shown it by now, considering their budget, and how they played with Hawk systems during these years, when they say Kamin is a mobile upgrade to Mersad, then you can be rest assured that there is no new nothing, they have decided to use the same old hawk missiles as a short range ADS.
> 
> What do you think of 105km range?



I have changed my opinion about the 105km range of the 3rd Khordad: There is a yet unknown variant of the Taer-2 missile that should have enabled a very high altitude trajectory pattern.

Taer-2A was a Buk-M2 equivalent that gave it a range of 50km

Taer-2B was a improved variant with 70-75km range

"Taer-2C" is the new variant with 105km real range, means: Not just against low-g targets at the edge of the envelope.
So if the radar is able to support such a high illumination distance the 3rd Khordad has now a pretty high performance for such a small system.

The new missiles can be identified by the straight rear control fins. The Taer-2A and -B has larger more complex formed fins optimized for shallower trajectories at lower approach altitudes.

105km with a 340-350mm diameter missile is good. Bavar-373 does 200km with 450-500mm and if Sadid-630 is still alive, something in 300km range would be expected from a 630mm SAM. At those ranges radar illumination capability becomes the problem.

The new 8x8 Zolfaghar TEL with 3 Sadid-630 and the 3rd Khordad engagement radar with twice size radar array creating a 300km long range SAM just gives an idea what may come.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

One of the greatest capabilities of the S-400 is its multi-radar data fusion capability.

We hear much from US and especially Israelis about their advanced ECM systems and training against S-300 systems and how capable they are to confront it.

The idea with the S-400 was first to use SIGINT systems like the Avtobaza-M to understand from where the ECM is coming and what kind/band it is. Then after this is known the system selects from at least 3 different band radars which one is the least ECM attacked and uses the data of the unattacked or least attacked radar.
All those radars are accurate enough to bring the S-400 missile to within just several hundred meters to the target.

So whats with Irans S-300PMU2 compared to e.g Azerbaijans'? 
They have following extras:
Avtobaza-M for ECM identification and location
S-band Big Bird search radar as main battalion level radar
Lower L-band 96L6 radar
Upper L-band Gamma-D
VHF-band Nebo-SVU
UHF-band Kasta (just for low level coverage, not missile guidance)

The engagement radar is in X-band and has limited search capability.

Most of these radars are frequency hoppers.

So for successful ECM jamming against those at least 5 fused radar frequencies your jammers need to attack all 5 of them simultaneously and overcome their frequency hopping. I'm not counting in upper IADS-level information from Irans whole IADS assets.

This is what makes Iranian S-300PMU2 unique in the world. It is specially designed to make Irans S-300 as deadly as possible against most advanced adversaries.
It just has fewer engagement channels, somewhat lower illumination power and a 50km lower ranged missile compared to the stage-1 S-400.
Otherwise it is a much different beast than Azerbajani S-300PMU-2 which just have the nominal 3 such bands without ECM classification capability via Avtobaza-M.
Greek S-300PMU-1 against which Israelis have trained have just two such bands.
S-300PT which Americans are believed to have just have 1 such bands.

The all-Iranian radar equipped Bavar-373 for now has 3 bands and awaits an 4th one (which the IRGC-ASF already has operational).

Russian stage-2 S-400 are expected to have that 5-band capability which Iranian S-300PMU-2 have already via the Nebo-M complex, of course at higher capability.

For now it is practically impossible to counter such systems with ECM. The window of opportunity ECM has is therefore just the terminal one where the X-band-only SARH seeker activates in SAGG mode.

Hence lets see how Syrian S-300PM perform. I think Russians will limit its capability by limiting it to a 2-band system providing just Thin Shield or 96L6 radar and thus also limiting its counter-stealth capability.
In the best case the Big Bird will be provided.
Far away from Irans 5-band fused S-300PMU2.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## T-72B

PeeD said:


> One of the greatest capabilities of the S-400 is its multi-radar data fusion capability.
> 
> We hear much from US and especially Israelis about their advanced ECM systems and training against S-300 systems and how capable they are to confront it.
> 
> The idea with the S-400 was first to use SIGINT systems like the Avtobaza-M to understand from where the ECM is coming and what kind/band it is. Then after this is known the system selects from at least 3 different band radars which one is the least ECM attacked and uses the data of the unattacked or least attacked radar.
> All those radars are accurate enough to bring the S-400 missile to within just several hundred meters to the target.
> 
> So whats with Irans S-300PMU2 compared to e.g Azerbaijans'?
> They have following extras:
> Avtobaza-M for ECM identification and location
> S-band Big Bird search radar as main battalion level radar
> Lower L-band 96L6 radar
> Upper L-band Gamma-D
> VHF-band Nebo-SVU
> UHF-band Kasta (just for low level coverage, not missile guidance)
> 
> The engagement radar is in X-band and has limited search capability.
> 
> Most of these radars are frequency hoppers.
> 
> So for successful ECM jamming against those at least 5 fused radar frequencies your jammers need to attack all 5 of them simultaneously and overcome their frequency hopping. I'm not counting in upper IADS-level information from Irans whole IADS assets.
> 
> This is what makes Iranian S-300PMU2 unique in the world. It is specially designed to make Irans S-300 as deadly as possible against most advanced adversaries.
> It just has fewer engagement channels, somewhat lower illumination power and a 50km lower ranged missile compared to the stage-1 S-400.
> Otherwise it is a much different beast than Azerbajani S-300PMU-2 which just have the nominal 3 such bands without ECM classification capability via Avtobaza-M.
> Greek S-300PMU-1 against which Israelis have trained have just two such bands.
> S-300PT which Americans are believed to have just have 1 such bands.
> 
> The all-Iranian radar equipped Bavar-373 for now has 3 bands and awaits an 4th one (which the IRGC-ASF already has operational).
> 
> Russian stage-2 S-400 are expected to have that 5-band capability which Iranian S-300PMU-2 have already via the Nebo-M complex, of course at higher capability.
> 
> For now it is practically impossible to counter such systems with ECM. The window of opportunity ECM has is therefore just the terminal one where the X-band-only SARH seeker activates in SAGG mode.
> 
> Hence lets see how Syrian S-300PM perform. I think Russians will limit its capability by limiting it to a 2-band system providing just Thin Shield or 96L6 radar and thus also limiting its counter-stealth capability.
> In the best case the Big Bird will be provided.
> Far away from Irans 5-band fused S-300PMU2.


Is this your claims? or do you get it from other sources?


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran turns into a power in airspace*





TEHRAN, Oct. 10 (MNA) – Iranian Minister of Defense (MoD) Brigadier General Amir Hatami said that Islamic Republic of Iran has turned into a power in gaining significant achievements and progresses in the field of air power with its revolutionary approach as well as with the tolerance of a fragile sanctions imposed on the country.

Speaking on Tuesday in a conference on the role of air power held at the venue of the Ministry of Defense's Air Industry, he said, “after the glorious victory of the Islamic Revolution, despite imposing all sanctions on the noble people of Islamic Iran, special sanctions were imposed in the field of air force and air industry.”

With the departure of foreign military advisers from the country, they [enemies] thought that the air force of the country would doom to failure, he continued.

Today, Islamic Republic of Iran is in a position that defense industry's capabilities of knowledge-based companies and leading universities of the country have joined their hands together and are working collectively in order to strengthen and improve air power of the country in the international level, Hatami reiterated. 

The minister of defense pointed to attaining advanced technology of designing and manufacturing a jet fighter named ‘Kowsar’ and said, “currently, many developed countries in the world are still dependent on these fields and are ready to spend huge funds to meet their demands.”

Elsewhere in his remarks, Hatami revealed the preparation of manufacturing Kowsar 88 training jet, designed and manufactured domestically, in the very near future and said, “strategic and constructive viewpoints of experts in the field of air industry have been received in order to be used for progressing air industry of the country.”

Meticulous, sensitive and precise decisions should be made in the field of air industry, he said, adding, “investing in the air industry sector is costly and strict measures should be taken in this regard.”

As a matter of fact, organizing such important Conference is a step towards boosting air defense capability of the country in the international level, he observed.

Brigadier General Amir Hatami expressed his hope that the Ministry of Defense, benefited from its fruitful experiences gained in the past 40 years, can take giant strides in increasing sovereignty of air power of the country in the international level.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> *Iran turns into a power in airspace*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Oct. 10 (MNA) – Iranian Minister of Defense (MoD) Brigadier General Amir Hatami said that Islamic Republic of Iran has turned into a power in gaining significant achievements and progresses in the field of air power with its revolutionary approach as well as with the tolerance of a fragile sanctions imposed on the country.
> 
> Speaking on Tuesday in a conference on the role of air power held at the venue of the Ministry of Defense's Air Industry, he said, “after the glorious victory of the Islamic Revolution, despite imposing all sanctions on the noble people of Islamic Iran, special sanctions were imposed in the field of air force and air industry.”
> 
> With the departure of foreign military advisers from the country, they [enemies] thought that the air force of the country would doom to failure, he continued.
> 
> Today, Islamic Republic of Iran is in a position that defense industry's capabilities of knowledge-based companies and leading universities of the country have joined their hands together and are working collectively in order to strengthen and improve air power of the country in the international level, Hatami reiterated.
> 
> The minister of defense pointed to attaining advanced technology of designing and manufacturing a jet fighter named ‘Kowsar’ and said, “currently, many developed countries in the world are still dependent on these fields and are ready to spend huge funds to meet their demands.”
> 
> Elsewhere in his remarks, Hatami revealed the preparation of manufacturing Kowsar 88 training jet, designed and manufactured domestically, in the very near future and said, “strategic and constructive viewpoints of experts in the field of air industry have been received in order to be used for progressing air industry of the country.”
> 
> Meticulous, sensitive and precise decisions should be made in the field of air industry, he said, adding, “investing in the air industry sector is costly and strict measures should be taken in this regard.”
> 
> As a matter of fact, organizing such important Conference is a step towards boosting air defense capability of the country in the international level, he observed.
> 
> Brigadier General Amir Hatami expressed his hope that the Ministry of Defense, benefited from its fruitful experiences gained in the past 40 years, can take giant strides in increasing sovereignty of air power of the country in the international level.



"Power" is a quite and overstatement let be realistic here.


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> "Power" is a quite and overstatement let be realistic here.



Let’s be real, the only other major military country that has a worse Air Force than Iran is North Korea. And calling North Korea a “major” military country is an overstatement considering their entire military is based on 1960’s tech.

Years of neglect and refusal by the upper echelon of Iran’s government to significantly invest in AirPower in the 90’s and put pressure on post-soviet Russia is why Iran is where it is at today.

Iran could have gotten it’s hands on the latest engine tech back in the 90’s from former soviet bloc countries along with blueprints and much more. 

But they were too worried about a powerful Air Force in the hands of the regular military at a time when iran had just come out of a major war.

So you see, that paranoia is actually why iran has such a glaring weakness. Quite ironic really.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sepasgozar

TheImmortal said:


> Let’s be real, the only other major military country that has a worse Air Force than Iran is North Korea. And calling North Korea a “major” military country is an overstatement considering their entire military is based on 1960’s tech.
> 
> Years of neglect and refusal by the upper echelon of Iran’s government to significantly invest in AirPower in the 90’s and put pressure on post-soviet Russia is why Iran is where it is at today.
> 
> Iran could have gotten it’s hands on the latest engine tech back in the 90’s from former soviet bloc countries along with blueprints and much more.
> 
> But they were too worried about a powerful Air Force in the hands of the regular military at a time when iran had just come out of a major war.
> 
> So you see, that paranoia is actually why iran has such a glaring weakness. Quite ironic really.



Not ironic when one realizes most of Iran's problems are caused by paranoia and internal distrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Let’s be real, the only other major military country that has a worse Air Force than Iran is North Korea. And calling North Korea a “major” military country is an overstatement considering their entire military is based on 1960’s tech.
> 
> Years of neglect and refusal by the upper echelon of Iran’s government to significantly invest in AirPower in the 90’s and put pressure on post-soviet Russia is why Iran is where it is at today.
> 
> Iran could have gotten it’s hands on the latest engine tech back in the 90’s from former soviet bloc countries along with blueprints and much more.
> 
> But they were too worried about a powerful Air Force in the hands of the regular military at a time when iran had just come out of a major war.
> 
> So you see, that paranoia is actually why iran has such a glaring weakness. Quite ironic really.



Their is only so much room for capital expenditures and Iran decided to invest in missile power and air defense at the expense of airpower. 

They made the right choice I think, because no matter how much aircraft they buy including the huge maintenance costs associated with it. No one can fight the U.S airforce head to head, and those airbases and aircraft would be wiped out on the ground because they are target#1 in a conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

sepasgozar said:


> Not ironic when one realizes most of Iran's problems are caused by paranoia and internal distrust.



Not paranoid:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/UAjlcFS9DZZ9/

Iran does not want to be turned into Palestinians living in a concentration camp of Gaza somewhere in Iran. 

80 million Iranians packed into some sliver of land in Iran, while the jews occupy the rest of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Their is only so much room for capital expenditures and Iran decided to invest in missile power and air defense at the expense of airpower.
> 
> They made the right choice I think, because no matter how much aircraft they buy including the huge maintenance costs associated with it. No one can fight the U.S airforce head to head, and those airbases and aircraft would be wiped out on the ground because they are target#1 in a conflict.



With that logic Russia and china shouldn’t have air force’s either because what’s the point in the face of the mighty USAF? PROPOSTEROUS argument made by the ill informed!

Iran could have acquired many of the needed technologies (radar, engine, ECW, etc) in the 90’s From Russia/Ex-Soviet bloc countries.

China was smart, they conditioned Air Force fighter jet deals on the notion that they would get full ToT on another fighter jet they wanted to mass produce. Russia was forced to accept at the time because they were desperate.

People forget that at the time Dollar to rial was 1 = 700 rials at one point! Now it’s 15000+!

Mistakes were made by Iran, they even passed on getting TU bomber aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sepasgozar said:


> Not ironic when one realizes most of Iran's problems are caused by paranoia and internal distrust.


Gee,thats funny,I always thought the regions problems,which of course include irans,were mainly the result of a century plus of foreign,mainly western,meddling in the affairs of the nations of the region.
Theres an old saying:just because you`re paranoid doesnt mean that there might not be people [or nations] who are actually out to get you.
I`d say iran,considering the neck of the woods/part of the world it lives in,has every reason to be [justifiably] paranoid,after all look at what happened to lebanon,afghanistan,iraq,libya,syria and of course palestine......oh and lets not forget all that iran has had to go thru as well in the last 80-odd years.Honestly under the circumstances I`m amazed that iran isnt far more paranoid and distrustful,especially these days with the rise of sunni wahabism locally and the rise of right wing populism in the west.We truly live in very dangerous times.



Stryker1982 said:


> Their is only so much room for capital expenditures and Iran decided to invest in missile power and air defense at the expense of airpower.
> 
> They made the right choice I think, because no matter how much aircraft they buy including the huge maintenance costs associated with it. No one can fight the U.S airforce head to head, and those airbases and aircraft would be wiped out on the ground because they are target#1 in a conflict.


Agreed,both the missile force and the development of area denial capabilities were certainly the correct way to go.These were certainly of far greater value to iran militarily as credible deterrents than another fifty or even a hundred 3rd or 4th gen aircraft would`ve been.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


>


HAY SOUDI MATHER FU CKER U CAME BACK FROM YOUR WHORE MOTHER WEDDING WITH ONE OF SAUDI CAMEL 
HOW YOUR MOTHER CAN EAT CAMEL DECK SO STRONG MOTHER BUT HER HELL HOLE SO DEEP NO PERABLEM SHE CAN EAT EVEN BIGGER ONE LIKE
*Elephant SO GOOD FOR HER PU SSY*

https://soundcloud.com/gwalesh-panchal/elefante-el-tiger-ft-neha

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran’s Bavar-373 Missile System Has Vertical Launchers, Commander Confirms*

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...tem-has-vertical-launchers-commander-confirms

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.armyrecognition.com/oct...se_missile_system_has_vertical_launchers.html

If they only unveil it. come on guys we're dying out here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran: New SAM Site At Masshad*

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2018/10/23/iran-new-sam-site-masshad/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> *Iran: New SAM Site At Masshad*
> 
> https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2018/10/23/iran-new-sam-site-masshad/


the sam sites in Msshad is just temporary not permanent

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

WordsMatter said:


>




People far smarter than you who called themselves expert on Missiles were laughing at Iran's Missile program too and fools like Michael Elleman who are PAID Experts just 6 years ago were claiming that Iran would need to fire 100's of Fateh class missiles just to hit his office across the Persian Gulf in the UAE under 250km away! 

Yes Iran started late and alloys like Steel and Aluminum that started being produced in the U.S. on an industrial scale around 1900 weren't produced in Iran until around the mid 70's due to half a century of really bad leadership (Western puppet leaders) 

But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,.....
Give Iran another 40 years and the fact that we started 80 years later than countries like the U.S. and Europe won't mean a thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> People far smarter than you who called themselves expert on Missiles were laughing at Iran's Missile program too and fools like Michael Elleman who are PAID Experts just 6 years ago were claiming that Iran would need to fire 100's of Fateh class missiles just to hit his office across the Persian Gulf in the UAE under 250km away!
> 
> Yes Iran started late and alloys like Steel and Aluminum that started being produced in the U.S. on an industrial scale around 1900 weren't produced in Iran until around the mid 70's due to half a century of really bad leadership (Western puppet leaders)
> 
> But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,.....
> Give Iran another 40 years and the fact that we started 80 years later than countries like the U.S. and Europe won't mean a thing.



Today I heard some news about testing of the bavar 373 system against zolfagar ballistic missile. I will try to find some photos too. did you hear anything?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.ilna.ir/بخش-استان-ها-15...اسان-نظامی-قرارگاه-خاتم-الانبیاء-در-منطقه-عکس


موشک_ذوالفقار
و موشک ذوالفقار با کد 
ZA
ثبت شده بر روی بدنه در عملیات_لیلة_القدر(حمله به دیرالزور سوریه)
ظاهرا این موشک در تست اخیر سامانه پدافند هوایی باور۳۷۳ به عنوان هدف مورد استفاده قرار گرفته است.

بر اساس اندازه گیری های انجام شده و مقایسه نسبت طول و قطر مخروط کلاهک کشف شده، به نظر میرسد که کلاهک کشف شده مربوط به مخروط چهارم(قبل از دماغه سیاه رنگ)کلاهک موشک ذوالفقار است.

در موشک ذوالفقار طول مخروط سوم(قسمت سرجنگی کلاهک)تقریبا دو برابر قطر پایه مخروط است.
در حالی که در کلاهک کشف شده نسبت ها برابرند که با مخروط چهارم کلاهک موشک ذوالفقار همخوانی دارد.

بنابراین قسمت مربوط با سرجنگی و سیستم هدایت و کنترل کلاهک موشک_ذوالفقار مفقود شده است.

مخروط ذکر شده آنقدر کوچک است که ظاهرا از برخورد ترکش موشک صیاد۴ در امان مانده است و شاید تنها محل شکستگی با برخورد ترکش آسیب دیده و پس از برخورد به زمین، محل آن گسترش یافته است.

آزمایش بی سر و صدای سامانه پدافند هوایی باور ۳۷۳؟ 
در رزمایشهای اخیر پدافندی سپاه و ارتش، منطقه کویر سمنان جزو مناطقی بود که سامانه های پدافندی در آن استقرار یافته و به انجام عملیات پرداختند.
به دلیل نزدیکی سمنان و خراسان رضوی به یکدیگر و تعدد نقاط گزارش شده(صدای انفجار و اجزای موشک)به نظر میرسد که موشک ذوالفقار در طی یک آزمایش پدافندی مورد رهگیری موفق قرار گرفته است.
سلامت بدنه موشک و آسیب دیدگی بخش کلاهک آن، نشان دهنده این نکته است که بدنه پس از اتمام سوخت فرود آمده و در نقطه دیگر کلاهک با انفجار سرجنگی(دارای فیوز مجاورتی)موشک پدافندی منحرف و ساقط شده است.
موشک ذوالفقار احتمالا از استان های شمالی یا غربی کشور شلیک شده است.

این واقعه را میتوان یک تست موفق اعلام نشده برای سامانه باور ۳۷۳ محسوب نمود.

تصویر اول:

محل فرود بخش بدنه و محفظه سوخت موشک.
همانطور که مشخص است محفظه سوخت و نازل به علت سنگینی(از آلیاژ فلزی)در زمین فرو رفته اند و در تصویر تنها بخشی از محفظه سوخت دیده میشود.
در واقع بدنه موشک از سر به ته به صورت عمودی سقوط کرده و در زمین فرو رفته و اتصالات بدنه و پوشش نازل در این حین به علت جنس متفاوت و سبکی آنها جدا شده و بر روی زمین افتاده اند.

تصویر دوم:
پوشش نازل موشک
کد ZB درج شده بر روی پوشش به معنای زلزال بی یا ذوالفقار بی است.
اما ذوالفقار بی تا به حال دیده نشده است.

اثرات سوختگی روی بدنه نشان دهنده فعالیت پیشران موشک است.
همانطور که از محل له شدگی بدنه پیداست پوشش از قسمت بالا به زمین برخورد کرده است.

تصویر سوم:
بدنه موشک(پوشش محفظه سوخت)که تقریبا سالم است.
در ساخت بدنه از فیبر کربن جهت تقویت بدنه و سبک سازی استفاده شده است.
بنابراین به احتمال زیاد موشک از نوع ذوالفقار است که نسل ششم موشک های بالستیک فاتح محسوب میشود.

عدم وجود محفظه سوخت و سالم بودن بدنه به معنای آن است که سوخت موشک قبل از سقوط بدنه مصرف شده و بدنه بدون سوخت فرود آمده است.
و الا با انفجار محفظه بدنه نیز در هوا یا بر روی زمین متلاشی میشد.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> https://www.ilna.ir/بخش-استان-ها-15/684642-سقوط-اشیای-ناشناس-در-کویر-بجستان-حضور-کارشناسان-نظامی-قرارگاه-خاتم-الانبیاء-در-منطقه-عکس
> 
> 
> موشک_ذوالفقار
> و موشک ذوالفقار با کد
> ZA
> ثبت شده بر روی بدنه در عملیات_لیلة_القدر(حمله به دیرالزور سوریه)
> ظاهرا این موشک در تست اخیر سامانه پدافند هوایی باور۳۷۳ به عنوان هدف مورد استفاده قرار گرفته است.
> 
> بر اساس اندازه گیری های انجام شده و مقایسه نسبت طول و قطر مخروط کلاهک کشف شده، به نظر میرسد که کلاهک کشف شده مربوط به مخروط چهارم(قبل از دماغه سیاه رنگ)کلاهک موشک ذوالفقار است.
> 
> در موشک ذوالفقار طول مخروط سوم(قسمت سرجنگی کلاهک)تقریبا دو برابر قطر پایه مخروط است.
> در حالی که در کلاهک کشف شده نسبت ها برابرند که با مخروط چهارم کلاهک موشک ذوالفقار همخوانی دارد.
> 
> بنابراین قسمت مربوط با سرجنگی و سیستم هدایت و کنترل کلاهک موشک_ذوالفقار مفقود شده است.
> 
> مخروط ذکر شده آنقدر کوچک است که ظاهرا از برخورد ترکش موشک صیاد۴ در امان مانده است و شاید تنها محل شکستگی با برخورد ترکش آسیب دیده و پس از برخورد به زمین، محل آن گسترش یافته است.
> 
> آزمایش بی سر و صدای سامانه پدافند هوایی باور ۳۷۳؟
> در رزمایشهای اخیر پدافندی سپاه و ارتش، منطقه کویر سمنان جزو مناطقی بود که سامانه های پدافندی در آن استقرار یافته و به انجام عملیات پرداختند.
> به دلیل نزدیکی سمنان و خراسان رضوی به یکدیگر و تعدد نقاط گزارش شده(صدای انفجار و اجزای موشک)به نظر میرسد که موشک ذوالفقار در طی یک آزمایش پدافندی مورد رهگیری موفق قرار گرفته است.
> سلامت بدنه موشک و آسیب دیدگی بخش کلاهک آن، نشان دهنده این نکته است که بدنه پس از اتمام سوخت فرود آمده و در نقطه دیگر کلاهک با انفجار سرجنگی(دارای فیوز مجاورتی)موشک پدافندی منحرف و ساقط شده است.
> موشک ذوالفقار احتمالا از استان های شمالی یا غربی کشور شلیک شده است.
> 
> این واقعه را میتوان یک تست موفق اعلام نشده برای سامانه باور ۳۷۳ محسوب نمود.
> 
> تصویر اول:
> 
> محل فرود بخش بدنه و محفظه سوخت موشک.
> همانطور که مشخص است محفظه سوخت و نازل به علت سنگینی(از آلیاژ فلزی)در زمین فرو رفته اند و در تصویر تنها بخشی از محفظه سوخت دیده میشود.
> در واقع بدنه موشک از سر به ته به صورت عمودی سقوط کرده و در زمین فرو رفته و اتصالات بدنه و پوشش نازل در این حین به علت جنس متفاوت و سبکی آنها جدا شده و بر روی زمین افتاده اند.
> 
> تصویر دوم:
> پوشش نازل موشک
> کد ZB درج شده بر روی پوشش به معنای زلزال بی یا ذوالفقار بی است.
> اما ذوالفقار بی تا به حال دیده نشده است.
> 
> اثرات سوختگی روی بدنه نشان دهنده فعالیت پیشران موشک است.
> همانطور که از محل له شدگی بدنه پیداست پوشش از قسمت بالا به زمین برخورد کرده است.
> 
> تصویر سوم:
> بدنه موشک(پوشش محفظه سوخت)که تقریبا سالم است.
> در ساخت بدنه از فیبر کربن جهت تقویت بدنه و سبک سازی استفاده شده است.
> بنابراین به احتمال زیاد موشک از نوع ذوالفقار است که نسل ششم موشک های بالستیک فاتح محسوب میشود.
> 
> عدم وجود محفظه سوخت و سالم بودن بدنه به معنای آن است که سوخت موشک قبل از سقوط بدنه مصرف شده و بدنه بدون سوخت فرود آمده است.
> و الا با انفجار محفظه بدنه نیز در هوا یا بر روی زمین متلاشی میشد.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 507688
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 507690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 507689
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 507692
> View attachment 507693
> View attachment 507694
> View attachment 507695
> View attachment 507696
> View attachment 507698
> View attachment 507699
> View attachment 507701
> View attachment 507702
> View attachment 507703


you can't see any trace of being intercepted on the missile , So I wonder if the test really was a successful intercepting of the missile


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> you can't see any trace of being intercepted on the missile , So I wonder if the test really was a successful intercepting of the missile



the missile was for training because it did not explode and people also said that they heard sound of blast in the sky.


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> the missile was for training because it did not explode and people also said that they heard sound of blast in the sky.


well it's certain that the target missile don't have a live war head , but the intercepting missile actually must be a working missile otherwise there is no pint in doing the test , and my theory about that explosion sound is that they destroyed the missile after it missed the target to stop any accidental damage .the only way that it was a successful test against ballistic missiles is that there be traces of shrapnel on target missile and there was not any picture to pint to that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dash

Iran is a great country. Its heartening to see they continue their scientific advancements despite all the obstacles. Whether its good/bad, success/failure doesnt matter. The will power to be developed is evident.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WordsMatter

VEVAK said:


> People far smarter than you who called themselves expert on Missiles were laughing at Iran's Missile program too and fools like Michael Elleman who are PAID Experts just 6 years ago were claiming that Iran would need to fire 100's of Fateh class missiles just to hit his office across the Persian Gulf in the UAE under 250km away!
> 
> Yes Iran started late and alloys like Steel and Aluminum that started being produced in the U.S. on an industrial scale around 1900 weren't produced in Iran until around the mid 70's due to half a century of really bad leadership (Western puppet leaders)
> 
> But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,.....
> Give Iran another 40 years and the fact that we started 80 years later than countries like the U.S. and Europe won't mean a thing.



"But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,....."

What jet engine? The one in your wet dreams? Helicopters? Like your bat-plane? Yeah you guys have come a long way in mastering the art of deceit. And BTW, since we are talking smart, I believe someone with a healthy dose of skepticism is far smarter than a paid IRI blogger like yourself. You guys are all fake news. All the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

WordsMatter said:


> "But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,....."
> 
> You are a fool indeed to think this "leadership" that you refer to is anything but incompetent, corrupt, murdering scums, just like their IRIGC thugs.
> 
> What jet engine? The one in your wet dreams? Helicopters? Like your bat-plane? Yeah you guys have come a long way in mastering the art of deceit. And BTW, since we are talking smart, I believe someone with a healthy dose of skepticism is far smarter than a paid IRI blogger like yourself. You guys are all fake news. All the time.



I'm sure to morons like you leaders that instead of buying overpriced American Fighters have chosen to make Iran the largest car producer in the region, the largest tractor producer in the region, 4th largest cement producer in the world, largest Dam builder in the region, fastest growing country in Science and Technology, one of the top 10 ranked countries in the world in the Economic activity growth of women, % of female collage graduates & % of females working in industry, a country that produces over 97% of it's yearly weapons accusations,………. Yea that government is corrupt!!!!!! But a government that after 50 years (US puppet Pahlavi) only built 16 universities in Iran, that took them over 40 years of begging to finally get foreigners to build them an industrial steel mill & aluminum production facilities in Iran and after 50 years of rule couldn't so much as produce a freaking car yea and that government was the west's beacon of light in the region!! LOL!

So clearly any Iranian leadership you in the west call corrupt and incompetent means the exact opposite in reality and in reality it is a good leadership for Iran! And no one say's they are not without their faults but the pros outway the cons....

As for Helo's HERE:
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/crime/article24758278.html

Bell even tried to sue Iran because Iran reverse engineered Bell's 206 as far back as 2002! LOL! MORON! So yea Iran was producing helos like the 206 as far back as 17 years ago! So feel free to cry now! LOL

Iran also started producing it's 1st +600lbf mini Jet engines as far back as ~20 years ago! Again NOTHING NEW and videos of it were made public ~10 years ago are now available on YouTube! so keep on crying!

I know Iran's progress in the past 30 years (Since the end of the war) is so shocking to people like you that the only way you can make sense of it is by seeing at a deceit! And that's fine by us! LOL!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> Today I heard some news about testing of the bavar 373 system against zolfagar ballistic missile. I will try to find some photos too. did you hear anything?



They had exercises in the west....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

As I understand from @skyshadow photos two different nozzles can be seen. A larger composite one consistent with that of the composite booster of the Zolfaghar. The smaller one seems to be a smaller metal nozzle that would fit for a SAM such as the Sayyad-4 which needs to be very cost effective.

From the photos I'm not too sure about that but if that's the case then they have tested the Bavar-373 or another LR-SAM against a Zolfaghar.
In that case the LR-SAM went for the booster stage instead for the near-hypersonic glide vehicle (RV).

The S-300PMU2 has 40km max. range against BMs and the S-400 up to 60km. A robust higher PK kill range would probably be 60-80% of that max. figure.

A Zolfaghar would be a difficult target for any ABM system. It has a separating glide vehicle which can perform terminal maneuvers.

Easiest way would have been to test it against a Shahab-1 or -2 with pure fixed ballistic trajectory.
Testing against a Shahab-3 would require the capability to attack and track a 10+ mach target (well within the capability of a electronically steered array LR-SAM system such as the Bavar-373).
The Zolfaghar would be slower at mach 6-8, stay for longer in the atmosphere to be attacked.
Its quasi-ballistic flat trajectory reduced warning time would not affect the Bavar-373 which is limited by its tactical range radar systems.
Using the Zolfaghar as test target would represent an adverse difficult condition for a ABM system due to its separating booster. So the test can be used to distinguish booster and glide vehicle and test the system against two targets with just one Zolfaghar.
Qualifying the system against a maneuvering glide vehicle/RV would be something not even the S-400 is reported to have achieved. Of course the glide vehicle could have been used without evasive maneuvering during a test.

Warhead killing capability is another hurdle which Russians only managed to master well with the S-300PMU2.

Plus: Although we knew it since the Zolfaghar exhibited last year: It has a composite filament booster casing, at least the tested version.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> As I understand from @skyshadow photos two different nozzles can be seen. A larger composite one consistent with that of the composite booster of the Zolfaghar. The smaller one seems to be a smaller metal nozzle that would fit for a SAM such as the Sayyad-4 which needs to be very cost effective.
> 
> From the photos I'm not too sure about that but if that's the case then they have tested the Bavar-373 or another LR-SAM against a Zolfaghar.
> In that case the LR-SAM went for the booster stage instead for the near-hypersonic glide vehicle (RV).
> 
> The S-300PMU2 has 40km max. range against BMs and the S-400 up to 60km. A robust higher PK kill range would probably be 60-80% of that max. figure.
> 
> A Zolfaghar would be a difficult target for any ABM system. It has a separating glide vehicle which can perform terminal maneuvers.
> 
> Easiest way would have been to test it against a Shahab-1 or -2 with pure fixed ballistic trajectory.
> Testing against a Shahab-3 would require the capability to attack and track a 10+ mach target (well within the capability of a electronically steered array LR-SAM system such as the Bavar-373).
> The Zolfaghar would be slower at mach 6-8, stay for longer in the atmosphere to be attacked.
> Its quasi-ballistic flat trajectory reduced warning time would not affect the Bavar-373 which is limited by its tactical range radar systems.
> Using the Zolfaghar as test target would represent an adverse difficult condition for a ABM system due to its separating booster. So the test can be used to distinguish booster and glide vehicle and test the system against two targets with just one Zolfaghar.
> Qualifying the system against a maneuvering glide vehicle/RV would be something not even the S-400 is reported to have achieved. Of course the glide vehicle could have been used without evasive maneuvering during a test.
> 
> Warhead killing capability is another hurdle which Russians only managed to master well with the S-300PMU2.
> 
> Plus: Although we knew it since the Zolfaghar exhibited last year: It has a composite filament booster casing, at least the tested version.



I don't see any second booster. Do you mean the section buried in the ground? That looks like the guidance section of Zolfaqar.


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I don't see any second booster. Do you mean the section buried in the ground? That looks like the guidance section of Zolfaqar.



There are two photos of nozzles. They could be the same just from different perspectives, I don't know, but they may be different.
If they are different, then a ABM test is the answer, if not its just a Zolfaghar booster.


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> There are two photos of nozzles. They could be the same just from different perspectives, I don't know, but they may be different.
> If they are different, then a ABM test is the answer, if not its just a Zolfaghar booster.



At first I thought they're the same one, just facing opposite directions and with different aspect ratios. But I actually think you could be right.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> At first I thought they're the same one, just facing opposite directions and with different aspect ratios. But I actually think you could be right.


to me they look the same object from two different view

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> to me they look the same object from two different view



*Look at this picture. In this photo, half the missile warhead is lost.




*










*But in this picture, what seems to be the second warhead, the second warhead is almost intact. Take a look at the ground in this photo. There is a black mark on the ground beside the warhead, but there is no sign of burn mark on the ground in the first photo. And take a look at the ground in this picture, it is muddy and rocky. But in the first picture, the ground is completely dusty and dry.*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> well it's certain that the target missile don't have a live war head , but the intercepting missile actually must be a working missile otherwise there is no pint in doing the test , and my theory about that explosion sound is that they destroyed the missile after it missed the target to stop any accidental damage .the only way that it was a successful test against ballistic missiles is that there be traces of shrapnel on target missile and there was not any picture to pint to that.





PeeD said:


> As I understand from @skyshadow photos two different nozzles can be seen. A larger composite one consistent with that of the composite booster of the Zolfaghar. The smaller one seems to be a smaller metal nozzle that would fit for a SAM such as the Sayyad-4 which needs to be very cost effective.
> 
> From the photos I'm not too sure about that but if that's the case then they have tested the Bavar-373 or another LR-SAM against a Zolfaghar.
> In that case the LR-SAM went for the booster stage instead for the near-hypersonic glide vehicle (RV).
> 
> The S-300PMU2 has 40km max. range against BMs and the S-400 up to 60km. A robust higher PK kill range would probably be 60-80% of that max. figure.
> 
> A Zolfaghar would be a difficult target for any ABM system. It has a separating glide vehicle which can perform terminal maneuvers.
> 
> Easiest way would have been to test it against a Shahab-1 or -2 with pure fixed ballistic trajectory.
> Testing against a Shahab-3 would require the capability to attack and track a 10+ mach target (well within the capability of a electronically steered array LR-SAM system such as the Bavar-373).
> The Zolfaghar would be slower at mach 6-8, stay for longer in the atmosphere to be attacked.
> Its quasi-ballistic flat trajectory reduced warning time would not affect the Bavar-373 which is limited by its tactical range radar systems.
> Using the Zolfaghar as test target would represent an adverse difficult condition for a ABM system due to its separating booster. So the test can be used to distinguish booster and glide vehicle and test the system against two targets with just one Zolfaghar.
> Qualifying the system against a maneuvering glide vehicle/RV would be something not even the S-400 is reported to have achieved. Of course the glide vehicle could have been used without evasive maneuvering during a test.
> 
> Warhead killing capability is another hurdle which Russians only managed to master well with the S-300PMU2.
> 
> Plus: Although we knew it since the Zolfaghar exhibited last year: It has a composite filament booster casing, at least the tested version.



I thought there were 2 there too but it was just different angle picture and fact is if there were 2 missile it's doubtful that they would land near the same location due to very different angles of trajectory and engagement altitude because for that to happen you'll need such a perfect hit at such high speeds that the missile have to practically fuse together 

And I only see the Missile body in the pics and I don't see any part of the separating warhead and if it's a Zolfaghar without a complete failed separation the missile body and separating warhead would NOT land in the same location and for SAM interception you'll be intercepting during terminal guidance and not before separation 

FYI If the missile had failed before running out of rocket fuel the explosion would have been so massive that there is no way parts that large and identifiable would have survived and there would be far more debris.... 

In conclusion it's either a failed separation after the missile ran out of solid fuel or just the missile body coming down.....



skyshadow said:


> *Look at this picture. In this photo, half the missile warhead is lost.
> 
> View attachment 508350
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But in this picture, what seems to be the second warhead, the second warhead is almost intact. Take a look at the ground in this photo. There is a black mark on the ground beside the warhead, but there is no sign of burn mark on the ground in the first photo. And take a look at the ground in this picture, it is muddy and rocky. But in the first picture, the ground is completely dusty and dry.
> 
> View attachment 508352
> *



More likely it's parts of the engine with composite high temperature heat shielding around it.... Can't really tell in those pictures but unlike other parts of the missile it looks burnt..... If it was the nose cone and there were explosives inside it wouldn't survive or if it did it would be dug into the ground... 
So if the front section didn't separate the missile would come in nose 1st and even without explosives it would be either be dug into the ground or completely destroyed 
BUT if this is just the missile body coming to the ground the heavies part of the missile would be the engine part and it would come in tail 1st like a dart and that's just normal physics and it seems that's exactly what happened here

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> I thought there were 2 there too but it was just different angle picture and fact is if there were 2 missile it's doubtful that they would land near the same location due to very different angles of trajectory and engagement altitude because for that to happen you'll need such a perfect hit at such high speeds that the missile have to practically fuse together
> 
> And I only see the Missile body in the pics and I don't see any part of the separating warhead and if it's a Zolfaghar without a complete failed separation the missile body and separating warhead would NOT land in the same location and for SAM interception you'll be intercepting during terminal guidance and not before separation
> 
> FYI If the missile had failed before running out of rocket fuel the explosion would have been so massive that there is no way parts that large and identifiable would have survived and there would be far more debris....
> 
> In conclusion it's either a failed separation after the missile ran out of solid fuel or just the missile body coming down.....
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's parts of the engine with composite high temperature heat shielding around it.... Can't really tell in those pictures but unlike other parts of the missile it looks burnt..... If it was the nose cone and there were explosives inside it wouldn't survive or if it did it would be dug into the ground...
> So if the front section didn't separate the missile would come in nose 1st and even without explosives it would be either be dug into the ground or completely destroyed
> BUT if this is just the missile body coming to the ground the heavies part of the missile would be the engine part and it would come in tail 1st like a dart and that's just normal physics and it seems that's exactly what happened here
> 
> View attachment 508634



They say they have found the rocket body at بجستان baiestan and the missile warhead in torbat heydariyeh تربت حیدریه 

do you think that this distance maybe is from zoalfagar warhead separation?


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> They say they have found the rocket body at بجستان baiestan and the missile warhead in torbat heydariyeh تربت حیدریه
> 
> do you think that this distance maybe is from zoalfagar warhead separation?


It's probable . what I'm wondering is that if any remain of the intercepting missile is shown.


----------



## ashool

WordsMatter said:


> "But under the current leadership the country that only had 16 universities now has well over 200 and a country that couldn't produce so much as a car within the span of 40 years & after fighting an 8year war is now building TBM's, Warships, Subs, light fighter jets, UCAV's, SLV's, Cruise Missiles, Jet engines, Radars, SAM's, Precision Guided Missiles, Helicopters, Tactical vehicles,....."
> 
> What jet engine? The one in your wet dreams? Helicopters? Like your bat-plane? Yeah you guys have come a long way in mastering the art of deceit. And BTW, since we are talking smart, I believe someone with a healthy dose of skepticism is far smarter than a paid IRI blogger like yourself. You guys are all fake news. All the time.


is an iranian kick your asss very hard even now is burning i said many time go buy painkiller for yourself and your mother maybe work for that hell holes


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> It's probable . what I'm wondering is that if any remain of the intercepting missile is shown.



Who would have shot this missile down?


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> They say they have found the rocket body at بجستان baiestan and the missile warhead in torbat heydariyeh تربت حیدریه
> 
> do you think that this distance maybe is from zoalfagar warhead separation?



It's possible that when the missile flipped after separation (like how a dart flips) due to the angle of the trajectory and it's speed the missile body was simply torn apart and in that case the engine will drop like a rock and the body will go down at a slower speed allowing it to glide down and land at another location and depending on how high it was and what angle it took during decent the location could vary and yes it could be that far or even further....

but it also adds in another scenario and that's a failed launch and the engine section simply was torn off mid flight due to structural problems OR the missile was so off course that they were forced to hit self destruct at high altitudes.... But I would need pic's of the Missile body and the debris there to give a better assessment as to what may have happened.....

If we are talking about the Zolfaghar the missile body would have nothing to do with interception for that would happen post separation during terminal guidance anyways but on a standard Fateh that would be a different story.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Who would have shot this missile down?


Who else , iran testing Bavar 373 against quasi ballistic missiles.


----------



## T-72B

Any new picture of Bavar 373


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> Any new picture of Bavar 373


no


----------



## Jäger

an Iranian S-300PMU2 SAM system. I think the PMU2 is one of the most advanced S-300 model SAMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059115077704605697

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Wasn't it supposed to be launched vertically ?


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> Wasn't it supposed to be launched vertically ?



It is 3-khordad or Talash Ant Air Defense System ... its not Bavar ... 

these missiles are Sayad 2 or Sayyad 3 ... Bavar is supposed to use Sayyad 4 missile ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

http://www.mokhbernews.ir/Home/ShowNewsInfo/9944414/تمرین-تاکتیک-های-مقابله-با-حملات-موشکی-کروز-در-رزمایش-پدافند-هوایی


























































View attachment 515363

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

The first unveiling of a sayyad 2D missile for the first time. A combination of talash system with Mersad project.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Russel

skyshadow said:


> http://www.mokhbernews.ir/Home/ShowNewsInfo/9944414/تمرین-تاکتیک-های-مقابله-با-حملات-موشکی-کروز-در-رزمایش-پدافند-هوایی
> 
> View attachment 515344
> View attachment 515345
> View attachment 515346
> View attachment 515347
> View attachment 515348
> View attachment 515349
> View attachment 515350
> View attachment 515351
> View attachment 515352
> View attachment 515353
> View attachment 515354
> View attachment 515355
> View attachment 515356
> View attachment 515357
> View attachment 515358
> View attachment 515359
> View attachment 515360
> View attachment 515361
> View attachment 515362
> View attachment 515363


Wt is this missile system with 8 missiles?


----------



## raptor22

I thought Bavar would be tested & shown ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Are we seeing a new jet powered drone at 0:30 ?


















Russel said:


> Wt is this missile system with 8 missiles?


which one



raptor22 said:


> I thought Bavar would be tested & shown ..


Iran usually first introduces a system and then it releases the test of the system.



Hack-Hook said:


> Wasn't it supposed to be launched vertically ?


that is talash air defense and it is not vertical launch system. bavar 373 system in anther hand is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

Russel said:


> Wt is this missile system with 8 missiles?


Its not Iranian system .... 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crotale_(missile)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

is that talash 1 system ?


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TOPGUN

Very nice guys " Mashallah "

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> is that talash 1 system ?
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



isnt that the new mobile Hawk AD system?


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



Is that on a Russian TEL? Looks like the TEL that carries the S-300


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> Wasn't it supposed to be launched vertically ?


Its not to far of it from the looks of the angle on the launcher,especially when compared to the patriot which looks to be its inspiration,at least for the launcher.


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> isnt that the new mobile Hawk AD system?


Yes it is, but some say its talash 1 but i do not think that.



TheImmortal said:


> Is that on a Russian TEL? Looks like the TEL that carries the S-300


Its Iranian made TEL.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> isnt that the new mobile Hawk AD system?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> is that talash 1 system ?
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Ahhhh,the mystery kamin 2`s sam is finally revealed at last.It certainly appears to be a sayyad 2 in a shortened launch canister,so it seems very likely that they`ve decided to use the sayyad 2 in its very own dedicated system,I wonder if it uses the same radars as its big brother?.Interestingly it also looks like the elevation of the kamin 2 launcher is closer to that of the patriot,tho whether that is the usual launch angle is unknown.




















Heres some enlarged and sharpened pics taken from the vid showing the launch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Ahhhh,the mystery kamin 2`s sam is finally revealed at last.It certainly appears to be a sayyad 2 in a shortened launch canister,so it seems very likely that they`ve decided to use the sayyad 2 in its very own dedicated system,I wonder if it uses the same radars as its big brother?.Interestingly it also looks like the elevation of the kamin 2 launcher is closer to that of the patriot,tho whether that is the usual launch angle is unknown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heres some enlarged and sharpened pics taken from the vid showing the launch.



Kamin-2 is an updated Mersad system and it’s missile is not a Shayad-2 but a missile named “Shahin”.

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/423503/Introducing-4-animated-defense-systems-for-effective-defense

Launch angle is probably due to fact it targets drones and low altitude aircraft/drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> Ahhhh,the mystery kamin 2`s sam is finally revealed at last.It certainly appears to be a sayyad 2 in a shortened launch canister,so it seems very likely that they`ve decided to use the sayyad 2 in its very own dedicated system,I wonder if it uses the same radars as its big brother?.Interestingly it also looks like the elevation of the kamin 2 launcher is closer to that of the patriot,tho whether that is the usual launch angle is unknown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heres some enlarged and sharpened pics taken from the vid showing the launch.


Well, they said Talash missile system has been used, so let's drop that "Kamin" name for now.

rapid development and new versions of the Sayyad missiles means Talash is an ongoing project for achieving a three layer air defense system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

mohsen said:


> rapid development and new versions of the Sayyad missiles means Talash is an ongoing project for achieving a three layer air defense system.


did they say anything about multi layered defence or just something you infer? 

what are the different layers?


----------



## TheImmortal

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> did they say anything about multi layered defence or just something you infer?
> 
> what are the different layers?



Multi layered defense is the doctrine of air defense.

The ring defense: long range air defense ring followed by medium range air defense ring followed by last resort short range air defense ring.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Kamin-2 is an updated Mersad system and it’s missile is not a Shayad-2 but a missile named “Shahin”.
> 
> https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/423503/Introducing-4-animated-defense-systems-for-effective-defense
> 
> Launch angle is probably due to fact it targets drones and low altitude aircraft/drones.


Frankly I find that pretty unlikely as the shahin is very clearly based on the old hawk sam,or at least these days its airframe,so unless they`ve radically redesigned the missile to look more like the sayyad 2 it seems very unlikely,altho it could use mersad/shahin components in the system as the pics from the same exercise showing 2 of the sayyad 2 equipped talash launchers also show the mersad search radar apparently being used with the system.The other thing that makes me dubious of this claim is simply the age of the article as it was written back when only a couple of pics of the system had been released and no pics,to my knowledge at least,had ever been shown of its actual sam or its launch,in fact I think these are the first actual pics we`ve seen of either.

The other thing thats interesting is that the kamin 2 launcher appears to be not only capable of much lower launch angles,but judging from the blast deflector fitted behind the cab,something that is very clearly missing in the sayyad 2/3 equipped talash tel,and the rear facing launch position in these pics,it looks like the kamin 2 launcher is capable of full 360 degree launch as well.
Lastly,if this is the kamin 2 then what was/where is the kamin 1 I wonder?


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Ahhhh,the mystery kamin 2`s sam is finally revealed at last.It certainly appears to be a sayyad 2 in a shortened launch canister,so it seems very likely that they`ve decided to use the sayyad 2 in its very own dedicated system,I wonder if it uses the same radars as its big brother?.Interestingly it also looks like the elevation of the kamin 2 launcher is closer to that of the patriot,tho whether that is the usual launch angle is unknown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heres some enlarged and sharpened pics taken from the vid showing the launch.




This system has been seen with OFOOQ radar 









what is the name of this radar?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> did they say anything about multi layered defence or just something you infer?
> 
> what are the different layers?


*مصاحبه تفصیلی/امیر ابراهیمی‌نژاد: آغاز تحقیقات برای ساخت "سامانه موشکی پانتسیر ایرانی"/ باور۳۷۳ با موفقیت روی موشک بالستیک تست شد*

** تسنیم:گویا سامانه تلاش در سه مدل متفاوت تولید شده است، مقداری در این باره توضیح دهید و بفرمایید که؛ آیا هر سه مدل این سامانه عملیاتی است یا نه؟‌

ــ امیر ابراهیمی‌نژاد: در جنگ هزینه‌های فراوانی وجود دارد ولی این که بتوانیم هزینه‌های جنگ را مدیریت کنیم به ما کمک می‌کند. استفاده کردن هر سیستم دفاعی متناسب با تهدید، می‌شود اقتصاد جنگ و با همین نگاه سامانه تلاش در سه مدل پیش‌بینی شد که برمی‌گردد به استفاده از موشک‌هایی که بتوانند متناسب با سرعت، دقت و مسافت مورد بهره‌برداری قرار بگیرند.

زمانی نیاز است از موشکی استفاده کنید که هدف را در 120 تا 150کیلومتر هدف قرار دهد ولی زمانی نیاز است تا از موشکی استفاده کنید که بتوانید نهایت صرفه‌جویی را داشته باشید. ما سعی کردیم این سامانه را در سه مدل طراحی کنیم. در آینده نه‌چندان دور به هر سه مدل این سامانه دست پیدا می‌کنیم.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navigator

skyshadow said:


> what is the name of this radar?
> View attachment 515642



It's Vostok radars from Belarus
http://www.kbradar.by/en/products/radiolokatsiya/radiolokatsionnye-stantsii/81/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## NADIM.NAZI

skyshadow said:


>


What he is telling?


----------



## skyshadow

NADIM.NAZI said:


> What he is telling?



He explains the training of the Air Defense Forces during the two days of the exercise and he explains that this is one of our largest exercises that is taking place at a level of 500,000 km and its consists of three joined groups: the Air Defense Forces and the Army Air Defense Forces and the Air Defense Forces of IRGC ( Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps ) that are taking part too. he says that they are using new systems and missiles and radars in this exercise and using various types of weapons such as warplanes, explosive and UAVs and bombers are used as enemy forces for various purposes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

skyshadow said:


> He explains the training of the Air Defense Forces during the two days of the exercise and he explains that this is one of our largest exercises that is taking place at a level of 500,000 km and its consists of three joined groups: the Air Defense Forces and the Army Air Defense Forces and the Air Defense Forces of IRGC ( Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps ) that are taking part too. he says that they are using new systems and missiles and radars in this exercise and using various types of weapons such as warplanes, explosive and UAVs and bombers are used as enemy forces for various purposes.


Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

در دومین روز رزمایش ولایت ۹۷، چند فروند از موشک‌های زمین به هوا «شلمچه» شلیک شدند؛ این موشک‌ها توانستند اهداف هوایی را پس از ورود به آسمان محل رزمایش مورد اصابت قرار داده و منهدم کنند.

همچنین در این مرحله از رزمایش شاهد شلیک سامانه موشکی برد متوسط «طبس» نیروی هوافضای سپاه پاسداران بودیم که این سامانه نیز در این رزمایش اقدام به شلیک و انهدام اهداف متخاصم کرد.

Iranian shalamcheh Air Defense system being used in second day of exercise.
















https://khabarone.ir/news/20104347/سیاری-قابلیت-های-"باور"-از-اس-300-بیشتر-خواهد-بود

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

The new short range (article says medium range) missile:





یک سامانه جدید موشکی در رزمایش پدافند هوایی رونمایی شد+تصاویر
More pictures:
انهدام اهداف هوایی توسط سامانه جدید موشکی
It says in the second day of wargame, but we saw it's picture in the first day!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> در دومین روز رزمایش ولایت ۹۷، چند فروند از موشک‌های زمین به هوا «شلمچه» شلیک شدند؛ این موشک‌ها توانستند اهداف هوایی را پس از ورود به آسمان محل رزمایش مورد اصابت قرار داده و منهدم کنند.
> 
> همچنین در این مرحله از رزمایش شاهد شلیک سامانه موشکی برد متوسط «طبس» نیروی هوافضای سپاه پاسداران بودیم که این سامانه نیز در این رزمایش اقدام به شلیک و انهدام اهداف متخاصم کرد.
> 
> Iranian shalamcheh Air Defense system being used in second day of exercise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://khabarone.ir/news/20104347/سیاری-قابلیت-های-"باور"-از-اس-300-بیشتر-خواهد-بود
> 
> View attachment 515735
> View attachment 515736
> View attachment 515737
> View attachment 515738
> View attachment 515739
> View attachment 515740
> View attachment 515741
> View attachment 515742
> View attachment 515743
> View attachment 515744
> View attachment 515745
> View attachment 515746
> View attachment 515747
> View attachment 515748
> View attachment 515749
> View attachment 515750
> View attachment 515751


Great pics!
It looks like the fully mobile versions of the hawk sam based search and fire control radars,and better quality pics of the kamsin 2 tel.It makes me wonder if they`re experimenting with using the hawk radars with the kamsin 2 tel,It could be that they`re trying to maximise interoperability between different sam systems and their components,as I notice there is a tendency among the iranian military to "pick and mix" different components of various systems which dates all the way back to the iran iraq war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> The new short range (article says medium range) missile:
> View attachment 515759
> 
> 
> یک سامانه جدید موشکی در رزمایش پدافند هوایی رونمایی شد+تصاویر
> More pictures:
> انهدام اهداف هوایی توسط سامانه جدید موشکی
> It says in the second day of wargame, but we saw it's picture in the first day!



Nice, my speculation that it will be RIM-162 ESSM-like is now confirmed.
It will replace the Shalamsheh and Shahin/HAWK in production.
It will bring the Mersad system to a shoot and scoot level of mobility and increase its potential ready to fire missiles.

The SAM should maintain the ~40km range of the HAWK to be able to be supported by the Mersad radar engagement systems.

Such point defense systems does not need more range, they protect objects like cities. For that they need a cost effective SAM that does the job.
This new missile is SARH, basically mini-modern HAWK.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Great pics!
> It looks like the fully mobile versions of the hawk sam based search and fire control radars,and better quality pics of the kamsin 2 tel.It makes me wonder if they`re experimenting with using the hawk radars with the kamsin 2 tel,It could be that they`re trying to maximise interoperability between different sam systems and their components,as I notice there is a tendency among the iranian military to "pick and mix" different components of various systems which dates all the way back to the iran iraq war.



Yes, the army is always trying to combine all the systems together. He also says that for several years the army has been changing all of its air defense systems and making them more and more mobile and they will finish the tests of the Bavar 373 system in this Iranian year and they will deliver it to the army. The more interesting thing is that some number of programs and systems are being tested in this exercise which has not been unveiled before.

https://khabarone.ir/news/20108091/رزمایش-پدافند-هوایی|-رادار-سه-بعدی-"بشیر"-عملیاتی-شد-عکس












































Sineva said:


> Great pics!
> It looks like the fully mobile versions of the hawk sam based search and fire control radars,and better quality pics of the kamsin 2 tel.It makes me wonder if they`re experimenting with using the hawk radars with the kamsin 2 tel,It could be that they`re trying to maximise interoperability between different sam systems and their components,as I notice there is a tendency among the iranian military to "pick and mix" different components of various systems which dates all the way back to the iran iraq war.



they called mersad here you can see it in action.

http://defapress.ir/files/fa/news/1397/8/15/561735_574.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> The new short range (article says medium range) missile:
> View attachment 515759
> 
> 
> یک سامانه جدید موشکی در رزمایش پدافند هوایی رونمایی شد+تصاویر
> More pictures:
> انهدام اهداف هوایی توسط سامانه جدید موشکی
> It says in the second day of wargame, but we saw it's picture in the first day!



Finally a better quality pic of the kamsin 2 sam launch.....aaannd with this we can see that the sam in question ISNT the sayyad 2,its the original rim66/mehrab or at least its airframe!.It also makes me wonder if the fire control radar thats been seen with this system in parades is also based on the naval mehrab as it does have a similar conical dish...hmmm?
As always some questions answered,but some still remain.



skyshadow said:


> Yes, the army is always trying to combine all the systems together. He also says that for several years the army has been changing all of its air defense systems and making them more and more mobile and they will finish the tests of the Bavar 373 system in this Iranian year and they will deliver it to the army. The more interesting thing is that some number of programs and systems are being tested in this exercise which has not been unveiled before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they called mersad here you can see it in action.


Great pics!
I really wish they could keep the names straight on these things tho,as the constant renaming or similar sounding names certainly makes it confusing to say the least.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> Finally a better quality pic of the kamsin 2 sam launch.....aaannd with this we can see that the sam in question ISNT the sayyad 2,its the original rim66/mehrab or at least its airframe!.It also makes me wonder if the fire control radar thats been seen with this system in parades is also based on the naval mehrab as it does have a similar conical dish...hmmm?
> As always some questions answered,but some still remain.
> 
> 
> Great pics!
> I really wish they could keep the names straight on these things tho,as the constant renaming or similar sounding names certainly makes it confusing to say the least.


Even chief commander of AD didn't use the "Kamin" name and called it mobile Mersad with new missiles!



> سامانه موشکی مرصاد متحرک این قرارگاه هم با استفاده از موشک‌های جدید با موفقیت ماموریت انهدام اهداف را انجام داد.


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/08/15/1870479/هماهنگی-دفاع-هوایی-ارتش-و-سپاه-نماد-اقتدار-ملی-است



skyshadow said:


> Yes, the army is always trying to combine all the systems together. He also says that for several years the army has been changing all of its air defense systems and making them more and more mobile and they will finish the tests of the Bavar 373 system in this Iranian year and they will deliver it to the army. The more interesting thing is that some number of programs and systems are being tested in this exercise which has not been unveiled before.
> 
> https://khabarone.ir/news/20108091/رزمایش-پدافند-هوایی|-رادار-سه-بعدی-"بشیر"-عملیاتی-شد-عکس


Please don't overload the pages, and mostly use links or thumbnails.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scimitar19

Sineva said:


>


This version of mobile launcher is pretty nasty since it can launch missiles at 0-180 degrees vertically and 360 horizontally. We are talking about SAM system not some AShM launched from the ground or air. I really can't think of any medium to long range mobile SAM system that is capable of such launching position capability, basically you can launch it from the cave in non urban terrain and from the window of the building in urban environment and not exposing not even an inch of launching vehicle to the enemy!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> Even chief commander of AD didn't use the "Kamin" name and called it mobile Mersad with new missiles!
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1397/08/15/1870479/هماهنگی-دفاع-هوایی-ارتش-و-سپاه-نماد-اقتدار-ملی-است
> 
> 
> Please don't overload the pages, and mostly use links or thumbnails.



The name Kamin-2 is from this years April Artesh parade where this missile was first paraded. As it was the only new SAM of that parade I deduced that this must be this new compact-HAWK-ESSM-SM-1 SAM. But could be completely off of course.

This is the final missile for the evolved mobile Mersad. It may replace the HAWK production as said.

Other points: The layout of the Sayyad-2/Talash suggests that after it being integrated to the strategic S-200, it may now be added to some extend to Mersad sites. Mersad sites with HAWK/Shahin/Shalamsheh have the limitation to be unable to target high flying objects. Adding this Sayyad-2D even with just two or three TELs and the Ofogh radar could provide remote cities and bases protected just by HAWKs with something to engage high altitude targets.
The new missile for the Mersad seems to have the same booster as the Sayyad-2 but could be an independent development a older one more relying on the SM-1 design ideas. It is very different than the SM-1 but with the Sayyad-2 booster it would be easily be able to hit high altitude targets.
Hence the new evolved mobile Mersad would just need this missile for its mid-range covering mission and be able to hit all altitude aero targets.
It basically would become a high velocity compact HAWK and that extra speed would make it more deadly (kinematics).
The miniaturization of electronics and subsystems could even have caused a more cost effective missile than the HAWK design at better performance.

It's a kind of clear roadmap for the different airdefense systems, a wise one.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

My analysis of the new missile for the Mersad:

- Guidance should be a "simple" SARH seeker without INS, probably a minor modification of the HAWK/Shalamsheh with a smaller array to fit the smaller diameter (probably that of the RIM-66, SM-1).
- The guidance computer should be significantly miniaturized and now much more cost effective (the HAWK computer systems were a major cause of cost back then).
- Warhead could have the same mass as the much larger HAWK.
- The guidance/seeker combinations reduced the cost for the missile as much as it did for the HAWK, it locks to the target prior to the launch trough the canister cover.
- With the same booster than the Sayyad-2, it would leave only the old HAWK booster in production for the Fakkur-90. This again pushes down the costs.
- Due to its simple guidance system it will have a shorter guidance section than the Sayyad-2 once the detail photos are released.
- Its cable duct is something that clearly shows that it is something in between SM-1 and HAWK, taking the best of both designs. 
- That cable duct is also a detail that shows it is a SARH seeker missile and not a command guided missile like the KS-1 that would have pushed down once again the costs for each round (albeit at lower capability).
- It will never reach the 70km range of the Sayyad-2 although probably using the same booster and lower weight. Thats due to the advanced guidance of the more expensive Sayyad-2.
- It will be faster and reach higher altitudes than the HAWK/Shahin/Shalamsheh.
- It's higher speed will allow it to push more endgame G's and increase PK.

In conclusion: This new missile is a high power, high velocity mid range missile with estimated 50km range. Most importantly it is a cost effective SAM. SARH guided SAMs, even mid-ranged ones used to be expensive with command guided missiles being the most cost effective ones. But this 2018 electronics vintage missile could be close to command guided SAMs.
In an IADS, sometimes targets are regarded as low threat targets and not attacked in advance with more expensive long range SAMs until they come close to attack range. Just once in attack range they need to be killed and that is best done by a cheap SAM that is available in high numbers due to its low cost.
If indeed 6, instead of the shown 3 missiles fit the TEL in max. wartime layout then 3 TELs would have 18 SAMs. 6 TELs (full HAWK layout) would have 36 rounds. Although 3 TEL 18 round is a good layout for evolved Mersad as a single channel system.

Strictly from engineering perspective a command guided variant of this missile would again push down the cost for each round but a SARH guidance is more robust.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> My analysis of the new missile for the Mersad:
> 
> - Guidance should be a "simple" SARH seeker without INS, probably a minor modification of the HAWK/Shalamsheh with a smaller array to fit the smaller diameter (probably that of the RIM-66, SM-1).
> - The guidance computer should be significantly miniaturized and now much more cost effective (the HAWK computer systems were a major cause of cost back then).
> - Warhead could have the same mass as the much larger HAWK.
> - The guidance/seeker combinations reduced the cost for the missile as much as it did for the HAWK, it locks to the target prior to the launch trough the canister cover.
> - With the same booster than the Sayyad-2, it would leave only the old HAWK booster in production for the Fakkur-90. This again pushes down the costs.
> - Due to its simple guidance system it will have a shorter guidance section than the Sayyad-2 once the detail photos are released.
> - Its cable duct is something that clearly shows that it is something in between SM-1 and HAWK, taking the best of both designs.
> - That cable duct is also a detail that shows it is a SARH seeker missile and not a command guided missile like the KS-1 that would have pushed down once again the costs for each round (albeit at lower capability).
> - It will never reach the 70km range of the Sayyad-2 although probably using the same booster and lower weight. Thats due to the advanced guidance of the more expensive Sayyad-2.
> - It will be faster and reach higher altitudes than the HAWK/Shahin/Shalamsheh.
> - It's higher speed will allow it to push more endgame G's and increase PK.
> 
> In conclusion: This new missile is a high power, high velocity mid range missile with estimated 50km range. Most importantly it is a cost effective SAM. SARH guided SAMs, even mid-ranged ones used to be expensive with command guided missiles being the most cost effective ones. But this 2018 electronics vintage missile could be close to command guided SAMs.
> In an IADS, sometimes targets are regarded as low threat targets and not attacked in advance with more expensive long range SAMs until they come close to attack range. Just once in attack range they need to be killed and that is best done by a cheap SAM that is available in high numbers due to its low cost.
> If indeed 6, instead of the shown 3 missiles fit the TEL in max. wartime layout then 3 TELs would have 18 SAMs. 6 TELs (full HAWK layout) would have 36 rounds. Although 3 TEL 18 round is a good layout for evolved Mersad as a single channel system.
> 
> Strictly from engineering perspective a command guided variant of this missile would again push down the cost for each round but a SARH guidance is more robust.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> The name Kamin-2 is from this years April Artesh parade where this missile was first paraded. As it was the only new SAM of that parade I deduced that this must be this new compact-HAWK-ESSM-SM-1 SAM. But could be completely off of course.


Well, They never showed the Kamin system during unveiling! and in the next parade, when they showed this new missile, they didn't call it Kamin but referred to it as mobile Tactical Mersad (like what they did in this drill), so if this system is Kamin (which I still doubt), either the guy who chose the name "Kamin", has forgotten to inform the rest of commanders of this new name, our commanders have amnesia or a name has been mentioned before it's due time!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> The name Kamin-2 is from this years April Artesh parade where this missile was first paraded. As it was the only new SAM of that parade I deduced that this must be this new compact-HAWK-ESSM-SM-1 SAM. But could be completely off of course.
> 
> This is the final missile for the evolved mobile Mersad. It may replace the HAWK production as said.
> 
> Other points: The layout of the Sayyad-2/Talash suggests that after it being integrated to the strategic S-200, it may now be added to some extend to Mersad sites. Mersad sites with HAWK/Shahin/Shalamsheh have the limitation to be unable to target high flying objects. Adding this Sayyad-2D even with just two or three TELs and the Ofogh radar could provide remote cities and bases protected just by HAWKs with something to engage high altitude targets.
> The new missile for the Mersad seems to have the same booster as the Sayyad-2 but could be an independent development a older one more relying on the SM-1 design ideas. It is very different than the SM-1 but with the Sayyad-2 booster it would be easily be able to hit high altitude targets.
> Hence the new evolved mobile Mersad would just need this missile for its mid-range covering mission and be able to hit all altitude aero targets.
> It basically would become a high velocity compact HAWK and that extra speed would make it more deadly (kinematics).
> The miniaturization of electronics and subsystems could even have caused a more cost effective missile than the HAWK design at better performance.
> 
> It's a kind of clear roadmap for the different airdefense systems, a wise one.




When it comes to Air Defense I have only 3 main worries

1st having enough fighters with sufficient Air to Air capabilities to backup our Air Defense.
For a fighter like the Kowsar to hope to have any kind of impact they would need to build a new Air to Air missile for it & they would at the very least need over 320 of them with over half strictly for Air Defense and they would need to build more bases spread more evenly due to the Aircrafts lack of speed and payload capacity and unfortunately right now the plan is to only build ~50 of them and if they can't get that done in the next year or so then they are doing something wrong.

2nd developing and mass producing a far more capable and automated SHORAD systems. Combating handful of fighters is one thing and combating a swarm of a few hundred quads coming at your Air Defense systems is quite another

3rd What happens to these extraordinary engineers after Iran changes it's focus away from Air Defense.
I think these guys are so extraordinary that if they keep at it at this pace in the next 2 decades Iran will be among the top 5 most advanced countries in the world in producing Radars, EWS, Fire control systems & SAM's and could potentially export them globally or even be leading the world in some aspects.


I really don't understand some in Iran's leadership! Countries go out of their way and spend vast amounts to import weapons while Iran is fully capable of producing it's own and has more engineers than they know what to do with and yet reframes from properly investing in it's defense industry 

The best way to move Iran away from being reliant on Oil exports is by using the defense industry to spear head the countries industrial and technological capabilities to mass produce high end, high grade products that will trickle down to the civilian sector

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> When it comes to Air Defense I have only 3 main worries
> 
> 1st having enough fighters with sufficient Air to Air capabilities to backup our Air Defense.
> For a fighter like the Kowsar to hope to have any kind of impact they would need to build a new Air to Air missile for it & they would at the very least need over 320 of them with over half strictly for Air Defense and they would need to build more bases spread more evenly due to the Aircrafts lack of speed and payload capacity and unfortunately right now the plan is to only build ~50 of them and if they can't get that done in the next year or so then they are doing something wrong.
> 
> 2nd developing and mass producing a far more capable and automated SHORAD systems. Combating handful of fighters is one thing and combating a swarm of a few hundred quads coming at your Air Defense systems is quite another
> 
> 3rd What happens to these extraordinary engineers after Iran changes it's focus away from Air Defense.
> I think these guys are so extraordinary that if they keep at it at this pace in the next 2 decades Iran will be among the top 5 most advanced countries in the world in producing Radars, EWS, Fire control systems & SAM's and could potentially export them globally or even be leading the world in some aspects.
> 
> 
> I really don't understand some in Iran's leadership! Countries go out of their way and spend vast amounts to import weapons while Iran is fully capable of producing it's own and has more engineers than they know what to do with and yet reframes from properly investing in it's defense industry
> 
> The best way to move Iran away from being reliant on Oil imports is by using the defense industry to spear head the countries industrial and technological capabilities to mass produce high end, high grade products that will trickle down to the civilian sector



The IRIADF has a requirement of 20 tactical Bavar-373 batteries.
The IRGC has requirements for ABM systems like the S-500 with overall capabilities above the Bavar-373. Because these are regarded as strategic, we hear very few about them and they don't publish achievements and operational capabilities. The 630mm Sadid SAM was a hint that they work on higher performance SAMs than the Bavar-373.
So there is enough things to work on for the experts of this field.

Kowsar is just the first serial produced Iranian fighter: get the line running, get the personal skilled, set up the PLM system, get the subsystem suppliers producing up to standard... It is twin seat to be put to advanced trainer task in the future where real solutions become available.
Once things are mature, serious stuff will start.
I'm basically against conventional airpower as some know. A F-20 like kinematically uprated Kowsar would still be no solution.
Runway-based airpower needs to be either long ranged to operate from deep, protected nodes such as Esfahan or light and stealthy/low-footprint like maybe the F-313.
A small high performance interceptor fleet to support pressure points of the enemy against the national wide IADS adds needed flexibility to the fundamental SAMs.
The alternative to rely on large, expensive, active-seeker, long range AAM would still be a solution because this is for emergency cases where a point at (a future national wide SAM covered IADS) would start to collapse by a enemy spearhead. In that alternative a low performance fighter could still do the job.

The DM said some interesting things: 
- The Kowsar has the goal to use existing infrastructure and equipment to be affordable enough to fit in Irans doctrine.
- The Kowsar will use AAMs that will be based on Irans high missile-tech capability for its air to air role.

So the idea to have just a platform that will transport long range AAMs to the enemy pressure center fast enough, is considered. This is a quite wise approach if a defensive posture is favored. My proposed F-313 would fit into that role.
My F-313 would be a more survivable Kowsar, little slower, longer ranged with two advanced (expensive) LRAAMs.
My F-313 would become a state of the art aircraft in its class.

A high performance fighter on the other hand would add a offensive capability, maybe go head-to-head against enemies, but unable to reach state of the art level for the time being. Here is where cost becomes important: Kowsar/F-313 or large fighter? Is its added offensive capability worth the money?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> The IRIADF has a requirement of 20 tactical Bavar-373 batteries.
> The IRGC has requirements for ABM systems like the S-500 with overall capabilities above the Bavar-373. Because these are regarded as strategic, we hear very few about them and they don't publish achievements and operational capabilities. The 630mm Sadid SAM was a hint that they work on higher performance SAMs than the Bavar-373.
> So there is enough things to work on for the experts of this field.
> 
> Kowsar is just the first serial produced Iranian fighter: get the line running, get the personal skilled, set up the PLM system, get the subsystem suppliers producing up to standard... It is twin seat to be put to advanced trainer task in the future where real solutions become available.
> Once things are mature, serious stuff will start.
> I'm basically against conventional airpower as some know. A F-20 like kinematically uprated Kowsar would still be no solution.
> Runway-based airpower needs to be either long ranged to operate from deep, protected nodes such as Esfahan or light and stealthy/low-footprint like maybe the F-313.
> A small high performance interceptor fleet to support pressure points of the enemy against the national wide IADS adds needed flexibility to the fundamental SAMs.
> The alternative to rely on large, expensive, active-seeker, long range AAM would still be a solution because this is for emergency cases where a point at (a future national wide SAM covered IADS) would start to collapse by a enemy spearhead. In that alternative a low performance fighter could still do the job.
> 
> The DM said some interesting things:
> - The Kowsar has the goal to use existing infrastructure and equipment to be affordable enough to fit in Irans doctrine.
> - The Kowsar will use AAMs that will be based on Irans high missile-tech capability for its air to air role.
> 
> So the idea to have just a platform that will transport long range AAMs to the enemy pressure center fast enough, is considered. This is a quite wise approach if a defensive posture is favored. My proposed F-313 would fit into that role.
> My F-313 would be a more survivable Kowsar, little slower, longer ranged with two advanced (expensive) LRAAMs.
> My F-313 would become a state of the art aircraft in its class.
> 
> A high performance fighter on the other hand would add a offensive capability, maybe go head-to-head against enemies, but unable to reach state of the art level for the time being. Here is where cost becomes important: Kowsar/F-313 or large fighter? Is its added offensive capability worth the money?


Given Iran's ballistic missile capabilities and current strategies which is controlling the immediate vicinity of its borders, I don't think large fighter jets with offensive capabilities would be needed. 

They would be a good asset when Iran decides to interfere and operate outside middle east.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Arminkh said:


> Given Iran's ballistic missile capabilities and current strategies which is controlling the immediate vicinity of its borders, I don't think large fighter jets with offensive capabilities would be needed.
> 
> They would be a good asset when Iran decides to interfere and operate outside middle east.


they would be useless outside Iran vicinity unless we build a strike group and the plane be a carrier based one .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> The IRIADF has a requirement of 20 tactical Bavar-373 batteries.
> The IRGC has requirements for ABM systems like the S-500 with overall capabilities above the Bavar-373. Because these are regarded as strategic, we hear very few about them and they don't publish achievements and operational capabilities. The 630mm Sadid SAM was a hint that they work on higher performance SAMs than the Bavar-373.
> So there is enough things to work on for the experts of this field.
> 
> Kowsar is just the first serial produced Iranian fighter: get the line running, get the personal skilled, set up the PLM system, get the subsystem suppliers producing up to standard... It is twin seat to be put to advanced trainer task in the future where real solutions become available.
> Once things are mature, serious stuff will start.
> I'm basically against conventional airpower as some know. A F-20 like kinematically uprated Kowsar would still be no solution.
> Runway-based airpower needs to be either long ranged to operate from deep, protected nodes such as Esfahan or light and stealthy/low-footprint like maybe the F-313.
> A small high performance interceptor fleet to support pressure points of the enemy against the national wide IADS adds needed flexibility to the fundamental SAMs.
> The alternative to rely on large, expensive, active-seeker, long range AAM would still be a solution because this is for emergency cases where a point at (a future national wide SAM covered IADS) would start to collapse by a enemy spearhead. In that alternative a low performance fighter could still do the job.
> 
> The DM said some interesting things:
> - The Kowsar has the goal to use existing infrastructure and equipment to be affordable enough to fit in Irans doctrine.
> - The Kowsar will use AAMs that will be based on Irans high missile-tech capability for its air to air role.
> 
> So the idea to have just a platform that will transport long range AAMs to the enemy pressure center fast enough, is considered. This is a quite wise approach if a defensive posture is favored. My proposed F-313 would fit into that role.
> My F-313 would be a more survivable Kowsar, little slower, longer ranged with two advanced (expensive) LRAAMs.
> My F-313 would become a state of the art aircraft in its class.
> 
> A high performance fighter on the other hand would add a offensive capability, maybe go head-to-head against enemies, but unable to reach state of the art level for the time being. Here is where cost becomes important: Kowsar/F-313 or large fighter? Is its added offensive capability worth the money?



This may sound ridiculous but how about this:

Modify a large plane that has a good endurance to carry out advanced radars with large aperture, electro optic sensors and tracking systems. Arm this plane with vast amount of Fakur 90 or something with longer range. This plane, preferably a C-130 would be able to take off and land almost anywhere, carry tons of missiles, and can act as a mobile air based SAM site.


A couple of these would fly and provide support under the protection of our IADS. Such planes could provide suppression, extra firepower and AWACS support.

Advantages:
- large payload of long range air to air missiles such as Fakur -90 with range of 100 nm.
- giant structure removes the need to build smaller fighter scale radars
- giant strutustr also allows for mounting diverse set of sensors with secondary AWACS usage
- C-130 is a reliable plane, can take off and land in many places especially with rocket boosters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

what is this? is it AS 6?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

VEVAK said:


> they would at the very least need over 320 of them


and why not 300!?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

It would be very beneficial for Iran to use the experience gained in building Surface to Air missiles to develop a new advanced Medium range air to air missile to replace the remaining AIM-7/ R-27s in IRIAF service.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Russel

Russel said:


> Wt is this missile system with 8 missiles?


I couldn’t find the picture in the thread anymore!


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> The IRIADF has a requirement of 20 tactical Bavar-373 batteries.
> The IRGC has requirements for ABM systems like the S-500 with overall capabilities above the Bavar-373. Because these are regarded as strategic, we hear very few about them and they don't publish achievements and operational capabilities. The 630mm Sadid SAM was a hint that they work on higher performance SAMs than the Bavar-373.
> So there is enough things to work on for the experts of this field.
> 
> Kowsar is just the first serial produced Iranian fighter: get the line running, get the personal skilled, set up the PLM system, get the subsystem suppliers producing up to standard... It is twin seat to be put to advanced trainer task in the future where real solutions become available.
> Once things are mature, serious stuff will start.
> I'm basically against conventional airpower as some know. A F-20 like kinematically uprated Kowsar would still be no solution.
> Runway-based airpower needs to be either long ranged to operate from deep, protected nodes such as Esfahan or light and stealthy/low-footprint like maybe the F-313.
> A small high performance interceptor fleet to support pressure points of the enemy against the national wide IADS adds needed flexibility to the fundamental SAMs.
> The alternative to rely on large, expensive, active-seeker, long range AAM would still be a solution because this is for emergency cases where a point at (a future national wide SAM covered IADS) would start to collapse by a enemy spearhead. In that alternative a low performance fighter could still do the job.
> 
> The DM said some interesting things:
> - The Kowsar has the goal to use existing infrastructure and equipment to be affordable enough to fit in Irans doctrine.
> - The Kowsar will use AAMs that will be based on Irans high missile-tech capability for its air to air role.
> 
> So the idea to have just a platform that will transport long range AAMs to the enemy pressure center fast enough, is considered. This is a quite wise approach if a defensive posture is favored. My proposed F-313 would fit into that role.
> My F-313 would be a more survivable Kowsar, little slower, longer ranged with two advanced (expensive) LRAAMs.
> My F-313 would become a state of the art aircraft in its class.
> 
> A high performance fighter on the other hand would add a offensive capability, maybe go head-to-head against enemies, but unable to reach state of the art level for the time being. Here is where cost becomes important: Kowsar/F-313 or large fighter? Is its added offensive capability worth the money?



Are you kidding me????

1st off your putting too much stock on stealth!! I think you missed the part where even Iran has gotten to a point where we can shoot down target drones as small as toy jet RC's whos RCS is smaller than even the canopy of an F-313 let alone the entire aircraft and let alone against a far more technologically advanced country....
Hell the RCS of the Karrar is less than the RCS of the F-313!

F-313 is a horrible design for Air to Air operation for it lacks Speed, Maneuverability, Situational awareness and is built on an extremally fragile and high drag frame that lacks survivability.....
Hell building a twin engine version of the Karrar armed with a better Air to Air Missiles is a far more sound option than something as ridicules as the F-313

Plus if anything Stealth Technology is only useful in Air to Air combat if you have a high speed high maneuvering aircraft to go with it! For example if your radar based missiles can't lock on a stealth fighter detected by your VHF radars you'll need to call in Air Support for a high speed, high maneuvering, highly stealth interceptor to get close enough so it's radar or IRST can detect the enemy!

I can promise you that If they ever build a single flying prototype of the F-313 the Kowsar will fly circles around it and easily achieve kill ratios greater than 5 to 1 and I can also promise you right now Iran's Air Force will NEVER use that absurd Aircraft for Air to Air missions!

F-313 is an absurd aircraft that would be moving Iran's fighter program backwards rather than forwards. And the ONLY thing that Aircraft is suited for is short ranged aerial refueling (Within 100km of the base it takes off from) simply to refuel a single aircraft and come home OR off the Persian Gulf used to fly at very low altitude deploy it's weapons a few hundred kilometers off Iranian costs and come home.....
which makes it a useless platform not worth taking into production



scythian500 said:


> and why not 300!?



Because 8X20= 160
8 Fighter deployed at 20 bases that are located no more than 300-400km apart allowing you to keep as many as 4 in the Air almost every day for a good timespan across 20 bases evenly distributed across the country that can backup Air Defense when necessary....


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> This may sound ridiculous but how about this:
> 
> Modify a large plane that has a good endurance to carry out advanced radars with large aperture, electro optic sensors and tracking systems. Arm this plane with vast amount of Fakur 90 or something with longer range. This plane, preferably a C-130 would be able to take off and land almost anywhere, carry tons of missiles, and can act as a mobile air based SAM site.
> 
> 
> A couple of these would fly and provide support under the protection of our IADS. Such planes could provide suppression, extra firepower and AWACS support.
> 
> Advantages:
> - large payload of long range air to air missiles such as Fakur -90 with range of 100 nm.
> - giant structure removes the need to build smaller fighter scale radars
> - giant strutustr also allows for mounting diverse set of sensors with secondary AWACS usage
> - C-130 is a reliable plane, can take off and land in many places especially with rocket boosters.



There was a USAF project to do something like that with a Boeing 747 in the 70's I think.
This is the air defense threat and the question is what kind of air based anti-air system is ideal and most effective to support pressure points on the ground based IADS.
C-130 or Tu-154 based large ones, small Kowsar based cheap ones or something like the F-313. The aperture and sensor question is indeed a valid one.
Hence another question is whether to rely on ground based sensors. A emission free F-313 shooting ARH LRAAMs via IADS information or a Tu-154 with a large radar, shining like a flashlight.
The answer to this question is complex and not a easy one.

@VEVAK 

We know your opinion on the F-313. 
In the context of this thread, the question is whats the ideal method for a fast, flexible support of the IADS front where the enemy tries to break trough.

The future will be a national wide area protected IADS. Currently Iran is doing point defense of important cities.
Once 20 Bavar-373 batteries are positioned all around the country, it will become an national wide IADS a fortress.

The problem with a large fortress is that the enemy can put most of its power on one section to achieve a breakthrough.
This is where an air based fast response air defense becomes useful. The question is only how this would look like. A the moment we have the F-14 fleet that may get sharper teeth with a future Phoenix copy, outraging current treats.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Why in many of the videos they fire just one missile? for s-300 normally they fire two at a time to maximise kill probability, talash mersad etc only need one??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Ok some more details about the new missile.

It does not have the 39cm booster of the Sayyad/Taer series but the 34cm booster of the SM-1.
This now makes sense because the Sayyad-2 booster is a dual-pulse motor, something more complex and expensive than the HAWK or SM-1 basic booster. It was probably mastered during the Mehrab project and viewed as ideal replacement for the short HAWK booster.

At 4,4m the missile is shorter than the ~5,1m HAWK and about the same as SM-1 (few cm shorter).
If diameter is taken into account (34cm vs. 37cm), the guidance and other systems have shrinkend by more than 60cm in length and 30cm outer diameter.
The SM-1 was compact too for a SARH missile, but the I-HAWK guidance is more advanced. Cost also plays a role, the SM-1 war certainly more expensive than the HAWK.

It certainly is not a modified SM-1, strake length and cable duct method is different, CoG has totally changed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> There was a USAF project to do something like that with a Boeing 747 in the 70's I think.
> This is the air defense threat and the question is what kind of air based anti-air system is ideal and most effective to support pressure points on the ground based IADS.
> C-130 or Tu-154 based large ones, small Kowsar based cheap ones or something like the F-313. The aperture and sensor question is indeed a valid one.
> Hence another question is whether to rely on ground based sensors. A emission free F-313 shooting ARH LRAAMs via IADS information or a Tu-154 with a large radar, shining like a flashlight.
> The answer to this question is complex and not a easy one.
> 
> @VEVAK
> 
> We know your opinion on the F-313.
> In the context of this thread, the question is whats the ideal method for a fast, flexible support of the IADS front where the enemy tries to break trough.
> 
> The future will be a national wide area protected IADS. Currently Iran is doing point defense of important cities.
> Once 20 Bavar-373 batteries are positioned all around the country, it will become an national wide IADS a fortress.
> 
> The problem with a large fortress is that the enemy can put most of its power on one section to achieve a breakthrough.
> This is where an air based fast response air defense becomes useful. The question is only how this would look like. A the moment we have the F-14 fleet that may get sharper teeth with a future Phoenix copy, outraging current treats.




@PeeD as you know already, some benefits of having a giant flashlight (AWACS) in the air are:
- reduced radar blindspot
- agility in mobility with respect ground based radars

In a country such as Iran where mountainous terrain can provide cover for low flying objects such as cruise missiles, stand off weapons as well as fighter jets, a reliable eye in the sky is vital to compliment the IADS.

The plane i proposed (with giant radars and sensors that can carry and fire tonnes of Fakur 90s ) will not be replacement to traditional fighters but merely a low cost solution to help IADS and provide extra air to air support. It will still need the protection of IADS.

I also think we need to utilize stealth. Stealth in A2A combat reduces detection range. This means an stealth fighter or UCAV armed with an LRAAM will have better chance of scoring a kill. Missiles lose kinetic energy and I believe Fakur 90's effect engagement is sub 60 nm launched from a platform that flies close to Mach 1...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD as you know already, some benefits of having a giant flashlight (AWACS) in the air are:
> - reduced radar blindspot
> - agility in mobility with respect ground based radars
> 
> In a country such as Iran where mountainous terrain can provide cover for low flying objects such as cruise missiles, stand off weapons as well as fighter jets, a reliable eye in the sky is vital to compliment the IADS.
> 
> The plane i proposed (with giant radars and sensors that can carry and fire tonnes of Fakur 90s ) will not be replacement to traditional fighters but merely a low cost solution to help IADS and provide extra air to air support. It will still need the protection of IADS.
> 
> I also think we need to utilize stealth. Stealth in A2A combat reduces detection range. This means an stealth fighter or UCAV armed with an LRAAM will have better chance of scoring a kill. Missiles lose kinetic energy and I believe Fakur 90's effect engagement is sub 60 nm launched from a platform that flies close to Mach 1...



I'm not strictly against the idea, I just have concerns about its survivability against enemy airpower. It could be a good idea if done properly.
Either that or another assymetrical solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> There was a USAF project to do something like that with a Boeing 747 in the 70's I think.
> This is the air defense threat and the question is what kind of air based anti-air system is ideal and most effective to support pressure points on the ground based IADS.
> C-130 or Tu-154 based large ones, small Kowsar based cheap ones or something like the F-313. The aperture and sensor question is indeed a valid one.
> Hence another question is whether to rely on ground based sensors. A emission free F-313 shooting ARH LRAAMs via IADS information or a Tu-154 with a large radar, shining like a flashlight.
> The answer to this question is complex and not a easy one.
> 
> @VEVAK
> 
> We know your opinion on the F-313.
> In the context of this thread, the question is whats the ideal method for a fast, flexible support of the IADS front where the enemy tries to break trough.
> 
> The future will be a national wide area protected IADS. Currently Iran is doing point defense of important cities.
> Once 20 Bavar-373 batteries are positioned all around the country, it will become an national wide IADS a fortress.
> 
> The problem with a large fortress is that the enemy can put most of its power on one section to achieve a breakthrough.
> This is where an air based fast response air defense becomes useful. The question is only how this would look like. A the moment we have the F-14 fleet that may get sharper teeth with a future Phoenix copy, outraging current treats.



Do you know how Old Iranian F-14's are? And how small that fleet is? Iran most defiantly got it's money's worth out of them and it's time they be replaced with an IRANIAN Platforms. 

And I am NOT against IADS even if Iran tomorrow build a fighter more advanced than the F-22 we would still need 20 deployed Bavar's spread across the country and that's just the ones deployed....
No smart country or major power choses one over the other U.S., France, Germany, Russia, Japan,... Hell even tiny Israel.... They don't say to themselves let just pick one over the other! Because it's ABSURD!

So unlike you I don't think one is sufficient or that Iran should be picking one over the other for me both are necessary and both are required just as much as Iran's Missile program is an absolute requirement and can't be traded off with anything EVER!

Iran's plan for the coming decades should be to increase Airbases to 20 evenly distributed bases that IRIAF, IADS and IRGC-AF jointly operate out of where Bavar systems are deployed covering the entire country. 

Also 6th Gen fighter will likely start being deployed within the next 15 years that at the very least will be equipped with laser countermeasures (Might even be sooner because of what happened to U.S. F-22's). Hell Russia plans on deploying it's Mach 4 MiG-31 replacement within the next 10 years while your suggest we make even slower fighters!

And the best way to do short takeoff is with TVC's, frontal canards on a platform with greater than 1 thrust to weight ratio rather than a absurd high drag fighter platform and if the IRGC was able to put TVC on a Missile like Qiam then they can most defiantly work towards building a TVC around a fighter engine hell even if they are one directional it would sufficient for one direction is really all you need and that's to point your thrust upwards. As for short landing, like on a carrier there are far better means of landing on 300 meter long runway when necessary than coming up an absurd high drag design. If an F-14 can land on a moving carrier then putting traps for short runway on land shouldn't be a problem. 


BUT MOST OF ALL Iran's Military Industry needs to be used as a tool to spearhead science, technology and industrial growth in Iran and fighter platforms and powerplants Iran choses to produce need to be such that they push the country to develop it's industrial infrastructure!
And Iranian leadership needs to comprehend that almost everything required in producing high end military gear will allow for the production of better civilian products moving Iran one step closer from removing our reliance on Oil Exports!
Tell me again how many Billions of Dollars were we planning to give away to buy civilian passenger Aircrafts from Boing and Airbus? And they want us to beg so they would agree to sell us their products that costs 10's of BILLIONS of dollars! Hell if half of that money in the past 10 years had gone towards the infrastructure to produce a real 5th generation fighter airframe and engine today with the other half Iran could have produced the Aircrafts ordered it's self to meet the needs of the country for Airliners and in the process created 100's of thousands of high end jobs for Iranians and increased our GDP with potential for export

And these are the type of things that make the Q-313 an utter absurd program when it comes to production for it does not push the country toward developing anything of worth. And yes it was a good job as a concept and a good practice for the airframe designers to practice designing but nothing more

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Russia plans on deploying it's Mach 4 MiG-31 replacement within the next 10 years while your suggest we make even slower fighters!



LOL Sure Russia is, that’ll be the day.

First of all Russia couldn’t even develop its own 5th gen fighter BY ITSELF. It had to have India finance part of it. Last I checked how is that project going btw? Oh that’s right terribly!

If you bothered to do a little digging you wound know that MIG is struggling. There is lack of clients in buying their fighter planes and they are losing orders to Sukhoi. 

But now MIG is going to make a super duper Mach 4 plane? Yeah let’s see how long it takes them to work out the bugs. Then let’s see if Russia can even afford to buy any planes or if they settle for a “token” amount like they did with SU-57.

Russia is not a powerhouse in cutting edge arms production anymore, China is catching up. 

Wether you like it or not Iran will not engage in a technology based arms race. It simply doesn’t have the budget for it. Even Russia can not afford it anymore. Only China can.

Iran has a 6th gen design in Sofreh Mahi (which look similar to US 6th gen concept designs). Iran is also proficient in the use of lasers (they used a laser to blind a US spy satellite several years ago). However, iran still lacks next gen engine technology, next gen air borne radar technology, next gen avionics, next gen electronic warfare, list goes on and on.

Building a 5th or 6th gen airframe is just the first step. But if the “insides” of the plane is filled with 80’s and 90’s era technology then what’s the point? It’s like building an Supercar and sticking a V6 engine inside and the dashboard of a Peykan.

What Iran really needs is a extremely fast and agile fighter that can temporarily break through enemy air defenses unleash a long range payload and leave the battlefield all in matter of seconds. It needs to be cheap, affordable, and easy to maintain.

For air superiority the same concepts apply except that it would need to be able to carry a significant number of next gen air to air missiles.

For Iran that will be mean cutting corners on certain “luxury” non essential technology.

If Iran cannot get it’s hands on AL-31 or US engine technology or even chinese engine technology then it needs to try to reverse engineer the F-14 engine and miniaturize it and seek some improvements around it. That engine could not only power a next gen Iranian air superiority fighter, but next gen Iranian long range flying wing bomber as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> Russia is not a powerhouse in cutting edge arms production anymore, China is catching up



besides China still buying russian engines and decades behind them

- Avangard (first hypersonic missile, Mach 20)
- SARMAT ICBM
- Poseidon (underwater nuclear torpedo)
- Dagger (hypersonic missile)
- Burevestnik (nuclear powered cruise misisle)
- peresvet (laser weapon)

+ things we even cant imagine bcz not unveiled 
+ i dont even mention russia jamming capabilities

russia no cutting edge technology? u jocking?
Russia could carry the US back into stone age without going nuclear, if necessary, and it has a budget 10 times smaller

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Russia is clearly superior in jet engines, ICBMs and EW capability. 

China is very quickly catching up though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Video on Russian Nebo-M radar complex. This gives a idea where Iran is, what it means and where Russians are. Very relevant as Iran uses similar radar technologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> LOL Sure Russia is, that’ll be the day.
> 
> First of all Russia couldn’t even develop its own 5th gen fighter BY ITSELF. It had to have India finance part of it. Last I checked how is that project going btw? Oh that’s right terribly!
> 
> If you bothered to do a little digging you wound know that MIG is struggling. There is lack of clients in buying their fighter planes and they are losing orders to Sukhoi.
> 
> But now MIG is going to make a super duper Mach 4 plane? Yeah let’s see how long it takes them to work out the bugs. Then let’s see if Russia can even afford to buy any planes or if they settle for a “token” amount like they did with SU-57.
> 
> Russia is not a powerhouse in cutting edge arms production anymore, China is catching up.
> 
> Wether you like it or not Iran will not engage in a technology based arms race. It simply doesn’t have the budget for it. Even Russia can not afford it anymore. Only China can.
> 
> Iran has a 6th gen design in Sofreh Mahi (which look similar to US 6th gen concept designs). Iran is also proficient in the use of lasers (they used a laser to blind a US spy satellite several years ago). However, iran still lacks next gen engine technology, next gen air borne radar technology, next gen avionics, next gen electronic warfare, list goes on and on.
> 
> Building a 5th or 6th gen airframe is just the first step. But if the “insides” of the plane is filled with 80’s and 90’s era technology then what’s the point? It’s like building an Supercar and sticking a V6 engine inside and the dashboard of a Peykan.
> 
> What Iran really needs is a extremely fast and agile fighter that can temporarily break through enemy air defenses unleash a long range payload and leave the battlefield all in matter of seconds. It needs to be cheap, affordable, and easy to maintain.
> 
> For air superiority the same concepts apply except that it would need to be able to carry a significant number of next gen air to air missiles.
> 
> For Iran that will be mean cutting corners on certain “luxury” non essential technology.
> 
> If Iran cannot get it’s hands on AL-31 or US engine technology or even chinese engine technology then it needs to try to reverse engineer the F-14 engine and miniaturize it and seek some improvements around it. That engine could not only power a next gen Iranian air superiority fighter, but next gen Iranian long range flying wing bomber as well.



The point is having a viable Platform (Airframe & Engine) that will last a you a long time that you can upgrade over the years just like the F-15 & Su-27 has been upgraded over the years....

The development of a 70's era engine like the F100 engines adding minor design changes, a few sensors, a few material upgrades using nanotech and maybe even a 1 directional TVC will be sufficient for Iran! And the development of all the industries that go behind it will allow Iran to build better civilian engines for airliners.... 

In terms of Airframe, If you plan on building a strong viable airframe then designing it with reduced or no vertical surfaces, S shaped air intakes, Internal Weapons bay, pointy edged panels, and maybe even a more aerodynamically stable design because you have TVC.... to reduce it's RCS and drag is simple logic so is making it big enough to handle laser countermeasures in the future 
And what makes the F-22 Airframe expensive is NOT it's design but rather the modern methods used in the construction of the Airframe using Ti casting
And again the development of all the infrastructure that goes behind it will allow Iran to develop better civilian passenger planes and various other civilian products 

As for Sensor upgrades that is something that will naturally happen though time and from the looks of it Iran is heading towards that direction anyways.....

As for the Russian Su-Pak the easement in Russia is the need to develop a 6th gen fighters because they are confident in their current modern fighters ability to combat F-35's using their modern sensors & weapons and Americans don't have enough F-22's to pose much of a threat to Russia outside their own boarders and it's not like the Russians aren't constantly adding fighters to their fleet on a yearly bases (Feel free to take a good look at how many fighter they've actually added since 2008) 
Also as soon as the Russians started building viable flying prototypes of the Su-Pak the Americans started the competition of their 6th Generation fighters so there is clear logic behind why they haven't pushed for the Mass production of the Su-Pak (Also the Su-Pak is a joint projects and joint projects take longer and just as the U.S. doesn't hand it's most advanced tech's to other countries the Russian's don't either)


Scientist don't stop thinking and conducting R&D not in America not in Europe or Russia or China or Iran! The main difference is that those countries have developed the infrastructure needed so when a good enough R&D project is ready for the next level they can push it through while we in Iran still haven't built that infrastructure and pushing for the development of an viable Airframe and Powerplant pushes Iran to develop that infrastructure and that infrastructure is far more important and far more valuable to the country than a particular fighter platform.

And the top 10 most technologically advanced countries in the world are also the same countries that have the top 10 best funded domestic defense industries in the world and they are also the same countries that have the top exports in the world & produce the best high tech civilian products because they know that advancements made in the defense industries trickles down to the civilian sector






And the only country on that list who is NOT an advanced country is Saudi Arabia who doesn't have a viable defense industry and they are simply the largest importer of foreign weapons. 

And if Iran want's to move away from it's dependency on Oil exports the BEST way to do that and produce better civilian products is by having a properly funded defense industry so the right infrastructure is built around it.

So properly funding your defense industry has NOTHING to do with an arms race!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> besides China still buying russian engines and decades behind them
> 
> - Avangard (first hypersonic missile, Mach 20)
> - SARMAT ICBM
> - Poseidon (underwater nuclear torpedo)
> - Dagger (hypersonic missile)
> - Burevestnik (nuclear powered cruise misisle)
> - peresvet (laser weapon)
> 
> + things we even cant imagine bcz not unveiled
> + i dont even mention russia jamming capabilities
> 
> russia no cutting edge technology? u jocking?
> Russia could carry the US back into stone age without going nuclear, if necessary, and it has a budget 10 times smaller



You basically made my point for me.

Like Iran, Russia cannot compete with US/China on a technological arms race and is thus resorting to nuclear missile based deterrence doctrine.

It’s new ICBM is to upgrade its DECADES old ICBM technology thus is simply part of a modernization effort.

Notice 90% of what you mentioned is MISSILE based technology which is relatively cheaper than say upgrading an entire Navy or airforce.

Russia is being backed into a corner by NATO/US and is thus relying on Hypersonic and advanced missile technology for nuclear deterrence.

It’s Navy? Still Needs major modernization

It’s 5th gen fighter project? In shambles and a token order was placed for some fighters. India got burned by Russian tactics just like Iran did with shafagh project.

It’s UAV based technology? Russia lacked a major consistent MALE UAV and had to buy technology From Israel and Iran to catch up.

While China is still behind US/Russia in engine technology, the massive jump it has made is simply incredible. China is the first country to devlop a next gen UAV fighter jet. It has two 5th gen fighters and will have domestic engines to power them in the future.

China is on a upward trajectory and russia is on a downward trajectory. Putin won’t be in power forever and Russia reliance on oil/gas primarily for income is a weakness.

The problems from russia go beyond just military, they have no true allies left in the world because of their policy of backstabbing everyone for their own gain. 

In major war, unless Iran or China intervene on russia’s behalf it will be alone to face the full force of the West.

While we like to think of an a russia-Iran-China axis, the truth is they are too selfish for their own interests to truly be an alliance. Maybe that changes in the future.

“Russia could carry the US back into stone age without going nuclear”

Lol you been watching to much Hollywood movies. Russia is no match for the US on toe to toe effort. It simply doesn’t have the war chest for that type of confrontation. It might be able to give NATO a good fight, but not both. 

Hence why you see Russia say they will use tactical/battlefield nuclear weapons if needed, because that’s their only equalizer or card to play in military confrontation.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Video on Russian Nebo-M radar complex. This gives a idea where Iran is, what it means and where Russians are. Very relevant as Iran uses similar radar technologies.



We are still way off from producing our own advanced processors, solid state storage devices, high end transistors, supercapacitors,.... leading to more advanced transponders and receivers...

So we have some way's to go to catch up! Although the tech developed so far shows great progress at an astonishing growth rate that is unbelievable but for how long Iran will be able to keep that growth rate would depend on how much we invest in the infrastructure needed to produce components because you can only go so far using imported off the shelf components.....

Iran's advancements in nanotech with the proper investment in the infrastructure and tools could potentially lead to the development of advanced processors and other electronics that could allow Iran to catch up and compete 1st domestically and later globally 

Right now whichever country that develops a mass production method for Graphene or something similar and keeps it's mass production method as a closely guarded secret will likely become one of the richest countries on the planet because that's the type of tech that will revolutionize everything from the type of Cars we drive to airplanes, computers, cellphones, weapons, satellites, batteries.... And if Iran develops it we can not only build the most advanced revolutionary products in the world but most of the major companies on the planet will line up to coproduce products with us because of it or trade the most sophisticated technologies on the planet for it!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> The point is having a viable Platform (Airframe & Engine) that will last a you a long time that you can upgrade over the years just like the F-15 & Su-27 has been upgraded over the years....
> 
> The development of a 70's era engine like the F100 engines adding minor design changes, a few sensors, a few material upgrades using nanotech and maybe even a 1 directional TVC will be sufficient for Iran! And the development of all the industries that go behind it will allow Iran to build better civilian engines for airliners....
> 
> In terms of Airframe, If you plan on building a strong viable airframe then designing it with reduced or no vertical surfaces, S shaped air intakes, Internal Weapons bay, pointy edged panels, and maybe even a more aerodynamically stable design because you have TVC.... to reduce it's RCS and drag is simple logic so is making it big enough to handle laser countermeasures in the future
> And what makes the F-22 Airframe expensive is NOT it's design but rather the modern methods used in the construction of the Airframe using Ti casting
> And again the development of all the infrastructure that goes behind it will allow Iran to develop better civilian passenger planes and various other civilian products
> 
> As for Sensor upgrades that is something that will naturally happen though time and from the looks of it Iran is heading towards that direction anyways.....
> 
> As for the Russian Su-Pak the easement in Russia is the need to develop a 6th gen fighters because they are confident in their current modern fighters ability to combat F-35's using their modern sensors & weapons and Americans don't have enough F-22's to pose much of a threat to Russia outside their own boarders and it's not like the Russians aren't constantly adding fighters to their fleet on a yearly bases (Feel free to take a good look at how many fighter they've actually added since 2008)
> Also as soon as the Russians started building viable flying prototypes of the Su-Pak the Americans started the competition of their 6th Generation fighters so there is clear logic behind why they haven't pushed for the Mass production of the Su-Pak (Also the Su-Pak is a joint projects and joint projects take longer and just as the U.S. doesn't hand it's most advanced tech's to other countries the Russian's don't either)
> 
> 
> Scientist don't stop thinking and conducting R&D not in America not in Europe or Russia or China or Iran! The main difference is that those countries have developed the infrastructure needed so when a good enough R&D project is ready for the next level they can push it through while we in Iran still haven't built that infrastructure and pushing for the development of an viable Airframe and Powerplant pushes Iran to develop that infrastructure and that infrastructure is far more important and far more valuable to the country than a particular fighter platform.
> 
> And the top 10 most technologically advanced countries in the world are also the same countries that have the top 10 best funded domestic defense industries in the world and they are also the same countries that have the top exports in the world & produce the best high tech civilian products because they know that advancements made in the defense industries trickles down to the civilian sector
> View attachment 517401
> 
> 
> And the only country on that list who is NOT an advanced country is Saudi Arabia who doesn't have a viable defense industry and they are simply the largest importer of foreign weapons.
> 
> And if Iran want's to move away from it's dependency on Oil exports the BEST way to do that and produce better civilian products is by having a properly funded defense industry so the right infrastructure is built around it.
> 
> So properly funding your defense industry has NOTHING to do with an arms race!



Issue is you have no idea what iran is or is not doing! Iran’s defense industry is not an open book.

If Russia won’t field a new 5th gen fighter before 2030’s it’s unlikely iran will field one before 2035-2040’s when F-14’s have to be retired from service.

And again wishful thinking. You think iran’s sensor upgrades will just “magically” develop over time?

Tell me, how does Russia’s targeting pod technology on its jets compare to US or even israel? The answer will suprise you!

What targeting pod technology does Iran use? 1970’s based? What EW based technology does Iran use? What datalink systems does Iran use? What jamming technology does Iran use? Can a single Iranian aircraft even blind/jam a single modern Western Radar?

So what would be the point if 5th gen fighter jet was unveiled tommorrow, but had the avionics and sensors of a F-4? Even Kowsar avionics package is dated!

Iran has to get ALL the technologies needed to make a 5th gen fighter not just the airframe (which is relatively easy).


VEVAK said:


> Right now whichever country that develops a mass production method for Graphene or something similar and keeps it's mass production method as a closely guarded secret will likely become one of the richest countries on the planet because that's the type of tech that will revolutionize everything from the type of Cars we drive to airplanes, computers, cellphones, weapons, satellites, batteries.... And if Iran develops it we can not only build the most advanced revolutionary products in the world but most of the major companies on the planet will line up to coproduce products with us because of it or trade the most sophisticated technologies on the planet for it!



Lol you think Iran could ever keep mass production of Graphene a secret? What do you think this is the 1500’s?

Iran cannot even finish simple construction projects on time or reduce lethal pollution levels in its capital city. This isn’t a “farhang” that is going to push the limits of civilization forward.

Even Nazi Germany couldn’t keep too many secrets in the 30’s & 40’s before the age of computers.

Furthermore, there are several countries and even wealthy companies that can throw way more money for r&d in 1 year then Iran spends in 20 years! So Iran leading in this field is highly unlikely.

Both US & China are working on quantum computers and using principle of quantum entanglement for next gen applications, Iran is very behind in this field.

Minerals and resources wise, Iran needs tens of billions of dollars in investment to become a exporter of key resources such as titanium. Again very behind in taking advantage of the resources available on their land.

Iran will likely spend the next half century playing catch up because of the backwards policies initiated in the 80’s and 90’s by the Islamic Republic which further continued the ineptitude of the last 300 years of Shah-ruled Persia.

This was Similar to backwards policies initiated by the Arab world for the better part of the last century. How ironic that the Middle East was the beacon of knowledge in antiquity and now is the symbolism of backwardness in the world.

Alas one must not get off topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

new taeer 2 missile 
range: 105 km

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Issue is you have no idea what iran is or is not doing! Iran’s defense industry is not an open book.
> 
> If Russia won’t field a new 5th gen fighter before 2030’s it’s unlikely iran will field one before 2035-2040’s when F-14’s have to be retired from service.
> 
> And again wishful thinking. You think iran’s sensor upgrades will just “magically” develop over time?
> 
> Tell me, how does Russia’s targeting pod technology on its jets compare to US or even israel? The answer will suprise you!
> 
> What targeting pod technology does Iran use? 1970’s based? What EW based technology does Iran use? What datalink systems does Iran use? What jamming technology does Iran use? Can a single Iranian aircraft even blind/jam a single modern Western Radar?
> 
> So what would be the point if 5th gen fighter jet was unveiled tommorrow, but had the avionics and sensors of a F-4? Even Kowsar avionics package is dated!
> 
> Iran has to get ALL the technologies needed to make a 5th gen fighter not just the airframe (which is relatively easy).
> 
> 
> Lol you think Iran could ever keep mass production of Graphene a secret? What do you think this is the 1500’s?
> 
> Iran cannot even finish simple construction projects on time or reduce lethal pollution levels in its capital city. This isn’t a “farhang” that is going to push the limits of civilization forward.
> 
> Even Nazi Germany couldn’t keep too many secrets in the 30’s & 40’s before the age of computers.
> 
> Furthermore, there are several countries and even wealthy companies that can throw way more money for r&d in 1 year then Iran spends in 20 years! So Iran leading in this field is highly unlikely.
> 
> Both US & China are working on quantum computers and using principle of quantum entanglement for next gen applications, Iran is very behind in this field.
> 
> Minerals and resources wise, Iran needs tens of billions of dollars in investment to become a exporter of key resources such as titanium. Again very behind in taking advantage of the resources available on their land.
> 
> Iran will likely spend the next half century playing catch up because of the backwards policies initiated in the 80’s and 90’s by the Islamic Republic which further continued the ineptitude of the last 300 years of Shah-ruled Persia.
> 
> This was Similar to backwards policies initiated by the Arab world for the better part of the last century. How ironic that the Middle East was the beacon of knowledge in antiquity and now is the symbolism of backwardness in the world.
> 
> Alas one must not get off topic.



What you call the Islamic Republics backward policies are the same policies that have made Iran "The Fastest Growing country in Science & Technology in the past 30 years"
Which was only possible due the Islamic Republic's policy of investment in it's Human infrastructure. And having an Educated workforce and slowly developing a skilled workforce is the very 1st step in industrial progress and no domestic progress in industry would have been possible without it!

And the growth in industrial progress Iran has made in the past 30 years despite sanctions is amazing! Now you wanna compare Iranian products with countries who have been producing Car's, Ships & Planes for 100 years and that is absurd but it most definitely is not a good reason not to start today!

And since the Pahlavi's were kicked out, Iran has had one progress after another we started producing our own cars, our own industrial equipment, our own composite materials, Nanotech, space program,.... all despite of sanctions that even ban the sale of raw materials to Iran

Now you think Iran should produce the Q-313 because Iran is a backwards country well that in it's self tells me all I need to know!

And the cost of producing an Airframe like the F-15 as appose to an Airframe like the J-20 wouldn't be much different.
And titanium is a vital strategic alloy that's NOT restricted to Aircraft's alone and it is a necessity for various industries country wide for various civilian industries and using the military to push for Ti mass production will allow Iran to improve on various domestically made products used in the country from the Oil industry to Medical to Paint to various industrial tools, chemical processing, naval industry, car industry, nuclear industry,..... So aircraft Airframes and other military equipment are simply one of the many products that will benefit.... And we are a long way away from meeting the various needs of our own country when it comes to Ti let alone exporting it!

As for Russia as I have said before the modern Russian fighters would have no trouble taking on U.S. F-35's
And before talking NONSESE take a good look at how many Russian Su-30's & Su-35's the Russian have actually added to their fleet in the past 5 years alone and how many they have added in the past decade!

And based on your absurd and absolutely ridicules logic since we can't produce a product that's as good as an American product then we shouldn't produce it at all and based on your logic we shouldn't produce our own Car's, TBM's, Ships, industrial equipment, composites, Tanks, Subs, Radars, UAV's..... Simply because the American version is better and at the same time you wanna complain that Iran is a backwards country! LOL! It's funny

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> What you call the Islamic Republics backward policies are the same policies that have made Iran "The Fastest Growing country in Science & Technology in the past 30 years"
> Which was only possible due the Islamic Republic's policy of investment in it's Human infrastructure. And having an Educated workforce and slowly developing a skilled workforce is the very 1st step in industrial progress and no domestic progress in industry would have been possible without it!
> 
> And the growth in industrial progress Iran has made in the past 30 years despite sanctions is amazing! Now you wanna compare Iranian products with countries who have been producing Car's, Ships & Planes for 100 years and that is absurd but it most definitely is not a good reason not to start today!
> 
> And since the Pahlavi's were kicked out, Iran has had one progress after another we started producing our own cars, our own industrial equipment, our own composite materials, Nanotech, space program,.... all despite of sanctions that even ban the sale of raw materials to Iran
> 
> Now you think Iran should produce the Q-313 because Iran is a backwards country well that in it's self tells me all I need to know!
> 
> And the cost of producing an Airframe like the F-15 as appose to an Airframe like the J-20 wouldn't be much different.
> And titanium is a vital strategic alloy that's NOT restricted to Aircraft's alone and it is a necessity for various industries country wide for various civilian industries and using the military to push for Ti mass production will allow Iran to improve on various domestically made products used in the country from the Oil industry to Medical to Paint to various industrial tools, chemical processing, naval industry, car industry, nuclear industry,..... So aircraft Airframes and other military equipment are simply one of the many products that will benefit.... And we are a long way away from meeting the various needs of our own country when it comes to Ti let alone exporting it!
> 
> As for Russia as I have said before the modern Russian fighters would have no trouble taking on U.S. F-35's
> And before talking NONSESE take a good look at how many Russian Su-30's & Su-35's the Russian have actually added to their fleet in the past 5 years alone and how many they have added in the past decade!
> 
> And based on your absurd and absolutely ridicules logic since we can't produce a product that's as good as an American product then we shouldn't produce it at all and based on your logic we shouldn't produce our own Car's, TBM's, Ships, industrial equipment, composites, Tanks, Subs, Radars, UAV's..... Simply because the American version is better and at the same time you wanna complain that Iran is a backwards country! LOL! It's funny



Either you are stupid or you intentionally misread my comments in order to further your agenda. I’ll let you decide.

First of all Iran would have become a beacon of knowledge IRREGARDLESS of what government came to power after the shah fell. Historically Iran has been a major center of learning dating back thousands of years!!

There are highly educated Iranians in various countries around the world and major companies/organizations including NASA/Lockheed Martin/Space X/etc. I guess they owe their knowledge to Islamic republic? Utter Nonsense!!

Iranians like Germans, Indians, Chinese, Japanese are typically intelligent hardworking race!

So again irregardless of what government came into power Iran would be a center of knowledge. Has this government promoted learning in last 20 years? Sure! Is this the most conducive government that can promote an technology renaissance driven Iran? Absolutely not! In fact it is holding Iran back from its true potential! Let’s not even address the Brain drain issue!

This government until the early 90’s banned foreign firms! Absurd policy! Most of Iran’s problems are caused by mismanagement and corruption rather than sanctions. The embargo has hurt Iran, but till 2010 Iran was free to promote and expand its economy with the rest of the world!

Who would have thought that pray 6 times a day and celebrating Imam anniversaries don’t make GDP go up?!

Iran shortly after the revolution was no different than the Sunni Extremist driven ideologies we see today! Iran’s promotion of terrorist attacks around the world during the 80’s and 90’s is costing Iran BILLIONS today in frozen assets that are being awarded by world courts to various entities. Even Shah era owned property is being consficated! All because of the short term nature thinking of those who had zero geopolitical experience. Hundreds of millions if not billions wasted on an inept Hamas!

Iran could have asked for ToT at ANYTIME during its relations with the world in the last 30 years yet incompetence and mismanagement of both energy sector AND non energy has caused the situation you see today! That is what happens in a FRACTURED Republic with many power brokers!

Even rahbar has mentioned this many times, but he doesn’t have the power to change the whole Republic from its roots without triggering a power broker war.

Example For how long was Iran burning off (flaring) gas during oil extraction because of antiquated oil technology? More money down the drains!

Turkey in the 90’s was a fractured country with ZERO energy resources yet by partnering with europe was able to transform its economy and get ToT in the process. They have surpassed Iran.

Iran was too busy feeding IRGC backed companies and even to this day IRGC does not want to see foreign companies in iran even if that means ToT. Why? because that means their monopoly is threatened!

They are happy keeping Iran’s economy from full potential because they make substantial wealth by both being the sanctions busters and by winning the most lucrative contracts.

The rest of your arguement is you purposely misrepresenting my comments. So I won’t address them.

I have advocated for Iranian advancement in avionics, radar absorbing skin, radar, etc to be able to truly build a 5th gen fighter. This requires serious effort that is simply underestimated by people. What is Iran’s most powerful airborne radar? The 1970’s era F-14 era? Sad!!

All you ramble about is “titanium” and “airframe” like a parrot. Truth is Iran’s engineers are much smarter than you and much.more experienced, so stop repeating the same thing in every thread. Iran has BILLIONS of tons of raw titanium that are available for extraction. If it’s not being extracted that’s the fault of the Republic!

I won’t even address your F-313 comment because I don’t care what comes of that project. I will give Iran the benefit of the doubt and will give them time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> Like Iran, Russia cannot compete with US/China on a technological arms race



False! Russia cannot compete in QUANTITY vs Nato, of course not, its budget is limited
But technologically, it can, as a matter of fact, in many divisions its ahead of US/Nato
Show me an western tank with an unmanned turret like T-14
Show me an western sub so quiet like the upgraded russian Kilo class "black hole"



TheImmortal said:


> It’s new ICBM is to upgrade its DECADES old ICBM technology



so what? you dont have to reinvent the wheele.
Every missile is an "upgrade" of the german V2, right?



TheImmortal said:


> Notice 90% of what you mentioned is MISSILE based technology which is relatively cheaper than say upgrading an entire Navy or airforce.



cheaper + more effective!
russia dont have to build one ship to every nato ship, one plane to every nato plane.
1 missile can smash a navy ship worth 1000 times of the missile, so russia is more efficient.
More efficient does not mean it cant compete technologically against Nato, it just means russians are doing things with brain, nato is doing things to drain the taxpayer.
Who u think will survive in a fight -> few millon $ Bastion anti ship missile vs 4 bln $ Zumwalt class navy ship?



TheImmortal said:


> Russia is being backed into a corner by NATO/US and is thus relying on Hypersonic and advanced missile technology for nuclear deterrence.



Russia has much more than only missiles against Nato agressors


TheImmortal said:


> It’s Navy? Still Needs major modernization



Possible, but again, Russia is going the "cost/benefit relation" doctrine


TheImmortal said:


> It’s 5th gen fighter project? In shambles and a token order was placed for some fighters. India got burned by Russian tactics just like Iran did with shafagh project.



you heavily underestimate the PAK-FA project, russians already working on 6th gen fighter. there was an good article, russians just dont waste money, they dont need YET! hundreds of PAK-FA, its all about "cost/benefit"
they just test new subsystems on the PAK-FA which will be implemented in the 6th gen fighter in future.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061194686507945984


TheImmortal said:


> It’s UAV based technology? Russia lacked a major consistent MALE UAV and had to buy technology From Israel and Iran to catch up.



it lacked because soviet/russia doctrine is different, they just dont needed UAV´s like the USA do.
there was no need for russia to bomb the shit out in other continents
But that changed, russia is now investing heaviliy in UAV´s, and its just a matter of time they will be ahead.


TheImmortal said:


> “Russia could carry the US back into stone age without going nuclear”
> 
> Lol you been watching to much Hollywood movies. Russia is no match for the US on toe to toe effort. It simply doesn’t have the war chest for that type of confrontation. It might be able to give NATO a good fight, but not both.



I wrote "if it necessary", what will the US do if all they satellites will be neutralized/jammed? There are many ways to humilate the enemey, no need to go nuclear imediatelly

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> False! Russia cannot compete in QUANTITY vs Nato, of course not, its budget is limited
> But technologically, it can, as a matter of fact, in many divisions its ahead of US/Nato
> Show me an western tank with an unmanned turret like T-14
> Show me an western sub so quiet like the upgraded russian Kilo class "black hole"



LOL! Are you kidding me? Russian doctrine is based on quality?

Russian aka Soviet Union doctrine has been BASED on QUANTITY for decades! Hence why Russia has thousands of T-72 tanks sitting in storage. Russian/soviet military doctrines was overloading the enemy with a lot of tanks even if they were inferior to their counterparts they would out number them.

T-14 is not a GameChanger at this point. Russia has lagged in tank quality against its German and American counterparts since WW2. US army has already put out a contract for next gen tank, so T-14 will have an adversary soon. That is if it even makes it to mass production.



Draco.IMF said:


> so what? you dont have to reinvent the wheele.
> Every missile is an "upgrade" of the german V2, right?



My point is the Hypersonic missile and ICBM are irrelevant as they are part of MAD doctrine and will never be used. If they are used, then Iran and the rest of the world will cease to exist as well as you are talking about a full on nuclear exchange with the two biggest nuclear superpowers.



Draco.IMF said:


> cheaper + more effective!
> russia dont have to build one ship to every nato ship, one plane to every nato plane.
> 1 missile can smash a navy ship worth 1000 times of the missile, so russia is more efficient.
> More efficient does not mean it cant compete technologically against Nato, it just means russians are doing things with brain, nato is doing things to drain the taxpayer.
> Who u think will survive in a fight -> few millon $ Bastion anti ship missile vs 4 bln $ Zumwalt class navy ship?



Seriously where do you pull these ridiculous numbers from.

A few million anti-ship missiles. This is a joke right?

First of all only 3 Zumwalts exist and they part of US Navy. I don’t know what the point of bringing this ship up. The Zumwalt has the RCS of a small fishing boat, so goodluck locating it. Not that it is ment to be a major game changer. 

So basing your entire arguement on anti ship missiles vs a project with severe cost overruns is oversimplifying the weapons/Navy that NATO and US truly have.

Lastly Russia vs NATO would be fought by land not by sea because Russia is restricted by how it can reach major waterways. That leaves Russian navy exposed away from home.

You act like russia is the only country with anti ship missiles and cruise missiles. Again those missiles buy Russia defense/deterrence.



Draco.IMF said:


> Possible, but again, Russia is going the "cost/benefit relation" doctrine



This doctrine doesn’t even exist. You just made it up. Putin announced a massive 100+billion modernization effort. Then they lost Ukraine and sanctions happened along with volatily of oil prices. It’s more like realities of situation than any actual change in doctrine. Russia still adheres to Soviet Union military tactics and doctrine.



Draco.IMF said:


> you heavily underestimate the PAK-FA project, russians already working on 6th gen fighter. there was an good article, russians just dont waste money, they dont need YET! hundreds of PAK-FA, its all about "cost/benefit"
> they just test new subsystems on the PAK-FA which will be implemented in the 6th gen fighter in future.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1061194686507945984



Lol the chief designer of Sukhoi is your source? Seriously? The outlet of propaganda? What is he supposed to say it sucks? It’s inferior to F-35?

So your telling me Russia spent 20 years building plane to test components for another gen plane coming in 15-20 years? Seriously who are you fooling?

Even India didn’t want the plane anymore because of the problems and that it wasn’t truly a 5th gen fighter. It had reduced RCS only at frontal angle. It wasn’t built as a full on stealth fighter as the F-22 was.

It just wasn’t impressive enough when the SU-35 exists at a cheaper price and is well established. That’s the simple truth.

And even if Russia builds a super duper “6th gen” fighter. Whose to say they can AFFORD it? Let’s say the plane costs 100M per unit, how many do you think they can afford?

The US took the F-35 program and had it subsidized by many countries and had certain countries produce certain parts to make it overall more cost effective. Not to mention the billions it will get from selling the planes to its allies. Russia won’t have that benefit. It will take the full brunt of r&d and production.



Draco.IMF said:


> it lacked because soviet/russia doctrine is different, they just dont needed UAV´s like the USA do.
> there was no need for russia to bomb the shit out in other continents
> But that changed, russia is now investing heaviliy in UAV´s, and its just a matter of time they will be ahead.
> 
> 
> I wrote "if it necessary", what will the US do if all they satellites will be neutralized/jammed? There are many ways to humilate the enemey, no need to go nuclear imediatelly



Here comes the flip flopping, on one hand Russia follows Soviet doctrine then on the other hand it follows “cost/benefit” doctrine. So which is it? It seems you don’t know the difference between the two because they are pretty different in terms of how they approach arms production.

The truth is Russia fell behind in certain areas and UAV technology was one of them. That got exposed in the Georgia war and sent Russia to the drawing board. After struggling on their own, they merely purchased UAVs From Israel (likely some ToT) and Iran.

Iran has had MALE UAV for nearly a decade and attack UAVs even longer. Last I checked, Iran wasn’t “bombing the shit out of other countries” during this time. The future is UAV and AI, Russia was late to the party.

If Russia disables GPS, US will disable GLONASS. So let’s not play the “what if” game. And Russia depends on GPS/GLONASS just as much as the US does.

The real fact is Russia is being backed into a corner without the US/NATO firing a single bullet.

Russia has NATO/US on its borders. Nuclear missiles aimed at it. Interceptor missiles on its borders. And sanctions are tightening the noose around Russia. Once EU finds other gas alternatives, Russia will lose even more leverage.

Putin is tied by the constitution in terms of max term limits. So unless he declares himself Czar he will have to leave the political front officially and work in the shadows.

Russia has lost Ukraine, just let that sink in For a moment. That would be the equivalent of Iran losing Tabriz and Iranian Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan and the West. If that were to happen you wouldn’t declare that Iran is on a roll now would you?

Russia has lost its soviet satellite states. It’s weakning. It can pound it’s chest and act tough but as you can see the US military is pivoting it’s military force to China.

China is the future threat to US global empire. Russia cannot compete economically or military wise with these two superpowers. Russia has no one to blame but itself.


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

any information about Baver 373


----------



## Malik Alashter

TheImmortal said:


> LOL! Are you kidding me? Russian doctrine is based on quality?
> 
> Russian aka Soviet Union doctrine has been BASED on QUANTITY for decades! Hence why Russia has thousands of T-72 tanks sitting in storage. Russian/soviet military doctrines was overloading the enemy with a lot of tanks even if they were inferior to their counterparts they would out number them.
> 
> T-14 is not a GameChanger at this point. Russia has lagged in tank quality against its German and American counterparts since WW2. US army has already put out a contract for next gen tank, so T-14 will have an adversary soon. That is if it even makes it to mass production.
> 
> 
> 
> My point is the Hypersonic missile and ICBM are irrelevant as they are part of MAD doctrine and will never be used. If they are used, then Iran and the rest of the world will cease to exist as well as you are talking about a full on nuclear exchange with the two biggest nuclear superpowers.
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously where do you pull these ridiculous numbers from.
> 
> A few million anti-ship missiles. This is a joke right?
> 
> First of all only 3 Zumwalts exist and they part of US Navy. I don’t know what the point of bringing this ship up. The Zumwalt has the RCS of a small fishing boat, so goodluck locating it. Not that it is ment to be a major game changer.
> 
> So basing your entire arguement on anti ship missiles vs a project with severe cost overruns is oversimplifying the weapons/Navy that NATO and US truly have.
> 
> Lastly Russia vs NATO would be fought by land not by sea because Russia is restricted by how it can reach major waterways. That leaves Russian navy exposed away from home.
> 
> You act like russia is the only country with anti ship missiles and cruise missiles. Again those missiles buy Russia defense/deterrence.
> 
> 
> 
> This doctrine doesn’t even exist. You just made it up. Putin announced a massive 100+billion modernization effort. Then they lost Ukraine and sanctions happened along with volatily of oil prices. It’s more like realities of situation than any actual change in doctrine. Russia still adheres to Soviet Union military tactics and doctrine.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol the chief designer of Sukhoi is your source? Seriously? The outlet of propaganda? What is he supposed to say it sucks? It’s inferior to F-35?
> 
> So your telling me Russia spent 20 years building plane to test components for another gen plane coming in 15-20 years? Seriously who are you fooling?
> 
> Even India didn’t want the plane anymore because of the problems and that it wasn’t truly a 5th gen fighter. It had reduced RCS only at frontal angle. It wasn’t built as a full on stealth fighter as the F-22 was.
> 
> It just wasn’t impressive enough when the SU-35 exists at a cheaper price and is well established. That’s the simple truth.
> 
> And even if Russia builds a super duper “6th gen” fighter. Whose to say they can AFFORD it? Let’s say the plane costs 100M per unit, how many do you think they can afford?
> 
> The US took the F-35 program and had it subsidized by many countries and had certain countries produce certain parts to make it overall more cost effective. Not to mention the billions it will get from selling the planes to its allies. Russia won’t have that benefit. It will take the full brunt of r&d and production.
> 
> 
> 
> Here comes the flip flopping, on one hand Russia follows Soviet doctrine then on the other hand it follows “cost/benefit” doctrine. So which is it? It seems you don’t know the difference between the two because they are pretty different in terms of how they approach arms production.
> 
> The truth is Russia fell behind in certain areas and UAV technology was one of them. That got exposed in the Georgia war and sent Russia to the drawing board. After struggling on their own, they merely purchased UAVs From Israel (likely some ToT) and Iran.
> 
> Iran has had MALE UAV for nearly a decade and attack UAVs even longer. Last I checked, Iran wasn’t “bombing the shit out of other countries” during this time. The future is UAV and AI, Russia was late to the party.
> 
> If Russia disables GPS, US will disable GLONASS. So let’s not play the “what if” game. And Russia depends on GPS/GLONASS just as much as the US does.
> 
> The real fact is Russia is being backed into a corner without the US/NATO firing a single bullet.
> 
> Russia has NATO/US on its borders. Nuclear missiles aimed at it. Interceptor missiles on its borders. And sanctions are tightening the noose around Russia. Once EU finds other gas alternatives, Russia will lose even more leverage.
> 
> Putin is tied by the constitution in terms of max term limits. So unless he declares himself Czar he will have to leave the political front officially and work in the shadows.
> 
> Russia has lost Ukraine, just let that sink in For a moment. That would be the equivalent of Iran losing Tabriz and Iranian Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan and the West. If that were to happen you wouldn’t declare that Iran is on a roll now would you?
> 
> Russia has lost its soviet satellite states. It’s weakning. It can pound it’s chest and act tough but as you can see the US military is pivoting it’s military force to China.
> 
> China is the future threat to US global empire. Russia cannot compete economically or military wise with these two superpowers. Russia has no one to blame but itself.


Explain to me these figures please 

*GDP (PPP)* 2018 estimate
*• Total*
$4.180 trillion[9] (6th)
*• Per capita*
$29,032[9] (49th)
*GDP (nominal)* 2018 estimate
*• Total*
$1.576 trillion[9] (12th)
*• Per capita*
$10,950[9] (67th) 

While China

*GDP (PPP)* 2018 estimate
*• Total*
$25.238 trillion[16](1st)
*• Per capita*
$18,066[16] (79th)
*GDP (nominal)* 2018 estimate
*• Total*
$14.092 trillion[16](2nd)
*• Per capita*
$10,087[16] (71st) 
Putin try to appease the Russians otherwise he can afford around 100 billion budget also i think he try to appease the Europeans by no scaring them what do you think


----------



## skyshadow

NADIM.NAZI said:


> any information about Baver 373


march 2019 as they say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scythian500

TheImmortal said:


> Both US & China are working on quantum computers and using principle of quantum entanglement for next gen applications, Iran is very behind in this field.


What is Iran's current status in quantum entanglement or other quantum researches? Can you please share with us?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

scythian500 said:


> What is Iran's current status in quantum entanglement or other quantum researches? Can you please share with us?



It’s primarily at the university level. It shows promise, but more needs to be done. 






Here is a video of iran achieving secured quantum communications in a laboratory. Again as we said preliminary stuff. 

Then the question becomes how seriously does military take it? After all the university level can only take it so far without proper funding.

Military is typically much further ahead than Public sector. So if we look at where the major tech companies (ex Google) we can see they already testing prototype quantum computers at 72 qubits. IBM and Intel have also test their own 50 and 49 qubit prototypes.

https://financialtribune.com/articles/economy-sci-tech/83083/new-quantum-computer-undergoing-trials

So if public sector has researched this point, where do you think US military sector is at? Or Chinese military sector?

The real question is can Iran produce quantum chips? As we know Iran is not ideally positioned in the field of microprocessors and chip production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> It’s primarily at the university level. It shows promise, but more needs to be done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a video of iran achieving secured quantum communications in a laboratory. Again as we said preliminary stuff.
> 
> Then the question becomes how seriously does military take it? After all the university level can only take it so far without proper funding.
> 
> Military is typically much further ahead than Public sector. So if we look at where the major tech companies (ex Google) we can see they already testing prototype quantum computers at 72 qubits. IBM and Intel have also test their own 50 and 49 qubit prototypes.
> 
> https://financialtribune.com/articles/economy-sci-tech/83083/new-quantum-computer-undergoing-trials
> 
> So if public sector has researched this point, where do you think US military sector is at? Or Chinese military sector?
> 
> The real question is can Iran produce quantum chips? As we know Iran is not ideally positioned in the field of microprocessors and chip production.



We are here in the field of quantum technology

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Either you are stupid or you intentionally misread my comments in order to further your agenda. I’ll let you decide.
> 
> First of all Iran would have become a beacon of knowledge IRREGARDLESS of what government came to power after the shah fell. Historically Iran has been a major center of learning dating back thousands of years!!
> 
> There are highly educated Iranians in various countries around the world and major companies/organizations including NASA/Lockheed Martin/Space X/etc. I guess they owe their knowledge to Islamic republic? Utter Nonsense!!
> 
> Iranians like Germans, Indians, Chinese, Japanese are typically intelligent hardworking race!
> 
> So again irregardless of what government came into power Iran would be a center of knowledge. Has this government promoted learning in last 20 years? Sure! Is this the most conducive government that can promote an technology renaissance driven Iran? Absolutely not! In fact it is holding Iran back from its true potential! Let’s not even address the Brain drain issue!
> 
> This government until the early 90’s banned foreign firms! Absurd policy! Most of Iran’s problems are caused by mismanagement and corruption rather than sanctions. The embargo has hurt Iran, but till 2010 Iran was free to promote and expand its economy with the rest of the world!
> 
> Who would have thought that pray 6 times a day and celebrating Imam anniversaries don’t make GDP go up?!
> 
> Iran shortly after the revolution was no different than the Sunni Extremist driven ideologies we see today! Iran’s promotion of terrorist attacks around the world during the 80’s and 90’s is costing Iran BILLIONS today in frozen assets that are being awarded by world courts to various entities. Even Shah era owned property is being consficated! All because of the short term nature thinking of those who had zero geopolitical experience. Hundreds of millions if not billions wasted on an inept Hamas!
> 
> Iran could have asked for ToT at ANYTIME during its relations with the world in the last 30 years yet incompetence and mismanagement of both energy sector AND non energy has caused the situation you see today! That is what happens in a FRACTURED Republic with many power brokers!
> 
> Even rahbar has mentioned this many times, but he doesn’t have the power to change the whole Republic from its roots without triggering a power broker war.
> 
> Example For how long was Iran burning off (flaring) gas during oil extraction because of antiquated oil technology? More money down the drains!
> 
> Turkey in the 90’s was a fractured country with ZERO energy resources yet by partnering with europe was able to transform its economy and get ToT in the process. They have surpassed Iran.
> 
> Iran was too busy feeding IRGC backed companies and even to this day IRGC does not want to see foreign companies in iran even if that means ToT. Why? because that means their monopoly is threatened!
> 
> They are happy keeping Iran’s economy from full potential because they make substantial wealth by both being the sanctions busters and by winning the most lucrative contracts.
> 
> The rest of your arguement is you purposely misrepresenting my comments. So I won’t address them.
> 
> I have advocated for Iranian advancement in avionics, radar absorbing skin, radar, etc to be able to truly build a 5th gen fighter. This requires serious effort that is simply underestimated by people. What is Iran’s most powerful airborne radar? The 1970’s era F-14 era? Sad!!
> 
> All you ramble about is “titanium” and “airframe” like a parrot. Truth is Iran’s engineers are much smarter than you and much.more experienced, so stop repeating the same thing in every thread. Iran has BILLIONS of tons of raw titanium that are available for extraction. If it’s not being extracted that’s the fault of the Republic!
> 
> I won’t even address your F-313 comment because I don’t care what comes of that project. I will give Iran the benefit of the doubt and will give them time.




Yea a country that had only 16 Universities in a country larger than UK, France, Germany & Italy combined was somehow magically keen to become the fastest growing country in Science and Technology!!!! 

Iran wasn't headed anywhere during the previous regime and outside of a few cities there just wasn't enough elementary schools, middle schools, high schools and universities hell even in Tehran there weren't enough schools so much so that the government started transforming houses to schools and allowed for the vast expansion of relatively low cost privet schools to meet the countries needs 

And you think we were somehow going to magically become the fastest growing country in science and technology simply because there were a few Iranians being educated in the west? As if Iranians were the ONLY foreigners being educated in the west! If Iranians were the ONLY foreigners in NASA you may of had a point but they most definitely are NOT!

And Iran was so far behind in terms of industry that if the government had not banned some foreign companies and charged 300% tax on imported cars to help grow our own domestic industries today we wouldn't be able to produce our own cars and if they hadn't taken such drastic measures we wouldn't of been able to produce all the various products we are capable of producing today!

The growth you see in Turkey is 1st off due to Tourism Industry, Music & Entertainment industry,... AND lack of foreign imposed SANCTIONS which allows them to send Sat like TurkSAT into space, buy Aircrafts for their Airliners, small business partnerships with foreign companies, participate in the world trade organization ....
And since they had no oil they really didn't have a choice 

And a lot of it has to do with having a healthy Tourism industry because rich foreigners come, see a product that they are fascinated with or see a country that they'd like visiting on a regular bases that has unused potential that they can exploit and make money out of..….

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## scythian500

skyshadow said:


> We are here in the field of quantum technology


Iranian quantum researches has already passed lab test barrier and could successfully make the distanced particle to entangle! meters away from its twin particle... 80 Iranian scientists are now working on entanglement tests for distances of 7 kms this year and 15 kms next year.

and let us not forget that even most advanced nations in new technologies like UK, Germany or France just recently (2013-2015) started to work on this field.. For now, China is ahead as they have tested it for 700 kms..

Most of current global leaders in science, tech and military are those nations who were present in the race for tech and research back in 19th and 20th centuries. Back then, Iran was absent and was busy recovering from a series of unfortunate internal and international disasters.

But this time, Iranian authorities and the Supreme leader personally, reacted quick. This is why, Iran started to focus on new and future science and techs (Nano, biophysics, biochemistry, quantum, stem cells, AI, multi-disciplinary fields, new materials, plasma, etc) alongside keeping an emphasis on major feeding fields like engineering, mathematics, Information systems, composites, etc). This is why ,this time, future of Iran is promising... Some would say, not all Iranian research papers listed in rankings are high quality papers... Yes, many students are doing it to have a better C.V... but let's not forget that papers in complex sciences are very legit generally... These fields are so complex that only high IQ nerds are after studying in them..

Another thing is that, although comparing to other pioneers in new sciences Iran spends much less but it is a direct result of current financial situation in Iran. Sanctions... Economic mismanagement... politically oriented minds... thieves who accumulate money to spend it on next elections! Especially when reformist governments are in power.. u know they are proved to be a relaxed, laid back, incompetent party type who does not want to risk and advent for a better future.. If it was up to them, they would be happy to surrender to US and Israel and just sell oil and have happy life with petrodollars.. like Saudis... but thanks God, although they can hinder Iranian progress to some scale but still are not the whole force in Iran... There are angel forces as well...!!

At the same time, one billion dollars spent on research in Iran could be equal to 10 billions of international dollars in other industrial nations. Iranian scientists learnt how to keep expenses very minimal.. This in addition to higher purchasing power of every dollar in Iran helped new sciences to progress fast in Iran..

In addition to formal amounts of investment on research we have unofficial research spending that is not listed anywhere.. Imagine how many billion of dollars IRGC alone spent on her numerous strategic researches... Imagine how much research is being done by thousands of privately- owned high tech start ups and manufacturers...

This is why with little budget that government allocated to hundreds of different research centers we still see rapid progress in new sciences..

It is not enough for sure... but things are on the right track... We have thousands of high techs and start ups... Most of these will stay small...but I,m sure there will be many successful brands with enough income to be able to have their own research investments... couple of years ago, most of private high techs were small start ups who were desperately after having small orders for their products... But today, we have many successful high tech firms already... Some of them are nearing the billion dollar threshold.. So, naturally, we would see at least a bunch of knowledge based companies who grow enough to have extra money to spend it on new serious research..

The sanctions was a hit to this process... But I,m sure, Iran will shine one again and very soon.. Actually a scientifically advanced and pioneer Muslim Iran is what the WEST is fearing the most... If it is done then, their whole destiny will be changed... Muslims will find a true role model to follow...and this is an existential threat for Western powers...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## VEVAK

scythian500 said:


> Iranian quantum researches has already passed lab test barrier and could successfully make the distanced particle to entangle! meters away from its twin particle... 80 Iranian scientists are now working on entanglement tests for distances of 7 kms this year and 15 kms next year.
> 
> and let us not forget that even most advanced nations in new technologies like UK, Germany or France just recently (2013-2015) started to work on this field.. For now, China is ahead as they have tested it for 700 kms..
> 
> Most of current global leaders in science, tech and military are those nations who were present in the race for tech and research back in 19th and 20th centuries. Back then, Iran was absent and was busy recovering from a series of unfortunate internal and international disasters.
> 
> But this time, Iranian authorities and the Supreme leader personally, reacted quick. This is why, Iran started to focus on new and future science and techs (Nano, biophysics, biochemistry, quantum, stem cells, AI, multi-disciplinary fields, new materials, plasma, etc) alongside keeping an emphasis on major feeding fields like engineering, mathematics, Information systems, composites, etc). This is why ,this time, future of Iran is promising... Some would say, not all Iranian research papers listed in rankings are high quality papers... Yes, many students are doing it to have a better C.V... but let's not forget that papers in complex sciences are very legit generally... These fields are so complex that only high IQ nerds are after studying in them..
> 
> Another thing is that, although comparing to other pioneers in new sciences Iran spends much less but it is a direct result of current financial situation in Iran. Sanctions... Economic mismanagement... politically oriented minds... thieves who accumulate money to spend it on next elections! Especially when reformist governments are in power.. u know they are proved to be a relaxed, laid back, incompetent party type who does not want to risk and advent for a better future.. If it was up to them, they would be happy to surrender to US and Israel and just sell oil and have happy life with petrodollars.. like Saudis... but thanks God, although they can hinder Iranian progress to some scale but still are not the whole force in Iran... There are angel forces as well...!!
> 
> At the same time, one billion dollars spent on research in Iran could be equal to 10 billions of international dollars in other industrial nations. Iranian scientists learnt how to keep expenses very minimal.. This in addition to higher purchasing power of every dollar in Iran helped new sciences to progress fast in Iran..
> 
> In addition to formal amounts of investment on research we have unofficial research spending that is not listed anywhere.. Imagine how many billion of dollars IRGC alone spent on her numerous strategic researches... Imagine how much research is being done by thousands of privately- owned high tech start ups and manufacturers...
> 
> This is why with little budget that government allocated to hundreds of different research centers we still see rapid progress in new sciences..
> 
> It is not enough for sure... but things are on the right track... We have thousands of high techs and start ups... Most of these will stay small...but I,m sure there will be many successful brands with enough income to be able to have their own research investments... couple of years ago, most of private high techs were small start ups who were desperately after having small orders for their products... But today, we have many successful high tech firms already... Some of them are nearing the billion dollar threshold.. So, naturally, we would see at least a bunch of knowledge based companies who grow enough to have extra money to spend it on new serious research..
> 
> The sanctions was a hit to this process... But I,m sure, Iran will shine one again and very soon.. Actually a scientifically advanced and pioneer Muslim Iran is what the WEST is fearing the most... If it is done then, their whole destiny will be changed... Muslims will find a true role model to follow...and this is an existential threat for Western powers...



Yup THE MOST IMPORTANT factor today is that we are on the right track and we may have started 50 to 100 years later than most of the advanced countries in the world and logically that effects our current products compared to there's simply because they have had far more time to build, fund and upgrade their infrastructure. But in time, that difference in products produced will naturally be reduced year by year because today despite all the economic hardships imposed on Iran by foreigners we are on the right track and we have moved passed being simple consumers of foreign products where the profit of each foreign product purchased in Iran was going to the development of infrastructure and enrichment of other countries and we've moved away from being that country that couldn't build its own Dam's, Cars, industrial equipment... to producers & builders. And we have moved away from that TO SARRI KHOR country that didn't even have full control over it's own infrastructure or it's own Tourism industry, that couldn't even maintain the military equipment purchased to defend the country let alone produce any real weapons, who had over 100 years of absolute neglect in it's human resources that directly led to neglect across every infrastructure & indigenous industry in the country.
And future generations of Iranians who look back at there countries history will clearly see and recognize when the turning point for Iran started, how it started and how it came to be. 

But at the end of the day all the blame doesn't fall on the reformists because when other parties in Iran hold such absurd views when it comes to Hejab, Music, Entertainment... you leave people no other choice.
Also during Khatami by the % of our GDP Iran spent far more money on it's military than any other Post war Iranian government and the country took giant leaps when it came to it's military industry which directly lead to giant leaps across the civilian sector and somehow Reformist went from a party that was making major leaps like suddenly turning Iran into a country that builds it's own Subs, Warships, Jet engines,.... To a party whos members today go on the floor of the Majles and talk about reduction of military spending in a country that hardly spends any money on it's military while the American have built over 30 bases surrounding the country. And they have gone from the party of progress to the party of impotence 
But they still have vast support amongst the public simply because other conservative parties take absurdly illogical positions when it comes to issues like Hejab, Music and Entertainment that directly effects Iran's tourism industry and economy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Interesting picture from janes that shows 2 sayyad launchers being used with the ofogh fire control radar as well as the new vehicle mounted version of the hawk/mersad search radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Interesting picture from janes that shows 2 sayyad launchers being used with the ofogh fire control radar as well as the new vehicle mounted version of the hawk/mersad search radar.


Well they were supposed to be modular and be able to interact with each other.


----------



## PeeD

Ok I'm now quite sure that a silent revolution is taking place in the field of SAM systems and Iran is a forerunner in it.

The recent video about the documentary on the Nebo-M and Zuhai 2018 have confirmed something I was thinking about since a while but never had a case of a foreign example.

Here is the thing:
The performance of a SARH/SAGG/TVM SAM is directly in relation with the illumination power of the engagement radar.
The S-300/-400 series is so deadly because it puts a high amount of EM power on the target. So much that jammers can't easily counter it, it "burns trough" the jamming signal.

Now comparing the Bavar-373 and S-400 engagement radars we see the following: The S-400 has a higher amount of emitting elements creating an about 50% or 100% larger aperture area.

To support a 200km range SARH/SAGG/TVM guided SAM, to achieve the same performance as a S-400, you don't just need twice as powerful elements but several times higher power levels (non-linear relation).

So the question is how could the Iranian claim that Bavar-373 is equivalent or better than the S-300PMU2 be true?

Here is the most likely answer: Dual band technology with separated emitting and receiving elements.
The the end of the Nebo-M documentary they show a experimental radar system and say that it will have separate transmitting and receiving elements.
At Zuhai 2018 a new engagement radar for the HQ-16 SAM was shown and it also had a dual band arrangement.

The idea behind the Russian system is clearly to have very high power elements emitting and sensitive elements receiving.
In that way the transmitting element becomes less complex and can handle higher power levels.
With such an approach it could be possible to achieve similarly high illumination power levels as the larger S-300/-400 with a smaller aperture size and fewer elements.
So could the Bavar-373 have 3-4 more powerful transmitting elements that don't use a space/lens feed system but a direct one?
In total far fetched but after the revelations of the last days it would become a possible answer for the claims on the Bavar-373.
There is another hint: The first mock-up of the Bavar-373 engagement radar was a dual band system, later separated to a independent acquisition and engagement radar. The acquisition radar is almost certainly a Hafez S-band AESA and the engagement radar a unknown phased-array X-band.

The idea to use a economic S-band AESA for coarse track and illuminate the tracked region with an aligned emit-only X-band aperture would be a quite elegant solution. It may even cut costs in comparison to a full 10.000 element T/R PESA like on the S-300/-400.

Lets see if Iran was a revolutionary forerunner on such a radar system architecture. Lets say there are not many more answers left if the Bavar-373 wants to be better than the S-300PMU2.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Ok I'm now quite sure that a silent revolution is taking place in the field of SAM systems and Iran is a forerunner in it.
> 
> The recent video about the documentary on the Nebo-M and Zuhai 2018 have confirmed something I was thinking about since a while but never had a case of a foreign example.
> 
> Here is the thing:
> The performance of a SARH/SAGG/TVM SAM is directly in relation with the illumination power of the engagement radar.
> The S-300/-400 series is so deadly because it puts a high amount of EM power on the target. So much that jammers can't easily counter it, it "burns trough" the jamming signal.
> 
> Now comparing the Bavar-373 and S-400 engagement radars we see the following: The S-400 has a higher amount of emitting elements creating an about 50% or 100% larger aperture area.
> 
> To support a 200km range SARH/SAGG/TVM guided SAM, to achieve the same performance as a S-400, you don't just need twice as powerful elements but several times higher power levels (non-linear relation).
> 
> So the question is how could the Iranian claim that Bavar-373 is equivalent or better than the S-300PMU2 be true?
> 
> Here is the most likely answer: Dual band technology with separated emitting and receiving elements.
> The the end of the Nebo-M documentary they show a experimental radar system and say that it will have separate transmitting and receiving elements.
> At Zuhai 2018 a new engagement radar for the HQ-16 SAM was shown and it also had a dual band arrangement.
> 
> The idea behind the Russian system is clearly to have very high power elements emitting and sensitive elements receiving.
> In that way the transmitting element becomes less complex and can handle higher power levels.
> With such an approach it could be possible to achieve similarly high illumination power levels as the larger S-300/-400 with a smaller aperture size and fewer elements.
> So could the Bavar-373 have 3-4 more powerful transmitting elements that don't use a space/lens feed system but a direct one?
> In total far fetched but after the revelations of the last days it would become a possible answer for the claims on the Bavar-373.
> There is another hint: The first mock-up of the Bavar-373 engagement radar was a dual band system, later separated to a independent acquisition and engagement radar. The acquisition radar is almost certainly a Hafez S-band AESA and the engagement radar a unknown phased-array X-band.
> 
> The idea to use a economic S-band AESA for coarse track and illuminate the tracked region with an aligned emit-only X-band aperture would be a quite elegant solution. It may even cut costs in comparison to a full 10.000 element T/R PESA like on the S-300/-400.
> 
> Lets see if Iran was a revolutionary forerunner on such a radar system architecture. Lets say there are not many more answers left if the Bavar-373 wants to be better than the S-300PMU2.



how do you come to the conclusion Iran is forerunner?
Did Iran show an radar compared to the russian one which they show in the end of the Nebo-M documentary?
I wish iran will show his AD-systems engaging cruise missiles/ballistic missiles, not only against "slow" propeller drones
In the next 10 years Iran will make huge huge leaps in AD development, I wish it will be 2nd in the world right behind russia


----------



## PeeD

Why a forerunner? Because it was first to show the concept of a dual-band engagement radar in 2014.
Of course Russia is ahead in radars and their system is separating emitter and receiver elements.

The Chinese system is more like the Iranian concept but has not the difficult task to achieve high EM energy on target for long range engagements like the Bavar-373 (HQ-16 in its lastest version has about 70km range). Hence they likely have two apertures in two bands each with transmitter and receiver in one element (the standard). When I say transmitter it means phase shifter for PESA designs and "true transmitter" for AESA designs.
The Chinese HQ-16 engagement radar is a AESA, as claimed, but it is unclear whether the Bavar-373 X-band engagement radar has a central source EM source and phase shifters (PESA) or has CW transmitting elements without receivers. The problem is that it is quite expensive to build an AESA engagement radar and does use benefits such as high MTBF of AESAs.
On the other hand, without a central space-feed PESA its difficult to pack that high amount of energy necessary onto the phase shifter elements. The Bavar-373 engagement radar without space feed system is too compact for a very high power PESA. The solution would be a new approach such as the emitter-only elements described here which would translate into a kind of AESA in fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

yavar said:


>



It annoys me so much when they call it the Iranian S-300.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



something interesting he is telling? english please



PeeD said:


> Why a forerunner? Because it was first to show the concept of a dual-band engagement radar in 2014.



can you please show a picture of it, thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Why a forerunner? Because it was first to show the concept of a dual-band engagement radar in 2014.
> Of course Russia is ahead in radars and their system is separating emitter and receiver elements.
> 
> The Chinese system is more like the Iranian concept but has not the difficult task to achieve high EM energy on target for long range engagements like the Bavar-373 (HQ-16 in its lastest version has about 70km range). Hence they likely have two apertures in two bands each with transmitter and receiver in one element (the standard). When I say transmitter it means phase shifter for PESA designs and "true transmitter" for AESA designs.
> The Chinese HQ-16 engagement radar is a AESA, as claimed, but it is unclear whether the Bavar-373 X-band engagement radar has a central source EM source and phase shifters (PESA) or has CW transmitting elements without receivers. The problem is that it is quite expensive to build an AESA engagement radar and does use benefits such as high MTBF of AESAs.
> On the other hand, without a central space-feed PESA its difficult to pack that high amount of energy necessary onto the phase shifter elements. The Bavar-373 engagement radar without space feed system is too compact for a very high power PESA. The solution would be a new approach such as the emitter-only elements described here which would translate into a kind of AESA in fact.



US unveiled DBR (dual band radar) prior to 2013 and installed it on Zumwalt destroyers. So how was Iran the first to unveil the concept?

Is your entire analysis based on around the notion that Iran has said the “Bavar-373 is as powerful as S-300PMU2”? Because it could just be psych ops/propaganda.

While Iran has certainly advanced in the field of air defense. To say it is the front runner compared to Superpowers like Russia, China, and US that have been in the field for decades if not since WWII, is a bit of a stretch and a rosy way to look at things.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Draco.IMF said:


> can you please show a picture of it, thanks








And no, the array below is not a IFF imo.

@TheImmortal

The Aegis system with the AN/SPG-62 is a earlier forerunner and an even earlier version of that family was an emit-only CW radar too.

Taking it to land system and making it phased array is the novel Iranian approach.

The elegance of the Talash system is to emulate the cost effective and compact AN/SPG-62 concept.
Albeit the IRGC system for the Sayyad-2 is very elegant too with a very different approach.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Bavar 373

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## Oldman1

PeeD said:


> And no, the array below is not a IFF imo.
> 
> @TheImmortal
> 
> The Aegis system with the AN/SPG-62 is a earlier forerunner and an even earlier version of that family was an emit-only CW radar too.
> 
> Taking it to land system and making it phased array is the novel Iranian approach.
> 
> The elegance of the Talash system is to emulate the cost effective and compact AN/SPG-62 concept.
> Albeit the IRGC system for the Sayyad-2 is very elegant too with a very different approach.



You mean like this?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

A laser range finder,part of the optronic mast we saw during the ad exercise

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-72B

Guys what happen to Iranian Crotales project like Ya-Sharad and etc? Why he haven’t seen any of these crotales in action or are they even haven’t been put into services?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Irans SA-6 sam systems have received some upgrades,the radar operators old crt displays has been upgraded with new lcd displays,and I suspect quite a bit more than just that as well.




Heres a close pic of what the original display would`ve looked like

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## PeeD

The Saudi capture of a Sayyad-2C could have been real: They built a mock-up for the presentation due to safety reasons but the Americans displayed non-explosive components of it.

As the Sayyad-2C likely is one of the SARH seeker guided missiles of the Sayyad-2 family, the loss of a seeker is quite bad as it helps much to develop specialized counter measures against it.

Maybe the Sayyad-2Ds displayed recently are an answer to the Americans that the seeker has been changed after this technology loss.

Could it just be SM-1 internals the Americans fabricated as Sayyad-2 internals? Yes possible.

To use the Sayyad-2C effectively they would at least need a Raad guidance radar truck or better a Tabas or 3rd Khordad for full range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> The Saudi capture of a Sayyad-2C could have been real: They built a mock-up for the presentation due to safety reasons but the Americans displayed non-explosive components of it.
> 
> As the Sayyad-2C likely is one of the SARH seeker guided missiles of the Sayyad-2 family, the loss of a seeker is quite bad as it helps much to develop specialized counter measures against it.
> 
> Maybe the Sayyad-2Ds displayed recently are an answer to the Americans that the seeker has been changed after this technology loss.
> 
> Could it just be SM-1 internals the Americans fabricated as Sayyad-2 internals? Yes possible.
> 
> To use the Sayyad-2C effectively they would at least need a Raad guidance radar truck or better a Tabas or 3rd Khordad for full range.



so which one was real? US or SA


----------



## skyshadow

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...n-syria-army-missile-fired-at-golan-1.6700966

*Israeli Army: Fragments of Syrian Anti-aircraft Missile Found in Golan Heights*


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...n-syria-army-missile-fired-at-golan-1.6700966
> 
> *Israeli Army: Fragments of Syrian Anti-aircraft Missile Found in Golan Heights*



Like I said S-300 won’t stop attacks, Israel jets unleash their payloads out in the Mediterranean Sea and do evasive maneuvers afterwards. Not much Syria can do unfortunately

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sepasgozar

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>




Literally any other song would have been better; that loop was deadly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> Like I said S-300 won’t stop attacks, Israel jets unleash their payloads out in the Mediterranean Sea and do evasive maneuvers afterwards. Not much Syria can do unfortunately



That is not true, they can engage at longer distance. S300's engagement range is higher than Small Diameter Bombs. The problem is success rate and affordability. The resistance needs to develop cheap solutions to counter these threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

simply , the best defense is offense ....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> That is not true, they can engage at longer distance. S300's engagement range is higher than Small Diameter Bombs. The problem is success rate and affordability. The resistance needs to develop cheap solutions to counter these threats.



You simply don’t understand what I said.

First of all Israeli jets fly that route even when not attacking. So Syria has to determine if its an attack mission o not.

Thus Syria is not going to engage a military jet outside of its borders and in international waters. The risk associated with if it mistakenly hits the wrong aircraft (s-200 incident) is too great for Syria right now. 

Thus it’s best bet is engaging the payloads themselves as they approach the targets. Which so far Syria has done a terrible job at intercepting Israeli bombs and US cruise missiles.


----------



## sanel1412

PeeD said:


> The Saudi capture of a Sayyad-2C could have been real: They built a mock-up for the presentation due to safety reasons but the Americans displayed non-explosive components of it.
> 
> As the Sayyad-2C likely is one of the SARH seeker guided missiles of the Sayyad-2 family, the loss of a seeker is quite bad as it helps much to develop specialized counter measures against it.
> 
> Maybe the Sayyad-2Ds displayed recently are an answer to the Americans that the seeker has been changed after this technology loss.
> 
> Could it just be SM-1 internals the Americans fabricated as Sayyad-2 internals? Yes possible.
> 
> To use the Sayyad-2C effectively they would at least need a Raad guidance radar truck or better a Tabas or 3rd Khordad for full range.


First of all. they said they displayed only part of missile because they didn't capture whole missile(they said this) and your idea about built mock up for presentation due safety reasons is just .....well...there are protocols and safety mechanism when missiles are stored and transported and there is no safety issue there,it is simle you don't call journalists to present them proof of Iran involement and than show them mock up of missile...second I don't think Iran will send(even if they ever choose to)latest and same technology like they use in own air defense systems to area where there is risk of been captured...They can always produce customized missiles for particular country or group..also Iran introducet Active radar seeker similar to Agat ARGS 6-7 years ago and recently new active radar seeker is introduced also so they have probably 2 or 3 different guidance for Raad and talash missiles ...considerning Raad family is developed from BUK-M2 technology and also iranian Kub upgrade is very similar to Belarus digital block upgrade for KUB and Buk M1 I wouldn't be surprised that Talash missiles use same or similar guidance as Raad family .


----------



## PeeD

sanel1412 said:


> First of all. they said they displayed only part of missile because they didn't capture whole missile(they said this) and your idea about built mock up for presentation due safety reasons is just .....well...there are protocols and safety mechanism when missiles are stored and transported and there is no safety issue there,it is simle you don't call journalists to present them proof of Iran involement and than show them mock up of missile...second I don't think Iran will send(even if they ever choose to)latest and same technology like they use in own air defense systems to area where there is risk of been captured...They can always produce customized missiles for particular country or group..also Iran introducet Active radar seeker similar to Agat ARGS 6-7 years ago and recently new active radar seeker is introduced also so they have probably 2 or 3 different guidance for Raad and talash missiles ...considerning Raad family is developed from BUK-M2 technology and also iranian Kub upgrade is very similar to Belarus digital block upgrade for KUB and Buk M1 I wouldn't be surprised that Talash missiles use same or similar guidance as Raad family .



Good, I wasn't aware that they claimed not to have captured the whole missile.
The Sayyad-2 family is large and very different. Some variants have SARH seeker, some not.
Some have INS, some not etc.
From what can be seen the most critical part, the guidance section is not there.
The only critical section is the "INS" section, but the -C variant has no complex INS like the -M and -D.

I fully agree that even the least advanced variant of the Sayyad-2, which seems to be the -C would be too risky to be sent abroad. The original Taer-2 of the Raad system with its Kub related seeker would be the best candidate if high altitude engagement capability is the goal.

Anyway: We know that the Sayyad-2 the Saudis presented was just a mock-up. Maybe the Americans got Hollywood artist to do the job better this time with some scrap SM-2 or SM-1 components.

Two of your points are wrong imo:

The 3rd Khordad is not based on the Buk-M2. Iran never got access on it. It is similar in terms of basic technology solutions but just for example it has no PESA feed in form of a central monopule emitter. The Russian design school uses this concept for the Pantsir-S1 and probably also the for the Buk-M2. Without going into details: The 3rd Khordad has a similar antenna array but apparently does not use a central monopulse feed.
I think it is the evolution of the Tabas system which seems to be based on a Buk-M1 they got their hand on.

I'm also not sure about your idea about a. active seeker presented for SAMs.
There is one for a larger caliber missile that could be a ARH seeker for anti-ship cruise missile or AshBM.
Generally speaking active seekers increase the costs, are less robust except if used at long ranges.
That's one reason why the S-400 is primary a SARH seeker SAM and only use ARH for its, about to enter service, long range missile (for use against high value targets such as AWACS). The SARH SAGG guidance is both very deadly and cost-effective.
Maybe the variant of the Taer-2 that has 105km range uses an ARH seeker, because the somewhat small 3rd Khordad array might be unable to sufficiently illuminate at those ranges (I hope not).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

the first picture of Eagle Eye AESA cell module ....

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Raghfarm007

Saudi fake missile vs real Sayyad 2 missile in the factory:

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Arminkh

Raghfarm007 said:


> Saudi fake missile vs real Sayyad 2 missile in the factory:


Well, they have too start somewhere. First fake ones, hopefully one they can make a real one.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Iran is building several high-tech long-range radars. The *Moragheb* radar is a three-dimensional 3D radar for discovering and detecting air targets (ballistic missiles) at high altitudes.

Iran at the end of this Iranian year will unveil one full set of the bavar 373 air defense System and they will test the system on live air targets.

http://defapress.ir/fa/news/323467/تست-گرم-باور-۳۷۳-تا-پایان-امسال-ساخت-رادارهای-سه‌بعدی-جدید

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> Iran is building several high-tech long-range radars. The *Moragheb* radar is a three-dimensional 3D radar for discovering and detecting air targets (ballistic missiles) at high altitudes.
> 
> Iran at the end of this Iranian year will unveil one full set of the bavar 373 air defense System and they will test the system on live air targets.
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/323467/تست-گرم-باور-۳۷۳-تا-پایان-امسال-ساخت-رادارهای-سه‌بعدی-جدید


Is the moragheb a separate system,ie a strategic warning system,or a component of bavar 373,ie a dedicated abm radar like the s300vm high screen?


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Is the moragheb a separate system,ie a strategic warning system,or a component of bavar 373,ie a dedicated abm radar like the s300vm high screen?



i do not know they did not say anything ether but i think this radar will join bavar 373 eventually.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> i do not know they did not say anything ether but i think this radar will join bavar 373 eventually.


Then we could be possibly be looking at something like an iranian version of the s300vm High Screen,a dedicated abm radar for the bavar 373.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Then we could be possibly be looking at something like an iranian version of the s300vm High Screen,a dedicated abm radar for the bavar 373.


they say that they tested the radar at the recent air defense exercise but was not shown to public.

I think this delay in the release time of the bavar 373 is because they are updating it or adding to it with there modern and more advanced systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

In the IRIADF the Meraj-4 will be the most powerful higher band, volume search, mobile radar. It is officially classified as an AESA design.

The Moghareb is for the lower end of that role, at lower price. It should be either a PESA design or just a planar array without electronic scanning (a similar case to the Matla-ol-Fajr-2/3 but with 3D capability). The array size can be about the same as the Meraj-4 or even larger.

To make it short: Its a S-band early warning radar with large antenna array, like the MoF-2 it can hopefully be acquired in large numbers due to it cost effective layout.
The Meraj-4 is harder to detect, has higher MBTF and provides better quality targeting information for SAMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Will Bavar 373 surpass S-300 PMU-2 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## N_Al40

Draco.IMF said:


> Will Bavar 373 surpass S-300 PMU-2 ?



Certainly looks like it is heading in that direction

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

The question is why does Iran want ABM? The Saudis have DF-3 and DF-21 MRBMs which are very hard to intercept for even dedicated ABM, let alone a converted anti-aircraft system. As for the Israelis, only one of their missiles needs to get through, and they have other options like the sub-launched Popeye.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> The question is why does Iran want ABM? The Saudis have DF-3 and DF-21 MRBMs which are very hard to intercept for even dedicated ABM, let alone a converted anti-aircraft system. As for the Israelis, only one of their missiles needs to get through, and they have other options like the sub-launched Popeye.


The number they spew about Popeye is just nonsense.


----------



## TheImmortal

AmirPatriot said:


> The question is why does Iran want ABM? The Saudis have DF-3 and DF-21 MRBMs which are very hard to intercept for even dedicated ABM, let alone a converted anti-aircraft system. As for the Israelis, only one of their missiles needs to get through, and they have other options like the sub-launched Popeye.



DF-3 is a 1970’s liquid rocket with very poor accuracy and likely has a predictable trajectory. So no it’s not “very hard” to intercept. Saudi Arabia has been able to intercept several Yemen launched scud missiles. Scud like missiles are actually quite easy to intercept with a decent success rate.

The DF-21 is more advanced with a low CEP, but again possibility to intercept is there if it lacks adequate counter measures.

Lastly, your Israel example is preposterous in that it assumes Israel will nuke Iran which is just fantasy. Israel nuking Iran will be the end of Israel itself as Israel cannot survive a nuclear strike while Iran can survive several.

ABM is not a perfect technology but even a 30% success rate is better than zero % (having no ABM).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Fortunately the DF-21 is easier to intercept than the DF-3. Both are non-terminally guided, the DF-3 is just faster.
One reason for the S-300PMU2 are just those two... However it is likely that the DF-3 was already phased out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Fortunately the DF-21 is easier to intercept than the DF-3. Both are non-terminally guided, the DF-3 is just faster.
> One reason for the S-300PMU2 are just those two... However it is likely that the DF-3 was already phased out.



DF-21 is terminally guided (active radar gudiance + gps).

DF-3 is too risky for SA to use as it can only be used on cities or very large military bases due to poor accuracy (it was designed to carry nuke).


----------



## PeeD

I highly doubt that Chinese sold their special, terminally guided variants to the Saudis. Alone the benefit of a very much easier to operate solid fuel missile would be enough an argument.


----------



## Navigator

China sold to Saudi Arabia the early version of the DF-21 - without terminal guiding.


----------



## TheImmortal

Navigator said:


> China sold to Saudi Arabia the early version of the DF-21 - without terminal guiding.



GPS guidance kits are fairly easy to procure. All Saudi Arabia had to was pay their puppet Pakistan to modify the warheads with a guidance kit. Since the amount of missiles is relatively low (under 100), it can be done.


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## Russel

TheImmortal said:


> GPS guidance kits are fairly easy to procure. All Saudi Arabia had to was pay their puppet Pakistan to modify the warheads with a guidance kit. Since the amount of missiles is relatively low (under 100), it can be done.


It can not be that simple for Ballistic missile. It’s not air launched bomb or rocket! Pls study more. Thanks.


----------



## TheImmortal

Russel said:


> It can not be that simple for Ballistic missile. It’s not air launched bomb or rocket! Pls study more. Thanks.



I didn’t say it was easy, but Pakistan has extensive experience in Ballistic Missile warhead design/modification.

Saudi Arabia doesn’t have a shortage of cash to throw to have them design a better warhead guidance system.

Lastly, the DF-3 was seen as widely useless by SA during the first gulf war when a Saddam was firing SCUDs. SA knew the DF-3 poor accuracy ment it would cause high civilian casualties if it were used against Saddam. Hence why years later they opted for a more advanced missile (DF-21) to provide the ability to accurately target Iranian critical infrastructure in a period of war (oil facilities/air bases/etc).

The US allowed the sale as long as the missiles were modified to not allow to carry nuclear payload.

So I wouldn’t underestimate the DF-21’s that SA has.


----------



## raptor22

TheImmortal said:


> I didn’t say it was easy, but Pakistan has extensive experience in Ballistic Missile warhead design/modification.
> 
> Saudi Arabia doesn’t have a shortage of cash to throw to have them design a better warhead guidance system.
> 
> Lastly, the DF-3 was seen as widely useless by SA during the first gulf war when a Saddam was firing SCUDs. SA knew the DF-3 poor accuracy ment it would cause high civilian casualties if it were used against Saddam. Hence why years later they opted for a more advanced missile (DF-21) to provide the ability to accurately target Iranian critical infrastructure in a period of war (oil facilities/air bases/etc).
> 
> The US allowed the sale as long as the missiles were modified to not allow to carry nuclear payload.
> 
> So I wouldn’t underestimate the DF-21’s that SA has.


I have a Q ... Have you heard of any test or firing these missile in any sort of way? drill? by Saudis ? just showing them in a military parade ... how does it possible to have a weapon and never test it to see if it fits in bigger picture of your military doctrine against your arch enemy? or they did it but has not got public.


----------



## TheImmortal

raptor22 said:


> I have a Q ... Have you heard of any test or firing these missile in any sort of way? drill? by Saudis ? just showing them in a military parade ... how does it possible to have a weapon and never test it to see if it fits in bigger picture of your military doctrine against your arch enemy? or they did it but has not got public.



DF-21 is an extensively tested missile by China, so unlike brand new designs by Iran (Sejil-2). These missiles were already tested during development by China. 

Nonetheless, SA could have conducted routine tests and not announce it. In Iran’s case even if they don’t announce their own missile test, chances are US intelligence will detect it (even test engine burns) and announce it to the world to put pressure on Iran. However, given SA has a small amount of missiles it cannot test them extensively without depleting supply.

The missiles arent a big part of SA defense doctrine like it is for Iran. SA has US military umbrella and a very large airforce.

This was just SA trying to achieve deterrence with small amount of missiles. They want to be able to say to tell Iran “if you hit me, I will hit you”. SA will likely strike oil facilities and major high value targets. 

Without a major ABM system, Iran is currently very vulnerable to BM strikes. Luckily it is developing Bavar-373 to also be able to take an ABM role. However, it will eventually want to have a dedicated ABM system if it thinks SA is moving towards a domestic BM program.

Currently and in near future, SA cannot hope to engage Iran in a Missile war. Iran simply has a massive arsenal. Thus it is primarily for deterrence and strikes against HVT during a major escalation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

raptor22 said:


> I have a Q ... Have you heard of any test or firing these missile in any sort of way? drill? by Saudis ? just showing them in a military parade ... how does it possible to have a weapon and never test it to see if it fits in bigger picture of your military doctrine against your arch enemy? or they did it but has not got public.



Saudi DF-3's simply lack the accuracy to hit anything for example if they were to fire 20 of them at Shahid Beheshti Airbase 19 out of 20 will more likely than not fail to hit anything of worth and it's doubtful the Saudi's would wanna bother with the upkeep and training of a liquid fuel missile like that let alone an inaccurate one. 

Now DF-21's are a different story since they are solid fuel it is more likely the type of missile the Saudi's wanted to have to build Silo's around and most likely than not they paid the Americans to build them the Silo's and preprogram targets for them. (Basically Americans likely got paid to have a peak inside DF-21's & at the same time got to insure that the missiles only target Iran....) 
In that case the Americans likely simplified everything for them so they'd be able to launch them with limited personal, limited equipment and relatively basic training and in that case the missiles will have the accuracy to be useful against known fixed high value targets but at the end of the day Saudi's simply can't launch enough of them for it to be a game changer 
and at the same time the Americans will likely wanna ensure their continued fighter jet sales to Saudi Arabia (They'd likely make the total cost of a single launch so costly that it wouldn't make much sense for wide use....)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Saudis would use DF-21 as counter-value assets again cities.
I think they have phased out the DF-3 because they openly paraded their former most-strategic asset. Keeping personell trained on such liquids is difficult.

They have got two DF-21 variants, both almost certainly terminally unguided and not even able to make any corrections after boost termination.
As boost terminated solid, it would have a CEP of 300m in the best case, more likely 500-1000m.

They and Israeli MRBMs were the main reason why the IRGC did everything possible in the 90's to get the S-300... and they were more successful than many think.
Now with the PMU2 we have two systems protecting Tehran directly designed to intercept such DF-21 like missiles sold to the Saudis. As said, the DF-3 would be a more difficult target due to its higher speeds.

PS: Chinese do the difficult BM related work in Saudi Arabia.


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Saudis would use DF-21 as counter-value assets again cities.
> I think they have phased out the DF-3 because they openly paraded their former most-strategic asset. Keeping personell trained on such liquids is difficult.
> 
> They have got two DF-21 variants, both almost certainly terminally unguided and not even able to make any corrections after boost termination.
> As boost terminated solid, it would have a CEP of 300m in the best case, more likely 500-1000m.
> 
> They and Israeli MRBMs were the main reason why the IRGC did everything possible in the 90's to get the S-300... and they were more successful than many think.
> Now with the PMU2 we have two systems protecting Tehran directly designed to intercept such DF-21 like missiles sold to the Saudis. As said, the DF-3 would be a more difficult target due to its higher speeds.
> 
> PS: Chinese do the difficult BM related work in Saudi Arabia.



Peed you are a very knowledgeable member of the forum but I disagree.

1) SA changed from DF-3 due to accuracy issue and the fact they wished not to cause civilian casualties in Gulf War. SA using BMs to attack innocent civilians during Iran war would be TERRIBLE PRESS and possibly a war crime.

2) SA did not buy DF-21 till 2007, which invalidates your point that IRGC sought S-300 against it in the 90’s.

3) There is no version of DF-21 with “500-1000m” CEP. The prototype had 300m cep but was never mass produced.

DF-21-A in 1996 was mass produced and had CEP of 100-300M. By 2006 DF-21C was unveiled with a CEP of around 30 meters

Intresting enough a YEAR LATER, SA signs a deal with China. The missile they have in their possession is likely DF-21C. 

Iran Intelligence services likely knows the version beyond a reasonable doubt so that’s all that matters.


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> Peed you are a very knowledgeable member of the forum but I disagree.



Thanks, you are welcome to disagree.



TheImmortal said:


> 1) SA changed from DF-3 due to accuracy issue and the fact they wished not to cause civilian casualties in Gulf War. SA using BMs to attack innocent civilians during Iran war would be TERRIBLE PRESS and possibly a war crime.



After Iran got it's "counter-value" SCUD-Cs in the 80's, it could already retaliate against eastern Saudi Arabia if necessary. To counter that, Saudi Arabia wanted something that could strike Tehran in a counter-value "war of the cities" scenario.
I don't know how much they gave to the Chinese but it was enough to make them sell DF-3 MRBMs, especially after the "Nodong" Shahab-3 was on the horizon.

All of the missiles of that generation were for counter value purposes: If the enemy hit your civilians, you can hit theirs.
Fueling and setting up the DF-3 made it so vulnerable and difficult/costly to operate that Saudis just wanted something easier and more survivable. Compared to the 1000's meters magnitude CEP of the DF-3, the around 500m CEP of the DF-21 was of course a benefit.



TheImmortal said:


> 2) SA did not buy DF-21 till 2007, which invalidates your point that IRGC sought S-300 against it in the 90’s.



DF-3 and Jericho series were the reason for that.



TheImmortal said:


> 3) There is no version of DF-21 with “500-1000m” CEP. The prototype had 300m cep but was never mass produced.
> 
> DF-21-A in 1996 was mass produced and had CEP of 100-300M. By 2006 DF-21C was unveiled with a CEP of around 30 meters
> 
> Intresting enough a YEAR LATER, SA signs a deal with China. The missile they have in their possession is likely DF-21C.
> 
> Iran Intelligence services likely knows the version beyond a reasonable doubt so that’s all that matters.



The DF-21C has high strategic value for China, they would not even sell it or it's technology to Pakistan.
They sold higher solid booster technology to Pakistan e.g.

Physics tell us that DF-21A and Sejil-1/2 class solid fuel MRBMs which are unguided/uncorrected after RV separation/boost termination, can't hit more accurately than around 300m.
It is even well likely that the Chinese developed lower grade export variant of the DF-21A for the Saudis, plus what appears a reduced warhead variant to come closer to the DF-3 range class.
So they will never sell their current top technologies to a US-ally and they will develop special, downgraded variants or improved range variants.
In 2007 the Chinese likely got international ok to just keep Saudi capability level by selling them something equivalent to their DF-3 capability. That probably means no object attack capability, only area attack like the DF-3 (CEP towards 1000m), no longer range and no critical technologies like a large, single, flex-nozzle or even filament casings.

This fortunately means for Iran that what they got for defense against the DF-3 will remain effective against Saudi DF-21. The Chinese once broke a technology barrier by selling the Saudis the DF-3, and booster technology for the Shahin-2 to Pakistan... in 2007 as a more responsible China, they would avoid to break another strategic technology barrier.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> DF-3 is a 1970’s liquid rocket with very poor accuracy and likely has a predictable trajectory. So no it’s not “very hard” to intercept.



It's damn near an IRBM. Even if it does not manoeuvre, the very high speeds it reaches can make interception very difficult, especially when you're trying to do it with anti-aircraft missiles which likely don't have the specialised warheads and advanced electronics needed to intercept a ballistic missile. They're designed to deal with aircraft going at max mach 2, not mach 15+.



TheImmortal said:


> Lastly, your Israel example is preposterous in that it assumes Israel will nuke Iran which is just fantasy. Israel nuking Iran will be the end of Israel itself as Israel cannot survive a nuclear strike while Iran can survive several.



I'm just hypothesising. It's a capability that the enemy has, so it should be considered.



PeeD said:


> However it is likely that the DF-3 was already phased out



I've heard some reports of this, but I think I still see them at Saudi missile bases on google earth. They look like they're stored out in the open in conspicuous looking shelters. They could possibly be reactivated in the event of war.







20°42'13.85"N 45°35'39.31"E

These shelters could just be normal accommodation or support buildings, but they definitely look suspicious.



TheImmortal said:


> 1) SA changed from DF-3 due to accuracy issue and the fact they wished not to cause civilian casualties in Gulf War. SA using BMs to attack innocent civilians during Iran war would be TERRIBLE PRESS and possibly a war crime.



No-one didn't seem to mind when Saddam rained down Scuds on Tehran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Thanks, you are welcome to disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> After Iran got it's "counter-value" SCUD-Cs in the 80's, it could already retaliate against eastern Saudi Arabia if necessary. To counter that, Saudi Arabia wanted something that could strike Tehran in a counter-value "war of the cities" scenario.
> I don't know how much they gave to the Chinese but it was enough to make them sell DF-3 MRBMs, especially after the "Nodong" Shahab-3 was on the horizon.
> 
> All of the missiles of that generation were for counter value purposes: If the enemy hit your civilians, you can hit theirs.
> Fueling and setting up the DF-3 made it so vulnerable and difficult/costly to operate that Saudis just wanted something easier and more survivable. Compared to the 1000's meters magnitude CEP of the DF-3, the around 500m CEP of the DF-21 was of course a benefit.
> 
> 
> 
> DF-3 and Jericho series were the reason for that.
> 
> 
> 
> The DF-21C has high strategic value for China, they would not even sell it or it's technology to Pakistan.
> They sold higher solid booster technology to Pakistan e.g.
> 
> Physics tell us that DF-21A and Sejil-1/2 class solid fuel MRBMs which are unguided/uncorrected after RV separation/boost termination, can't hit more accurately than around 300m.
> It is even well likely that the Chinese developed lower grade export variant of the DF-21A for the Saudis, plus what appears a reduced warhead variant to come closer to the DF-3 range class.
> So they will never sell their current top technologies to a US-ally and they will develop special, downgraded variants or improved range variants.
> In 2007 the Chinese likely got international ok to just keep Saudi capability level by selling them something equivalent to their DF-3 capability. That probably means no object attack capability, only area attack like the DF-3 (CEP towards 1000m), no longer range and no critical technologies like a large, single, flex-nozzle or even filament casings.
> 
> This fortunately means for Iran that what they got for defense against the DF-3 will remain effective against Saudi DF-21. The Chinese once broke a technology barrier by selling the Saudis the DF-3, and booster technology for the Shahin-2 to Pakistan... in 2007 as a more responsible China, they would avoid to break another strategic technology barrier.



You make very good points.

However...

Russia has sold SU-35 to Bahrain, PAK-FA 5th gen technology to India, etc. but refuses to even sell SU-30 to Iran. Why? Because again Banana countries are not a threat to Russia or its arms industry. Same applies to China. Russia is in the process of selling highly advancd S-400 to Turkey (a major NATO country).

So yes China can sell Saudi Arabia advanced weaponry (export) versions of its air planes or BMs even though it’s a major US ally because it knows SA is a banana country that will not reverse engineer the technology. 

Whatever technology the export versions contains, China is well content for the US to examine to hearts desire. It’s the same if the US/Israel got its hands on Fateh-110 Missile. Just because you can see the underbelly of technology doesn’t mean you can stop it.

In the case of Iran and Pakistan, China does not have any assurances that this would not happen. Fundamentally it is one of the reasons (besides sanctions) that Russia/China do not engage in advanced arms deals with Iran. They know Iran is only after technology/design it hasn’t fully mastered on its own.


----------



## PeeD

You are right about that.
Saudis are far away from being able to make use of that technology given to them by the Chinese.

Surely Americans would also not learn or gain anything noteworthy by looking at those DF-21.

Russians also have problems with a too powerful Iran.
I think they would sell Iran Su-30's after the sanctions. The question is only if the huge efforts to copy the Su-30 would be the right choice or if continuing the path from simple systems to own complex ones is. In light of $200k, 2000km Ghadr BMs, some important aspects need to be re-assessed.


----------



## skyshadow

IRGC Commander: Iran Has Radars to Monitor Satellites in LEO

*"We have been able to build space-monitoring radars which monitor satellites in the LEO," General Salami said, addressing a forum in Tehran on Saturday.*
*
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13971008000711*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> IRGC Commander: Iran Has Radars to Monitor Satellites in LEO
> 
> *"We have been able to build space-monitoring radars which monitor satellites in the LEO," General Salami said, addressing a forum in Tehran on Saturday.
> 
> http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13971008000711*


probably its at least 10 years we have that


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> probably its at least 10 years we have that



yes and after that time they told us now. why is that?


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> yes and after that time they told us now. why is that?



They have said it many times. I remember during Ahmadenejad era, he went to radar space sites that were built to monitor Iran’s microsats and foreign sats.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> They have said it many times. I remember during Ahmadenejad era, he went to radar space sites that were built to monitor Iran’s microsats and foreign sats.


Exactly,there were pictures taken at a space tracking sight at delijan that was equipped with radar and telescopes,I think it was there that we saw one of the first pics of what was possibly an iranian aesa radar as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> yes and after that time they told us now. why is that?


I recall it from a TV news of those times , also when Iran managed to blind a USA satellite it was tell tell sign of existence of such capabilities .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

Sineva said:


>



funny part that people were blaming Ahamadi Nejas for being energetic .... now Hassan Rouhani goes to work at 9:00 and come back to his damn palace at 16:00 and all he is doing is LYING ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

OldTwilight said:


> funny part that people were blaming Ahamadi Nejas for being energetic .... now Hassan Rouhani goes to work at 9:00 and come back to his damn palace at 16:00 and all he is doing is LYING ...


the bulk of complaint against Ahmadinejad was not about him being workaholic , his problem was that he believed he is expert in every field and he didn't knew when to stay silent and just act instead of shouting what he want to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Hack-Hook said:


> the bulk of complaint against Ahmadinejad was not about him being workaholic , his problem was that he believed he is expert in every field and he didn't knew when to stay silent and just act instead of shouting what he want to do.


ahmad... a workaholic? are we talking about the same person? the person that refused to work for weeks over some stupid reasons?


----------



## Raghfarm007

Antarinejad did a lot of work.... but his works were entirely fukups. Secret jew.


----------



## OldTwilight

Hack-Hook said:


> the bulk of complaint against Ahmadinejad was not about him being workaholic , his problem was that he believed he is expert in every field and he didn't knew when to stay silent and just act instead of shouting what he want to do.



well after 6 years , all we have against sanctions is what he already did for first time , in short period of time and without any fuse ... 
people were more happier and have some hope for future but what about now !? 
nothing , absolutely nothing ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

OldTwilight said:


> well after 6 years , all we have against sanctions is what he already did for first time , in short period of time and without any fuse ...
> people were more happier and have some hope for future but what about now !?
> nothing , absolutely nothing ....


there was hope for future under ahmadinejad? that's why even khamenei told him not to run again and keeps his ministers as deposit?


----------



## TheImmortal

Ahmadinejad was just like Edrogan. Arrogant, corrupt, and self centered. Since he was a former IRGC, the IRGC did not stand in the way of his proposals or turn him into a lame duck president.

Even for IRI establishment the corruption during his time was beyond acceptable levels. Add that to the fact he tried to turn Iran back to Persian roots and his dispute with the Rahbar led to the end of hus political future.

No doubt this man like Edrogan was trying to cause an upheaval in the system so he could become a president for life.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> ahmad... a workaholic? are we talking about the same person? the person that refused to work for weeks over some stupid reasons?


yes the same person , he did strike for 10 day ,but when he was not on strike he some times worked well after midnight and he was among the first to come to work.



TheImmortal said:


> Ahmadinejad was just like Edrogan. Arrogant, corrupt, and self centered. Since he was a former IRGC, the IRGC did not stand in the way of his proposals or turn him into a lame duck president.



well he was former IRGC , but what you describe have nothing to do with being IRGC and is more a personal trait , Rezaee was also former IRGC ,Ghalibaf were also a Former IRGC ,but they are a lot more pragmatic and Far Far less self eccentric


----------



## Sineva

Interesting pics showing the detail differences between 2 mersad/kamsin tels





How many more differences can you spot?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> You are right about that.
> Saudis are far away from being able to make use of that technology given to them by the Chinese.
> 
> Surely Americans would also not learn or gain anything noteworthy by looking at those DF-21.
> 
> Russians also have problems with a too powerful Iran.
> I think they would sell Iran Su-30's after the sanctions. The question is only if the huge efforts to copy the Su-30 would be the right choice or if continuing the path from simple systems to own complex ones is. In light of $200k, 2000km Ghadr BMs, some important aspects need to be re-assessed.



As long as Iran militarily & economically remains weaker than Russia and remains a close partner of Russia's they wouldn't have a problem and wouldn't care how strong Iran's military gets especially if we don't build a massive nuclear stockpile and we don't try to copy Russian tech they do sell themselves without their permission the stronger Iran's military gets the better it would be for Russia especially after Syria Russia's lack of partners that were willing to go to bat with them is clearly a major weakness they would need to address and the only way the Russians can strengthen their block in the region is though Iran and naturally like U.S. allies they would want Iran to be more dependent on their tech but due to Iran's previous experience with the U.S. it' doubtful Iran would fall for that again so cooperation, joint projects & coproduction is the only way left when it comes to Iran and that's a pill the Russian's have had a hard time swallowing.
At the end of the day what's worse for Russian than a strong Iranian military is a weak Iranian military that can easily be occupied by the U.S. and a U.S. puppet state in Iran again 

As for the Su-30 I think if Iran technologically gets to a level that we can copy every aspect of the Su-30 and had the infrastructure to produce them then we wouldn't need to copy them at all and can simply design our own

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

SA6 based sam tel and fc radar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

What is Kamin-2? I read it is upgraded Mersad, but it looks totally different... Any footage of it being tested/launched/deployed?


----------



## Draco.IMF

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> What is Kamin-2? I read it is upgraded Mersad, but it looks totally different... Any footage of it being tested/launched/deployed?



its an Mobile Mersad Air Defence system with upgraded/modivied missiles....

take a look here, some discussions going on about the system

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-142

Analysis from member PeeD

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-143#post-10923315

Video:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Draco.IMF said:


> its an Mobile Mersad Air Defence system with upgraded/modivied missiles....
> 
> take a look here, some discussions going on about the system
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-142
> 
> Analysis from member PeeD
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-143#post-10923315
> 
> Video:


Thanks.

But I don't see same launcher, what is this then?


----------



## sanel1412

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> Thanks.
> 
> But I don't see same launcher, what is this then?
> 
> View attachment 534591
> View attachment 534592
> View attachment 534591


That is S-200 missile container for storage/transport

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

sanel1412 said:


> That is S-200 missile container for storage/transport


ah thank you. why are they parading ancient s-200 (not even s-200, its container!) still!? 

hopefully bavar 373 will be mass produced and replace s-200

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> ah thank you. why are they parading ancient s-200 (not even s-200, its container!) still!?
> 
> hopefully bavar 373 will be mass produced and replace s-200


I suppose because it looks fairly impressive in a parade,you`ve got the core stage plus the separate boosters as well.
Heres a pic of the boosters,there is a better one of them carried on angled mountings but sadly I couldnt find it.

As for bavar 373,well its no easy task to develop a sam system in the s300pmu2 class along with all its associated systems such as long range search and dedicated anti lo/vlo radars and possibly abm components as well,its a huge job and it takes time.Also we dont know if the funding has been cut for this sort of thing either under rouhanis regime.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Sineva said:


> I suppose because it looks fairly impressive in a parade,you`ve got the core stage plus the separate boosters as well.
> Heres a pic of the boosters,there is a better one of them carried on angled mountings but sadly I couldnt find it.
> 
> As for bavar 373,well its no easy task to develop a sam system in the s300pmu2 class along with all its associated systems such as long range search and dedicated anti lo/vlo radars and possibly abm components as well,its a huge job and it takes time.Also we dont know if the funding has been cut for this sort of thing either under rouhanis regime.


I think the s-200 with its boosters looks extremely outdated and ugly 

Bavar 373 they said finished testing a few months ago, hopefully announced next month

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> I think the s-200 with its boosters looks extremely outdated and ugly
> 
> Bavar 373 they said finished testing a few months ago, hopefully announced next month


Yes,its not very pretty is it?.Unfortunately back then with a liquid fueled main motor sam you needed a booster to get it up to speed quickly,and for a big missile like this using a large single rear mounted booster,such as the sa2,would`ve made it enormous.Interestingly at one point thats pretty much what the west thought that sa5/s200 was.
If you want to see the top contender for the title of the ugliest sam in the world it would have to be the british sea slug,indeed at first glance it can be hard to figure out which end is the pointy bit[lol!]




Hopefully bavar 373 will be unveiled soon,as its no small understatement to say that theres a hell of a lot riding on its success.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Any guess which AD system this is?
Sayyad?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> Any guess which AD system this is?
> Sayyad?



its Sayyad 2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

woooow. the containers of Sayyad _ 4 missiles in the Bavar 373 system are small for them.

* Bavar 373 air defense system *on the left poster loaded with its Sayyad _ 4 missiles.
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

I doubt Iranian military officials would be parading an old system like S200 unless they upgraded it. 



sanel1412 said:


> That is S-200 missile container for storage/transport

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> woooow. the containers of Sayyad _ 4 missiles in the Bavar 373 system are small for them.
> 
> * Bavar 373 air defense system *on the left poster loaded with its Sayyad _ 4 missiles.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Those Sayyad-4 probably just stick out of the container for testing purposes. Early testing usual takes place with a direct radar lock of the seeker on the target, only later on development the lock-on after launch feature becomes available.
So they probably just used a dated photo there.

As for the Ya-Zahra/Crotale on Mercedes trucks: I wonder why they still stick to the Crotale design.

I must say this designs offers some fundamental benefits that might even enable it to compete with the Pantsir or its claimed Iranian variation: Why?

- The truck on which it is based is cheap in overall system price and very reliable/low maintenance.
- It lacks a own search radar, so it remains passive up to attack or can use optical guidance.
- Pantsir can also remain passive if a higher IADS asset or another Pantsir is networked but each system costs more due to the own search radar.
- The advanced PESA radar of the Pantsir can engage 4 targets but is potentially much more expensive.
- If we assume that 4 Crotale are equivalent to a Pantsir in guidance channels and missiles carried, there is space for a realistic question whether 4 Ya-Zahra with its solid state mechanical antenna radar and miniaturized systems is not still cheaper. The PESA radar and the independent search radar for each vehicle are high cost items.
- A inherit feature of the Ya-Zahra would then of course be survivability: 4 fully automatic unmanned launchers which are operating passively, represent a significant increase in the ability of the system to take punishment.
- The Pantsir can only attack 4 targets coming from a 90° sector and has always just one optical channel for passive operation. The Crotale on the other hand offers 4 independent optical channels if we assume the 4 launcher = 1 Pantsir scenario.
- Its true that the Pantsir has also AAA, but AAA is also a must for the Ya-Zahra to take out targets that are not worth a missile such as slow moving drones.
- At least since the presentation of the Seraj AAA search optronic system we can expect that open radar emissions can be effectively avoided for such short range systems. A Seraj search optronic, 4 Ya-Zahra unmanned launchers, 2 Mesbah-2 AAA and a control post connected to upper IADS assets could in total still be cheaper than a single Pantsir, operate completely passively, be mobile and much more difficult to kill.

So at least if the goal is not the protection of moving mechanized formations, a serious cost-effect assessment may prove a 2019 Crotale based sytem to be the better choice.

A good example for the dynamics such complex topics can create.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> woooow. the containers of Sayyad _ 4 missiles in the Bavar 373 system are small for them.
> 
> * Bavar 373 air defense system *on the left poster loaded with its Sayyad _ 4 missiles.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



looks a bit like a reverse engineered TOR missile?


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> looks a bit like a reverse engineered TOR missile?


i do not know if its reverse engineered or not but it's a good candidate for Iranian Pantsir model.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

French Crotel missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> i do not know if its reverse engineered or not but it's a good candidate for Iranian Pantsir model.


There was at one point a serious consideration for an iranian pantsir equivalent,this went as far as an actual wind tunnel model that was developed around the same time as models for other sams.




We can see that just as with the original pantsir it is a 2 stage system comprised of a short ranged sam and a booster.Whats interesting is that the second stage sam component appears to be either based on or certainly inspired by the british rapier short ranged sam,which iran has in service.








Its probably one of the most compact radar guided sams ever built with excellent mobility,but strangely its one that iran doesnt appear to have done any real work on upgrading or improving despite all its possibilities,ie naval use,air mobility/portability,upgrading with e/o capabilities,etc...
Its a shame that iran never took the idea of an iranian pantsir,or better yet an iranian tunguska[8 pantsir type sams+2 30mm cannons] any further.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> There was at one point a serious consideration for an iranian pantsir equivalent,this went as far as an actual wind tunnel model that was developed around the same time as models for other sams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can see that just as with the original pantsir it is a 2 stage system comprised of a short ranged sam and a booster.Whats interesting is that the second stage sam component appears to be either based on or certainly inspired by the british rapier short ranged sam,which iran has in service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its probably one of the most compact radar guided sams ever built with excellent mobility,but strangely its one that iran doesnt appear to have done any real work on upgrading or improving despite all its possibilities,ie naval use,air mobility/portability,upgrading with e/o capabilities,etc...
> Its a shame that iran never took the idea of an iranian pantsir,or better yet an iranian tunguska[8 pantsir type sams+2 30mm cannons] any further.



*i think you mean this one*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *i think you mean this one*


Could well be,I wish we had a better pic of it,the proportions look a bit odd when its taken from that angle.
Just out of curiosity,what are those things in the first pic?.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Could well be,I wish we had a better pic of it,the proportions look a bit odd when its taken from that angle.
> Just out of curiosity,what are those things in the first pic?.



Bird cages

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> Just out of curiosity,what are those things in the first pic?.


Elements of Shahab radar. everywhere and nowhere!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Could well be,I wish we had a better pic of it,the proportions look a bit odd when its taken from that angle.
> Just out of curiosity,what are those things in the first pic?.


shahab radar.



TheImmortal said:


> Bird cages


 certainly its looks like it.



TheImmortal said:


> Bird cages



but if you are not satisfied, I have a much better radar for you.



TheImmortal said:


> Bird cages

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

That radar was visible on Google earth since more than a year, nice to see it unveiled now, time to talk about it:

First impression? Large 12m array which looks like to be based on the Gamma-DE. If true, it would be the first L-band phased array in Iran. A good to have large aperture EW system for the IRIADF.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> That radar was visible on Google earth since more than a year, nice to see it unveiled now, time to talk about it:
> 
> First impression? Large 12m array which looks like to be based on the Gamma-DE. If true, it would be the first L-band phased array in Iran. A good to have large aperture EW system for the IRIADF.



can we use it as a ballistic missile early warning radar?


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> can we use it as a ballistic missile early warning radar?



Yes. However it is not like the giant Israeli Green pine AESAs. With those low resolution photos for now I would say it is just a upscaled Moragheb radar but if it is really based on Gamma-DE technology and a AESA it would offer a good basis for a tactical BMEW radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Yes. However it is not like the giant Israeli Green pine AESAs. With those low resolution photos for now I would say it is just a upscaled Moragheb radar but if it is really based on Gamma-DE technology and a AESA it would offer a good basis for a tactical BMEW radar.



thanks. did you see the new ballistic missile? although I am guessing that its new because of the serial number on the missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

new radar: Najm_B AESA radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Yes, compared to the Najm-802 (or A) it has a smaller aperture, but probably more powerful elements. But main benefit is that it is now fully mobile. in effect a miniaturized Najm for the IRGC Sayyad-2 batteries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Jammer system for Anti-radar missiles.*










*Bashir AESA radar and Talash air defense system.*





























PeeD said:


> Yes, compared to the Najm-802 (or A) it has a smaller aperture, but probably more powerful elements. But main benefit is that it is now fully mobile. in effect a miniaturized Najm for the IRGC Sayyad-2 batteries.


Do you think it will replace Najm-802 completely?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

The Najm was Irans first AESA.
There may be a new variant with more powerful T/R elements to support a IRGC Sayyad-3 or Sadid-630 for ABM purposes. But for all other purposes the Najm-B is better because of its likely shoot and scoot capability.

My open source research showed me what revolutionary idea and design the Najm and its weapon, the Sayyad-2 was. It was Irans first own large SAM and the IRGC managed to build a great system with a AESA radar, back when Iran was just new to this discipline. They got a little help from a close country on the Najm, but it gave Iran an up to date and cost effective SAM system.

I give a hint: If the Najm-B achieves an angular accuracy like the Najm-A a shoot and scoot system will always be preferred for a tactical anti-air breathing SAM. But if long ranges require a larger aperture a upgraded Najm-A could have a comeback.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

New small missile of Sayyad/Taer family:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

Any info on the specs of the new radars such as range etc?



PeeD said:


> New small missile of Sayyad/Taer family:



Any other photos from this missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## un4given.1991

PeeD said:


> New small missile of Sayyad/Taer family:



“9 DEY“ missile ..Range 30 km






source: @Arteshban telegram channel

-------------------------------
Taer missile... range 105 km




source: military.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## un4given.1991

un4given.1991 said:


> “9 DEY“ missile ..Range 30 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source: @Arteshban telegram channel
> 
> -------------------------------
> Taer missile... range 105 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source: military.ir





> یکی دیگر از محصولات جالب توجه که برای نخستین بار در نمایشگاه دفاعی مصلی تهران رونمایی شده است، موشک پدافندی جدیدی با نام "موشک 9 دی" هست. به نظر می‌آید که این موشک گونه کوچک سازی شده موشک طائر یا صیاد-2 هست. برد 30 کیلومتری و قابلیت لینک شدن با سامانه‌های پدافندی طبس و سوم خرداد برای این موشک بیان شده است. مشخصات بیشتری از این موشک در دست نیست ولی چنانچه این موشک بصورت تیوب پرتاب بکارگیری شده و در هر آتشبار از سامانه‌های طبس و سوم خرداد حداقل یک واحد پرتابگر با تعداد مناسبی از این موشک منظور شود، برای دفاع از خود آتشبار دربرابر تهدیدات ارتفاع پست می‌تواند، بسیار مفید باشد. قبلا گفته شده است که هر آتشبار از سامانه‌های طبس و سوم خرداد از یک پرتابگر دارای رادار (تلار) تشکیل شده که با 4 پرتابگر بدون رادار (تل) لینک شده‌اند. می‌توان یکی از تلها را به موشک‌های مخصوص تهدیدات ارتفاع پست و برد کوتاه اختصاص داد. همچنین این موشک می‌تواند پلتفرم مناسبی برای توسعه موشک هوا به هوا هم باشد. .











--------


> در نمايشگاه اقتدار هوايي از يكي از مسئوليني كه احساس كردم در زمينه موتورهاي هوايي اطلاعاتي دارند از موتور rd33 سوال كردم كه ايا مهندسي معكوس شده يا كه خير اول طفره رفتن و صرفا گرفتن روي موتور كار ميشه پرسيدم چند ماه پيش سردار باقري حرف از موتور ملي جنگنده زدن كه ٩٨ درصد هم پيشرفت داشته منظورشون همون rd33 بوده يا موتور ديگه ايي؟؟ كه تاييد كردن منظور سردار rd33 بوده
> https://www.farsnews.com/amp/13970717001004


the new turbofan engine is RD-33
---------------



> موتور موشک هویزه هم توربوجته، وزیر دفاع چند وقتیه افتاده به ......... گفتن. اون از کرار و کوثر. موشکی که 2500 کیلومتر برد داره میگه 700!!! موتور توربوجت رو هم میگه توربوفن
> 
> 
> 
> 
> دیدم چند نفر هم درمورد سیمرغ (شاهد 171) خوشمزگی میکنن! اون نمونه ای که در نمایشگاه بود، اولین نمونه پروازی هست که چند سال آزمایشات رو انجام داد و کاملا طبیعیه که به اون روز بیوفته. همه ی سیستم ها و حتی موتور رو از روش باز کردن و فقط برای نمایشگاه ها کاربرد داره. جایگاه تسلیحاتی هم در این نمونه تعبیه نشده بود
> 
> 
> 
> 
> سرعت پهپاد شاهد 191 (با اسم قبلی صاعقه) هم 300 کیلومتر بر ساعت برد موشک فکور هم بین 110 تا 150 کیلومتر بسته به ارتفاع و شرایط پروازی


The Fakour air-to-air missile range is 110-150 km

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

un4given.1991 said:


> “
> the new turbofan engine is RD-33
> ---------------



I am confused here, they said the engine they are working on has a thrust of 34,000- 35,000 ib, that cannot be RD-33, unless they have also made a R/E version of rd-33 too. This makes sense, as we need something like RD-33 to help power our jet fighter, next gen UAV's etc in the meantime as we're working on this next gen engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

WinterNights said:


> I am confused here, they said the engine they are working on has a thrust of 34,000- 35,000 ib, that cannot be RD-33, unless they have also made a R/E version of rd-33 too. This makes sense, as we need something like RD-33 to help power our jet fighter, next gen UAV's etc in the meantime as we're working on this next gen engine.


It’s also be a strong enough engine to powered F-313 because why would a stealth jet using a fricking weak J-85?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

un4given.1991 said:


> --------
> 
> the new turbofan engine is RD-33
> ---------------
> 
> 
> The Fakour air-to-air missile range is 110-150 km



Ok, so the name is 9-Day. Could be the name of a new unknown Pantsir class system, it would fit the 3rd Khordad.

If its the name of the missile then it could also belong to the Sayyad family of canister launched SAMs, for that the equal high of fins and stakes would be a indicator.

Diameter is down from 390mm to something between 150-250mm similar to a AMRAAM probably.

Guidance looks like SARH which is a little expensive for a 30km range SAM as some may would say.
6 or even more would likely fit on a 3rd Khordad TEL.
Since the 3rd Khordad is such a popular and capable SAM with multi target engagement I expect this 9-Day to be the short range saturation attack component of a 3rd Khordad formation. If the new Taer-2 variant achieves 105km max. range then a short range component for low priority and low altitude CM targets would be very welcome.

The 3rd Khordad is the shooting star of Iranian air defense technology and the 9-Day would be a perfect short range component.

Note that the new TELAR seems to have a added camera for passive engagement or verifying of correct target engaged.

@WinterNights 

Iran first needs a copy of something larger than the Owj into running serial production. The own design of a 12-14t thrust class engine will need time and is veeery ambitious. If tested successfully, the production line would be ready to switch to it after some years RD-33 production

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> Ok, so the name is 9-Day. Could be the name of a new unknown Pantsir class system, it would fit the 3rd Khordad.
> 
> If its the name of the missile then it could also belong to the Sayyad family of canister launched SAMs, for that the equal high of fins and stakes would be a indicator.
> 
> Diameter is down from 390mm to something between 150-250mm similar to a AMRAAM probably.
> 
> Guidance looks like SARH which is a little expensive for a 30km range SAM as some may would say.
> 6 or even more would likely fit on a 3rd Khordad TEL.
> Since the 3rd Khordad is such a popular and capable SAM with multi target engagement I expect this 9-Day to be the short range saturation attack component of a 3rd Khordad formation. If the new Taer-2 variant achieves 105km max. range then a short range component for low priority and low altitude CM targets would be very welcome.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad is the shooting star of Iranian air defense technology and the 9-Day would be a perfect short range component.
> 
> Note that the new TELAR seems to have a added camera for passive engagement or verifying of correct target engaged.
> 
> @WinterNights
> 
> Iran first needs a copy of something larger than the Owj into running serial production. The own design of a 12-14t thrust class engine will need time and is veeery ambitious. If tested successfully, the production line would be ready to switch to it after some years RD-33 production




I have been looking forward to something like this missile which can be used en mass to defend against saturation attacks. This missile, combined with that pantsir like missile should be a great defence against swarm attacks.

I wonder if this missile will replace the Mersad systems?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> New small missile of Sayyad/Taer family:



is this not the missile used in the new mobile Mersad/Hawk ("Kamin-2") system?


----------



## PeeD

@WinterNights 

The missile @Draco.IMF showed, what we call Kamin-2 is what is used with the Mersad, a missile that at least distantly belongs to the Sayyad family.
9-Day is something new, smaller and most likely for 3rd Khordad family.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> @WinterNights
> 
> The missile @Draco.IMF showed, what we call Kamin-2 is what is used with the Mersad, a missile that at least distantly belongs to the Sayyad family.
> 9-Day is something new, smaller and most likely for 3rd Khordad family.



ok, i thouht this 9-Day is the missile belonging to Kamin-2
So many unveilings the last days we see is astonishing.
I have a gutfeeling they let the best unveiling (B-373) will come at last, lets hope in some days....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> @WinterNights
> 
> The missile @Draco.IMF showed, what we call Kamin-2 is what is used with the Mersad, a missile that at least distantly belongs to the Sayyad family.
> 9-Day is something new, smaller and most likely for 3rd Khordad family.



I am starting to lose track of all these missiles. It feels like it was only yesterday that we were dreaming of a good Iranian air defence systems. Today there's too many to name

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

So this are the Crotale (Herz-9) mounted on a Mercedes truck:







Why they are not puting a radar on it like Pantsir has, imagine this one mounted on the mercedes truck:






is it because Iran dont has this technology our it would be a too costly system?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

Draco.IMF said:


> So this are the Crotale (Herz-9) mounted on a Mercedes truck:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why they are not puting a radar on it like Pantsir has, imagine this one mounted on the mercedes truck:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is it because Iran dont has this technology our it would be a too costly system?



I suppose to bring down cost. Recent Israeli strikes has thought Iran value lessons. Small Diameter munitions can strike cheaply at 10s of kilometers away. I suppose Iran wants to reduce cost of loss by making assets cheaper while mobile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Such continuous emitting search radars are the reason why the Syrian Pantsir received a saturation attack by Israeli anti-radar suicide drone.

You want to have something passive if possible to avoid attracting such weapons.

Today Iran can use IIR cameras of high performance to search for targets and submit them to individual YZ-3 launchers for attack. If you stay passive and don't turn on the flashlight you survive more likely.

When original Pantsir was developed appropriate IIR cameras were either not available or too expensive. This is somewhat recent technology that came up in the west in the 90's, Russians and Chinese got in the 2000's and Iran in this decade, roughly speaking.

There is no doubt that a radar like the Pantsirs offers higher situational awareness and easier management when facing a saturation attack. But a system in the protected center should do that, like the Bashir, around it passive systems such as a Seraj-YZ hybrid would be the best way.
Iran understood this principle with the Raad SAM system which removed the search radar of the SA-7 "staight flush" to replace it with IIR search system.
Going the path of the most up to date technology without old habits or traditions is the way for something really new.

The IIR cameras available to Iran today, should be a magnitude cheaper than a PESA search radar on the Pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## mohsen

Baby missile:

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## YeBeWarned

Is iran using any of these AD system in Syria ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

mohsen said:


> Baby missile:



the smallest one is the 9-Day missile i assume

As @PeeD mentioned, its possible 6 of them could be placed on the 3rd Khordad system
Missile positioning could look similar to the Buk M3 (with or without canisters)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

More good news: There is a 35mm AHEAD round among the shells, the IRIADF needs that since they have no Mesbah-2 like AAA ("CIWS").

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Draco.IMF said:


> the smallest one is the 9-Day missile i assume
> 
> As @PeeD mentioned, its possible 6 of them could be placed on the 3rd Khordad system
> Missile positioning could look similar to the Buk M3 (with or without canisters)


Yes,the 9K317M Viking would be a very good model for future raad/3rd khordad upgrades or even a spin off system of its own.
Interestingly the russian have produced another short ranged sam,the sosna,which appears to be somewhat modeled on the pantsir,but to use laser guidance rather than sar.I wonder if this was because of the claimed mediocre performance of the pantsir in syria?
Something for iran to look at I think,interestingly there are multiple claims that iran either had or still does have the Swedish rbs70 which is a laser guided manpad,tho I have never actually seen any proof of this,but some accurate sources reported the sale so....







PeeD said:


> More good news: There is a 35mm AHEAD round among the shells, the IRIADF needs that since they have no Mesbah-2 like AAA ("CIWS").


What about all the flak zwilling type systems that were built and deployed in the early to mid 2000s?.




Or the mesbah 1




Who operates these systems then?,you`d think that gun based systems like these would be used in huge numbers by the adf,virtually its backbone in fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Waiting for Bavar 373... 5 days left!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> So this are the Crotale (Herz-9) mounted on a Mercedes truck:


yes, because of need for the mass production Herz-9, our military tuck producer cannot produce such high quantity truck in 4 mouths or year in big numbers so M.O.D needed to finsh the contract which they had, so the only posible option they had was to find big number of truck which was Mercedes



Draco.IMF said:


> Why they are not puting a radar on it like Pantsiris it because Iran dont has this technology our it would be a too costly system?



no is not because of technology we already have the radar technology and much better one.
it because the Herz-9,is inactive passive system and it is designed to withstand any electronic jamming or warfare and no radiation or signal or radar signature should be in system to keep it as inactive system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Sineva said:


> Yes,the 9K317M Viking would be a very good model for future raad/3rd khordad upgrades or even a spin off system of its own.
> Interestingly the russian have produced another short ranged sam,the sosna,which appears to be somewhat modeled on the pantsir,but to use laser guidance rather than sar.I wonder if this was because of the claimed mediocre performance of the pantsir in syria?
> Something for iran to look at I think,interestingly there are multiple claims that iran either had or still does have the Swedish rbs70 which is a laser guided manpad,tho I have never actually seen any proof of this,but some accurate sources reported the sale so....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about all the flak zwilling type systems that were built and deployed in the early to mid 2000s?.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or the mesbah 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who operates these systems then?,you`d think that gun based systems like these would be used in huge numbers by the adf,virtually its backbone in fact.



Good point, the reasons for Sosna development explains everything about passive system strategy.
The laser beam guidance is more jam proof than radar guidance but the YZ/Herz-9 can use a mode in which it does not track the target but uses radar-beam-riding mode. That mode is the same as the Sosna, just done by radar instead of laser.

Sosna on the other hand does not to have an as effective search IIR system as the Seraj.
A issue with the YZ/Herz-9 is that it uses a kinematically dated missile that is not on pair with the very fast missiles on the Pantsir and Sosna. But on the other hand, the Crotale missile might be a good design because of cost effectiveness and use of economic materials and techniques. For use against PGMs/CMs, the Gs a Crotale missile can pull might be really sufficient.
But that windtunnel model showed that Iran is working on a kinematically strong missile.
I really like the Sosna design its like a YZ-3 with more, (more) lethal missiles and laser instead of radar, both are single target passive systems.

As for the Mesbah series: They are in service foremost with IRGC. The IRIADF favors and keeps 35mm guns and here a AHEAD round has the potential to make it as potent as the Mesbah series.
The Mesbah series was the anti-CM/PGM backbone of the IRGC and an amazing system/concept back then. But AHEAD concept may prove more cost effective and lethal.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

[QUOTE = "Draco.IMF, post: 11151058, member: 166252"] Voici donc la Crotale (Herz-9) montée sur un camion Mercedes:






Pourquoi ils ne mettent pas un radar dessus comme Pantsir, imaginez celui-ci monté sur le camion Mercedes:






Est-ce parce que l'Iran n'a pas cette technologie, ce serait un système trop coûteux? [/ QUOTE]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Good point, the reasons for Sosna development explains everything about passive system strategy.
> The laser beam guidance is more jam proof than radar guidance but the YZ/Herz-9 can use a mode in which it does not track the target but uses radar-beam-riding mode. That mode is the same as the Sosna, just done by radar instead of laser.
> 
> Sosna on the other hand does not to have an as effective search IIR system as the Seraj.
> A issue with the YZ/Herz-9 is that it uses a kinematically dated missile that is not on pair with the very fast missiles on the Pantsir and Sosna. But on the other hand, the Crotale missile might be a good design because of cost effectiveness and use of economic materials and techniques. For use against PGMs/CMs, the Gs a Crotale missile can pull might be really sufficient.
> But that windtunnel model showed that Iran is working on a kinematically strong missile.
> I really like the Sosna design its like a YZ-3 with more, (more) lethal missiles and laser instead of radar, both are single target passive systems.
> 
> As for the Mesbah series: They are in service foremost with IRGC. The IRIADF favors and keeps 35mm guns and here a AHEAD round has the potential to make it as potent as the Mesbah series.
> The Mesbah series was the anti-CM/PGM backbone of the IRGC and an amazing system/concept back then. But AHEAD concept may prove more cost effective and lethal.



How many simultaneous engagement can such systems achieve?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> How many simultaneous engagement can such systems achieve?



Theoretically 2 but effectively 1. 2-3 may be possible with a compact but more expansive laser complex such as the twin Kornet launcher Iran has developed, albeit that is just multi-round, not multi-target.

But the passiveness of a battery of this systems allow them to stay intact and attack with their single channel for longer periods. YZ/Herz-9 are not completely passive during the engagement tough, but very hard to detect.

The best tactic is to spread them around and have anti-saturation systems such as the Pantsir protecting central high value targets such as SAM search radars that on the other hand provide early warning for the passive systems. Hence passive will degrade numbers of attacking weapons/platforms and what goes trough is intercepted by a Pantsir multi-channel system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Good point, the reasons for Sosna development explains everything about passive system strategy.
> The laser beam guidance is more jam proof than radar guidance but the YZ/Herz-9 can use a mode in which it does not track the target but uses radar-beam-riding mode. That mode is the same as the Sosna, just done by radar instead of laser.
> 
> Sosna on the other hand does not to have an as effective search IIR system as the Seraj.
> A issue with the YZ/Herz-9 is that it uses a kinematically dated missile that is not on pair with the very fast missiles on the Pantsir and Sosna. But on the other hand, the Crotale missile might be a good design because of cost effectiveness and use of economic materials and techniques. For use against PGMs/CMs, the Gs a Crotale missile can pull might be really sufficient.
> But that windtunnel model showed that Iran is working on a kinematically strong missile.
> I really like the Sosna design its like a YZ-3 with more, (more) lethal missiles and laser instead of radar, both are single target passive systems.
> 
> As for the Mesbah series: They are in service foremost with IRGC. The IRIADF favors and keeps 35mm guns and here a AHEAD round has the potential to make it as potent as the Mesbah series.
> The Mesbah series was the anti-CM/PGM backbone of the IRGC and an amazing system/concept back then. But AHEAD concept may prove more cost effective and lethal.



do you mean a missile like this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

The one problem with a laser based system is bad weather,ie fog,low cloud,rain,this was supposedly the reason why the us cancelled its plans to buy the impressive ADATS system,tho its just as likely that the end of the cld war itself had a lot to do with it.This system was quite unique in that it was dual use,and that it could be used as a heavyweight long ranged antitank missile and a short ranged beam riding supersonic sam.The new russian sosna reminds me a lot of this system in its look and layout,tho its a sam only and the sams appear smaller and possibly 2 stage like the pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> do you mean a missile like this?


That does appear to be a rapier sam,radar guided.However you could probably convert this to infrared guidance or laser guidance possibly just by frankensteining it with components from other weapons systems,tho that would likely just be as a test of concept sort of thing.As a radar guided sam its one of the most compact systems ever made and you could probably make it even more compact if you used folding fins and encapsulation for the missiles.
I`m actually surprised the navy didnt look at adapting these for use on its blue water ships.
The modernised system is a bit larger but still very compact all things considered.
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111643

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Sineva said:


> The one problem with a laser based system is bad weather,ie fog,low cloud,rain,this was supposedly the reason why the us cancelled its plans to buy the impressive ADATS system,tho its just as likely that the end of the cld war itself had a lot to do with it.This system was quite unique in that it was dual use,and that it could be used as a heavyweight long ranged antitank missile and a short ranged beam riding supersonic sam.The new russian sosna reminds me a lot of this system in its look and layout,tho its a sam only and the sams appear smaller and possibly 2 stage like the pantsir.



That's indeed a good point in favor for radio command. But statistically these weather conditions would not be a K.O criteria for Iran.

However Iran uses YZ/Herz-9 a radio guidance system that can operate without a track, send-only (in cases where jamming breaks the lock).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


>







What happened to the rest of the tel,is it partially invisible?[lol!]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> What happened to the rest of the tel,is it partially invisible?[lol!]


lool. i think for security reasons they deleted half of the photo.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

Sineva said:


> What happened to the rest of the tel,is it partially invisible?[lol!]




iran has mastered stealth technology and taken it to the next level!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> iran has mastered stealth technology and taken it to the next level!



I would not say that we mastered stealth technology yet, but we are surely have reached very good places. the era of trying to reach the rest of world in technology has come to an end. we came to a place where we can compete with the world powers in many sectors. Iran in many sectors no longer needs to copy or reverse engineer technology anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> What happened to the rest of the tel,is it partially invisible?[lol!]


Actually in all honesty for a moment there I thought I was looking at one of those semi fixed positions where the trailer part of sam tel is parked minus its prime mover,you see the americans do this a lot with the patriot and the russians have started offering the option with the latest s300/400 tels they`re using.
So I just assumed this might be the iranian version for use in semi permanent fixed positions.....but then I realised it was waaay too short[lol!]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Actually in all honesty for a moment there I thought I was looking at one of those semi fixed positions where the trailer part of sam tel is parked minus its prime mover,you see the americans do this a lot with the patriot and the russians have started offering the option with the latest s300/400 tels they`re using.
> So I just assumed this might be the iranian version for use in semi permanent fixed positions.....but then I realised it was waaay too short[lol!]


And way too blurred at lathe left side of the vehicle .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## scythian500

Hack-Hook said:


> And way too blurred at lathe left side of the vehicle .


and the fences on the left seem to be copy/pasted to conceal something... whats that?


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

scythian500 said:


> and the fences on the left seem to be copy/pasted to conceal something... whats that?


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

Sayyad-4 seems pretty huge. My guess for range will be 250-300km?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

WinterNights said:


> Sayyad-4 seems pretty huge. My guess for range will be 250-300km?


Probably up to 200km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> Probably up to 200km



That's a little too low in my opinion. The sayyad-3 has a range around 120-150km, sayyad-4 is considerably larger.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Cmon Bavar, we are waiting, dont disappoint us....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

WinterNights said:


> That's a little too low in my opinion. The sayyad-3 has a range around 120-150km, sayyad-4 is considerably larger.


sayyad 3 is 120km, s-300's best missile is 200km so matching that would be a huge achievement (depending on the missiles' other specs)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Persian Gulf 1906 said:


> sayyad 3 is 120km, s-300's best missile is 200km so matching that would be a huge achievement (depending on the missiles' other specs)



If sayyad-4's range is anything less than 250km I would be suprised. S-300 missiles, although upgraded are still old. Given Iran's advancement in materials and solid fuel and the size of sayyad-4, a 200km range would surprise me. I would not be "upset", as 200km is still a good capability, but still. My bet is on a range between 250-300.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

WinterNights said:


> If sayyad-4's range is anything less than 250km I would be suprised. S-300 missiles, although upgraded are still old. Given Iran's advancement in materials and solid fuel and the size of sayyad-4, a 200km range would surprise me. I would not be "upset", as 200km is still a good capability, but still. My bet is on a range between 250-300.


sayyad 2 is based on pretty old tech and I'd rather Iran built a more advanced/faster 200km range sayyad-4 than a just upgraded range version of sayyad 3

hopefully we'll find out soon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No, no and no !! The orange is not missile Sayyad 4 . The white missile is other things! It's up to you!

This is the sayyad 3

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

I really don't understand why some of the Sayyad systems only have 2 instead of 4 canisters.



skyshadow said:


>



We already have some idea of what the Bavar system is going to look like. Take a look at the picture on the left.


Draco.IMF said:


> Cmon Bavar, we are waiting, dont disappoint us....








more pics


----------



## skyshadow

sha ah said:


> I really don't understand why some of the Sayyad systems only have 2 instead of 4 canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> We already have some idea of what the Bavar system is going to look like. Take a look at the picture on the left.
> 
> View attachment 538528
> 
> 
> more pics
> View attachment 538535
> View attachment 538536
> View attachment 538537
> View attachment 538538



me too. maybe they want it to be expand throughout the country i mean Destroying a 2-launcher system is better than destroying an 4-launcher system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

sha ah said:


> I really don't understand why some of the Sayyad systems only have 2 instead of 4 canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> We already have some idea of what the Bavar system is going to look like. Take a look at the picture on the left.
> 
> View attachment 538528
> 
> 
> more pics
> View attachment 538535
> View attachment 538536
> View attachment 538537
> View attachment 538538


Old photos we already know that


----------



## skyshadow

*IDF cyber chief: Iran tried to hack missile-alert system*

*https://www.jns.org/idf-cyber-chief-iran-tried-to-hack-missile-alert-system/*


----------



## sanel1412

sha ah said:


> I really don't understand why some of the Sayyad systems only have 2 instead of 4 canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> We already have some idea of what the Bavar system is going to look like. Take a look at the picture on the left.
> 
> View attachment 538528
> 
> 
> more pics
> View attachment 538535
> View attachment 538536
> View attachment 538537
> View attachment 538538


Bavar 373 and other long range systems used against all targets(from low flying objects to high atlitude targets) must use 2 or even 3 different missiles because you can't built missile with excellent performanse for all targets,thus it is metter of price,design..etc...long range missiles needs to be much faster and have boosters..etc...any way point is large missile wights more..that could be one reason why some lunchers have 2 containers..but mostly it depend from system performance and deployment formation...for example 1 BUK system can control 4 lanchers and in same time it can target 4 targets while track 24....So BUK battery/system has 4 TELs but require only one to has radar attached on TEL...that is why you can see in one baterry some BUK(also Iranian RA'AD family) TELs without radars....Now you can use different configuration..but what really is important is how many targets it can aim and rarget in same time..how many can track...Bottom point is..that luncher is not airdefence system and it will never be deployed as standalone..instead it will be deployed in some formation..lowest one is battery and how many quad or twin lunchers will be deployed depends on system perfomanse,deployed missiles and formation....also most of those TELs can be used in twin and quad configuration at same time since containers can be attached independently(I can show you images of s-300 with only one canister..but it is quad luncher still) but I suppose there will be few different TELs because of missile size since bavar will have ABM component.....if they matched S-300PMU2 perfomanse and system will be ABM capable it means it canengage 12 targets(or more) in same time and it will use probably 3 different missiles..I'm expecting we will see one short range missile soon and with 2 we already saw it would be 3 different missiles for Bavar 373.
Now since it can engage 12 targets in same time they can use different formation deployemnts..6x4 would be logic and it is also standard S-300 deployment when not deployed at higher level formation..but they can also use s-300VM formation and add twin lunchers with ABM missiles or even use some own deployment formation..who knows.....it deppends from million factors...For example even in Russian military army doesn't follow air defense formation deployment because their situation,goals and needs are different..for example army deploy S-300vm as puk and s-300V is originaly designed for army...And again,to most of those lunchers,currently with 2 containers,4 missile containers can be attached just like PAC2...


----------



## skyshadow




----------



## PeeD

Some good and quite significant news from the Eghtedar 40 exhibition:
In the field of ESM we should soon see important developments.
Iran has already at least two generations of passive DF and triangulation systems, famous is the IRGC-ASF Alim mast mounted system.
But a new generation of assets is been developed:

An Avtobaza-M like system seems to add up to the Russian original and previous Iranian "passive radars".

The SPN-4-like Saeghe jammer will get a two companions, resembling the Krasukha-2 and Krasukha-4.

So the ELINT "passive radar" capability of the overall IADS will be further improved and in the fields of ground based jammers three potent will degrade enemy capabilities via soft means.

A high capability and serious IADS needs all those assets and Iran is working towards that.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Blue In Green

Still no full Bavar-373 reveal?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Still no full Bavar-373 reveal?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Persian Gulf 1906

WinterNights said:


> If sayyad-4's range is anything less than 250km I would be suprised. S-300 missiles, although upgraded are still old. Given Iran's advancement in materials and solid fuel and the size of sayyad-4, a 200km range would surprise me. I would not be "upset", as 200km is still a good capability, but still. My bet is on a range between 250-300.


i knew it was 200km

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Can anyone give me a translation of whats written on the poster?,is it system specifications/capabilities?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sineva said:


> Can anyone give me a translation of whats written on the poster?,is it system specifications/capabilities?


Yeah a few specs that we've already known. Range 75 km, Engagement altitude 27 km, capability of engaging 4 targets simultaneously.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jäger

is there any chance of Iran getting the S-400 or is it not going to happen because of the Bavar 373 development?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Bundeswehr said:


> is there any chance of Iran getting the S-400 or is it not going to happen because of the Bavar 373 development?


I`d say theres none at all.
These days iran seems thoroughly committed to the development and production of indigenous air defence systems and all of their associated systems and hardware.Frankly it honestly wouldnt surprise me if the existing s300pmu2s that iran eventually received from the russians were either going to be phased out or passed on to the syrians once iran has enough bavar 373s in service to meet all of its long range ad needs.
Ironically all of this indigenous ad development was in no small measure brought about due to the complete political and economic unreliability of the russians during the s300 debacle,tho in truth this was merely the latest in a continuing long line of such behavior by the russians.
Ultimately this sort of stupid game playing by both the russians and the west achieved virtually nothing for them in the long term.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> I`d say theres none at all.
> These days iran seems thoroughly committed to the development and production of indigenous air defence systems and all of their associated systems and hardware.Frankly it honestly wouldnt surprise me if the existing s300pmu2s that iran eventually received from the russians were either going to be phased out or passed on to the syrians once iran has enough bavar 373s in service to meet all of its long range ad needs.
> Ironically all of this indigenous ad development was in no small measure brought about due to the complete political and economic unreliability of the russians during the s300 debacle,tho in truth this was merely the latest in a continuing long line of such behavior by the russians.
> Ultimately this sort of stupid game playing by both the russians and the west achieved virtually nothing for them in the long term.



Lol phase out an S-300? That’s a good one. Considering Iran still hasn’t phased out the S-200.

Iran will likely pass on S-400, but could be interest in S-500/S-600 as they are made to intercept BMs and Hypersonic vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Lol phase out an S-300? That’s a good one. Considering Iran still hasn’t phased out the S-200.
> 
> Iran will likely pass on S-400, but could be interest in S-500/S-600 as they are made to intercept BMs and Hypersonic vehicles.


Thats because at the moment the s200 is the sole long range sam system that iran has in service despite both its obvious age and the fact that the countermeasures to it have been available to the west for literally decades.I`ve little doubt that once iran has enough indigenous systems in service ie bavar,sayyad,mersad,raad etc.. both it and the remaining older legacy and post cold war systems will be retired,simply because the ability of the older systems are marginal,but that also in the case of the newer systems like the s300 one simply doesnt know what "optional extras" the russians may have installed without irans knowledge,not to mention of course that the west has access to the older models of the s300 right up to at least the pmu1 and will undoubtedly also acquire plenty of data on the s400 once the saudis and turks get theirs [eventually].Lastly theres also the basic well known unreliability of the russians when it comes to after market support and back up for their products,and one could also mention the rather shall we say "uninspiring" performance of the russian sams in syria,tho how much of that was actually due to the systems themselves versus the syrians competence is hard to discern.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Sineva said:


> Thats because at the moment the s200 is the sole long range sam system that iran has in service despite both its obvious age and the fact that the countermeasures to it have been available to the west for literally decades.I`ve little doubt that once iran has enough indigenous systems in service ie bavar,sayyad,mersad,raad etc.. both it and the remaining older legacy and post cold war systems will be retired,simply because the ability of the older systems are marginal,but that also in the case of the newer systems like the s300 one simply doesnt know what "optional extras" the russians may have installed without irans knowledge,not to mention of course that the west has access to the older models of the s300 right up to at least the pmu1 and will undoubtedly also acquire plenty of data on the s400 once the saudis and turks get theirs [eventually].Lastly theres also the basic well known unreliability of the russians when it comes to after market support and back up for their products,and one could also mention the rather shall we say "uninspiring" performance of the russian sams in syria,tho how much of that was actually due to the systems themselves versus the syrians competence is hard to discern.



Iran does not need S-400 and you will see why at the official presentation of Bavar-373. Iran is fully capable of making its own high-powered air defense systems .. FALSE, the S-200 system and the S-300PMU do not have the only long-range air defense system. The Talash system has also become a long-range system with its Sayyad3 missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

March already, b373 by any chance??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> March already, b373 by any chance??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Bavar-373 is functionally ready (which is what really matters), they just have not revealed it fully yet. Look at Fateh submarine, Iran will not reveal these strategic systems until they have passed all their rigorous tests up to high standards. Bavar has passed all such tests and is very close to its fully unveil date.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

"end of current Iranian year" could be next possible date of unveiling, but I have doubts, we will see....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

I don't understand why people are so eager to have to see bavar be shows to public? Who cares when they unveil it as long as it is ready? They're probably now focused on working on readying the mass production factories before officially unveiling it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

WinterNights said:


> Bavar-373 is functionally ready (which is what really matters), they just have not revealed it fully yet. Look at Fateh submarine, Iran will not reveal these strategic systems until they have passed all their rigorous tests up to high standards. Bavar has passed all such tests and is very close to its fully unveil date.



yeah, take the sublaunched missile for example which was shown some days ago
there were pictures of this model in a tube dated back to 2012!, but we only saw it now, 6-7 years later....
so it could be same with B-373, its already functional but we have to wait some more years to see it in public



WinterNights said:


> I don't understand why people are so eager to have to see bavar be shows to public?



because we have waited so long and we would love to see this beast in action 

And B-373 is not a weapon like any other one, its THE weapon which could reshape the middle east, a truly gamechanger....so yeah, thats the reason why we are crazy about it

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

Draco.IMF said:


> yeah, take the sublaunched missile for example which was shown some days ago
> there were pictures of this model in a tube dated back to 2012!, but we only saw it now, 6-7 years later....
> so it could be same with B-373, its already functional but we have to wait some more years to see it in public



Yes, we just need to be happy in the fact that it is ready. I much rather see it unveiled once they have actually started the mass production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> yeah, take the sublaunched missile for example which was shown some days ago
> there were pictures of this model in a tube dated back to 2012!, but we only saw it now, 6-7 years later....
> so it could be same with B-373, its already functional but we have to wait some more years to see it in public
> 
> 
> 
> because we have waited so long and we would love to see this beast in action
> 
> And B-373 is not a weapon like any other one, its THE weapon which could reshape the middle east, a truly gamechanger....so yeah, thats the reason why we are crazy about it



B-373 will not reshape the Middle East any more than Turkey or Saudi Arabia will reshape the Middle East by having the S-400.

It’s an air defense system (first generation) people, not a 6th gen AI powered terminator.

It will at least protect Iran’s skies better and make it more costly for air strikes.

But let me tell you this, prior to civil war Syria had one of the densest and protected air defense of any country even Iran at the time per US generals. And yet Israel was still able to strike all the way inside Deir-ez-Zor nuclear reactor.


----------



## Tokhme khar

That so called Syrian reactor strike was carried out by the IDF using Turkish airspace.

And no shit, Syria was not expecting it from that direction.



TheImmortal said:


> B-373 will not reshape the Middle East any more than Turkey or Saudi Arabia will reshape the Middle East by having the S-400.
> 
> It’s an air defense system (first generation) people, not a 6th gen AI powered terminator.
> 
> It will at least protect Iran’s skies better and make it more costly for air strikes.
> 
> But let me tell you this, prior to civil war Syria had one of the densest and protected air defense of any country even Iran at the time per US generals. And yet Israel was still able to strike all the way inside Deir-ez-Zor nuclear reactor.


----------



## TheImmortal

Tokhme khar said:


> That so called Syrian reactor strike was carried out by the IDF using Turkish airspace.
> 
> And no shit, Syria was not expecting it from that direction.



Baloney. Only a foolish idiot would expect Israel to fly right through the heart of Syria and Syrian air defenses to get to eastern Syria.

There were only two viable options through Jordan and up the right side or from the Mediterranean through Lebanon and the Turkish border.

Your logic is also flawed because Syrian longer range radars can pick up any Israeli F-16’s leaving Israeli airspace and track through Lebanon and Turkey. Syria has/had plenty of radars stationed on Turkish side as the heart of Alawite territory is runs along the coast.

The raid was actually more complex then that and included blinding radar points and jamming.

The real answer is a syria didn’t think Israel knew. And if Syria didn’t think Israel knew and if the project is top secret only upper brass know, then certain anomalies that night get disregarded by AD team or result in delayed reaction.

Anyway the point was that no matter how dense an AD, it all comes down to capabilty of crew and how well you can overcome your enemies tricks.

Bavar-373 will bolster Iran’s AD system tremendously just based on the fact enemy hasn’t trained against it and the code is Iranian.

But reshape the middle east? Not even close


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It's been a few years since I followed this forum and I registered this year. Dear TheImmortal your analyzes are often very painful to read. About Bavar 373 you will have big surprise. Yes, it will be the first generation but this first generation will be unique in the world. A new generation of air defense system science. Russia, the US, China, Israel and other countries will be surprised by the Bavar 373 ... it arrives soon and the news will circumnavigate the world and analysts will fall on the *** ...

It already seems rumored that Iran is working on Bavar 373 II for hypersonic missile interception. A form of Iranian S-500. Iranian scientists are really on a mission to surpass themselves. The manufacture of Bavar 373 raised the scientific level of Iranian scientists

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It's been a few years since I followed this forum and I registered this year. Dear TheImmortal your analyzes are often very painful to read. About Bavar 373 you will have big surprise. Yes, it will be the first generation but this first generation will be unique in the world. A new generation of air defense system science. Russia, the US, China, Israel and other countries will be surprised by the Bavar 373 ... it arrives soon and the news will circumnavigate the world and analysts will fall on the *** ...
> 
> It already seems rumored that Iran is working on Bavar 373 II for hypersonic missile interception. A form of Iranian S-500. Iranian scientists are really on a mission to surpass themselves. The manufacture of Bavar 373 raised the scientific level of Iranian scientists



My friend....I been following the Iranian military developments for over 15 years.

I bring logic to an otherwise optimistic group. If you have inside information (I doubt it) then that’s one thing. I rely on what’s been leaked and available through public source.

Bavar 373 is a national priority project and I have never underestimated its importance. However, I will challenge those that think it will radically reshape the landscape outside of Iran. 

Iran is not being attacked at the homeland (minus cowardly terrorism) it is being attack on the outer edges of its reach (Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon). It is being pressured in order to cut that reach and force the war machine into retreat.

Defensive weapons raise the cost for the enemy, but they don’t eliminate it. In a full blown war, Iran’s air defense system will simply be overwhelmed even with bavar-373, if the adversary is the US. 

It is unrealistic to think Iran’s air defense systems are enough to protect against saturation wave attacks and may never be if your adversary fields 600+ warplanes and CMs in tens of thousands. There simply isn’t enough interceptor missiles to counter all that at a cost benefit rationale.

Lastly, air defenses increase possibility of BM interception but let’s be realistic unless you are intercepting a SCUD or low technology missile where warhead and body do not detach, chances of interception are low but still better than nothing.

If you can claim otherwise, then that would make Iran’s entire defense doctrine (Based on BMs) also in jeopardy. 

Since Iran continues to increase BM count it can be reasoned that Iran’s leadership believes current ADs cannot intercept a significant amount of BMs at a successful rate. And if you can’t intercept a BM at a successful rate then you certainly aren’t going to intercept a Hypersonic Glide Vehicle.

So Russia may claim they will be able to intercept HGV’s yet at the same time they claim their own HGV is indefensible.


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> B-373 will not reshape the Middle East any more than Turkey or Saudi Arabia will reshape the Middle East by having the S-400



By reshape I mean in an militarily and strategically way, and yes, sure it will!
For decades Israel enjoyed total dominance by air, violating other countries airspace and bombing everything in name of so called "self defence" without fearing consequences...these days are over...
They already got a taste of it in Syria







Turkish/Saudi Arabian S-400 will be heavy downgraded (export versions), there are in noy way a match to B-373
+ im sure russians can deactivate them, whereas B-373´s codes are totally unknown..

In an full out war the airspace from the Mediterranean Sea through to the Persian Gulf will be not safe for them.
Im sure they will get the surprise already in the Lebanon airspace..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Immortal still comes back to us with a weak analysis. Sorry but Iran is in the club of the 4 greatest powers in Air Defense and will not be overwhelmed by the US. Your 15 years of research are not very useful. In addition, the artillery will do a lot of interception in the last seconds of approach missile. The Bavar 373 is unique in the world and very powerfull, you will see very soon. The ability of many powerful radar in the country and the super capacity in electronic warfare makes Iran highly protected ...

And you seriously think that the US launchers and their planes will not be reached? You are not really serious, sir. And the number of defense system is already incredible in the country and it will increase again. You see too many Americans film because their army is presented as the most powerful force in the universe by destroying aliens far more powerful than themselves.

Stop speculating and do the lessons to the Iranian scientists who are made much further than you think. The Irannians should do this and that but stop this because they are made much further than your advice and reflections

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

If to deploy Bavar 373 in the Straight of Hormuz---it will paralyze US air force, thus securing Iranian speedboats which will be safely mining the Straight of Hormuz

Also Bavar 373 will make potential Israeli air assault much less effective and increase the loss rate of US air force

But note that in all out war no air defense system in the world can match US air power and its anti-radiation capabilities.

So Bavar-373 is a game changer in the Straight of Hormuz (guaranteeing that Iran will successfully mine the Straight before US air power will be able to do something about it) and a game changer when it comes to threats from Israeli air force

Also Bavar 373 will complicate potential US war against Iran, because USA will have to 1) spend many days first to clean Straight of Hormuz and oil rich Persian Gulf from Iranian air defenses by committing substantial portion of its air power for anti-radiation operations 2) destroy Iranian navy for preventing it from harassing oil tankers 3) and only when Bavar 373 in the Persian Gulf is paralyzed and navy is destroyed ----only then US can attack targets deep inside Iran

So Bavar 373 will help Iran to buy time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

_The _*"Exploration" radar*_ is one of the radar shields of the Ministry of Defense, which is the result of reverse engineer or upgrading the Russian radar.
Explore and Costa is a specialist in the discovery of low-level targets such as cruise missiles, helicopters and UAVs. Command and energy cameras are integrated into a car._













*MERSAD AD SYSTEM CLOSE VIEW:*

_*New missile defense system "Morsad 2" launcher

The system uses missiles similar to the "standard" and "altar" missiles for short-range and medium-range bird interactions.

The military's "effort" defense project is likely to be filled with this version




*_

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

The Iraqi's & Syrians were both quite foolish with their nuclear programs. They should have known the Israeli's would target their reactors, especially Syria after seeing what happened to Saddam's reactor decades earlier.

They should have built heavily fortified underground facilities preferably underneath mountain ranges protected by their best air defense batteries. They should not have put all their eggs in one basket, depending merely on one site for their entire program. 

Well at least Iran got it right where both Syria & Iraq got it wrong. 



Tokhme khar said:


> That so called Syrian reactor strike was carried out by the IDF using Turkish airspace.
> 
> And no shit, Syria was not expecting it from that direction.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

Draco.IMF said:


> _The _*"Exploration" radar*_ is one of the radar shields of the Ministry of Defense, which is the result of reverse engineer or upgrading the Russian radar.
> Explore and Costa is a specialist in the discovery of low-level targets such as cruise missiles, helicopters and UAVs. Command and energy cameras are integrated into a car._
> 
> 
> View attachment 542741
> 
> 
> View attachment 542740
> 
> 
> 
> *MERSAD AD SYSTEM CLOSE VIEW:*
> 
> _*New missile defense system "Morsad 2" launcher
> 
> The system uses missiles similar to the "standard" and "altar" missiles for short-range and medium-range bird interactions.
> 
> The military's "effort" defense project is likely to be filled with this version
> 
> View attachment 542742
> *_


That radar Costa...it is Kasta 2E radar,it is wrongly named or maybe original text was translated and name was translated wromgly.Any way,it can be used as standalone but mostly it is used with Tor,Pantsir and Buk as as search and acquisition radar...I think it is 150km range and it is very acurate thus it is capable to identify low RCS objects...it is specialized for low altitudes...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense unveiled two new radars.
'_Moeen 40_' a secondary surveillance radar with 400km range. before Iran, only 8 countries were manufacturing this radar and were refusing to share it's technology with Iran.

'_Naser 40_' a passive radar which has no transmitter and uses the reflection of signals from urban transmitters to discover the targets.

Moeen 40 secondary surveillance radar :






https://www.aparat.com/v/QoIBH/رونمایی_از_دستاوردهای_پدافند_هوایی_|_رادار_ناصر_40_|

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Draco.IMF said:


> yeah, take the sublaunched missile for example which was shown some days ago
> there were pictures of this model in a tube dated back to 2012!, but we only saw it now, 6-7 years later....
> so it could be same with B-373, its already functional but we have to wait some more years to see it in public
> 
> 
> 
> because we have waited so long and we would love to see this beast in action
> 
> And B-373 is not a weapon like any other one, its THE weapon which could reshape the middle east, a truly gamechanger....so yeah, thats the reason why we are crazy about it





TheImmortal said:


> Baloney. Only a foolish idiot would expect Israel to fly right through the heart of Syria and Syrian air defenses to get to eastern Syria.
> 
> There were only two viable options through Jordan and up the right side or from the Mediterranean through Lebanon and the Turkish border.
> 
> Your logic is also flawed because Syrian longer range radars can pick up any Israeli F-16’s leaving Israeli airspace and track through Lebanon and Turkey. Syria has/had plenty of radars stationed on Turkish side as the heart of Alawite territory is runs along the coast.
> 
> The raid was actually more complex then that and included blinding radar points and jamming.
> 
> The real answer is a syria didn’t think Israel knew. And if Syria didn’t think Israel knew and if the project is top secret only upper brass know, then certain anomalies that night get disregarded by AD team or result in delayed reaction.
> 
> Anyway the point was that no matter how dense an AD, it all comes down to capabilty of crew and how well you can overcome your enemies tricks.
> 
> Bavar-373 will bolster Iran’s AD system tremendously just based on the fact enemy hasn’t trained against it and the code is Iranian.
> 
> But reshape the middle east? Not even close



For a country in the Middle East to manufacture such an advanced air defense system, it is indeed a game changer for that country and its allies, as Iranians can quickly deploy patches, fixes, and upgrades. It'll allow Iranian engineers to keep pace with other advanced air defense systems in the world, and they will surely test against many jet fighters. Just think of the psychological impact it'll have on any country, especially military planners, who are thinking to wage war on Iranian air space.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Not much response here on the Naser-40.
This is the first time Iran talks about such passive PCL radars. Its survivability, cost and anti-stealth capabilities would present a huge improvement for Irans IADS (more so in the fight against small drones such as quad copters)

Here a article dealing with it:

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/a...new-frontiers-in-passive-radar-and-sonar.html

and an important quote:

*



In a 2015 paper, "Target Tracking and Receiver Placement in MIMO DVB-T Based PCL" from Iran's Sharif University of Technology, researchers looked at the electronic warfare applications of using multiple antennas for transmission and reception of a passive radar system in a multiple input/multiple output (MIMO) configuration.

"The idea of using multiple of such illuminators to get the advantages of MIMO technology, besides the advantages of passive illumination, is new and attractive," they wrote. "An excellent candidate of such configuration is a DVB-T [Digital Video Broadcasting-Terrestrial] SFN (single frequency network). Various obstacles and considerations appear when working with a MIMO DVB-T based passive radar system. Using the commercial transmitting stations already working in the environment as the non-cooperative transmitter of the radar system makes the radar covert."

Click to expand...

*
It was also shown briefly in the video.
Most importantly Iran has a mature program running in this field. Like the team working on the OTH radar program and previously on unique projects such as the Nazir radar, we see a leap in this science-heavy fields.
Now its strategic early warning in form of the promised OTH radar that Iran lacks the most.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Draco.IMF

*"A picture of the RADD defense system, which, by firing rockets, tries to destroy low-speed air targets such as helicopters and drone strikes."*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

I am assuming those are just unguided rockets they are using as air defence. Isn't it a much more efficient use of time and resources to instead focus on the Iranian pantsir like missile which would actually be guided and more effective? If they're going to use anything unguided they should just stuck to AAA bullets with fragmentation...

If they managed to take normal rockets and added some sort of an air defence capable guidance/seeker for them then it will be good for our proxies, but if not then this is not a good use of resource if you ask me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

WinterNights said:


> I am assuming those are just unguided rockets they are using as air defence. Isn't it a much more efficient use of time and resources to instead focus on the Iranian pantsir like missile which would actually be guided and more effective? If they're going to use anything unguided they should just stuck to AAA bullets with fragmentation...
> 
> If they managed to take normal rockets and added some sort of an air defence capable guidance/seeker for them then it will be good for our proxies, but if not then this is not a good use of resource if you ask me.


Its actually not a completely unknown concept,the french back in the early 70s had an idea for a mobile system called javelot which used a barrage of 40mm unguided rockets.These would use a magazine of 64 rockets that could be fired in selectable salvos using radar for initial targeting. 




Admittedly these days it might possibly be more effective to try to come up with a new bolt on front end section fitted with a relatively cheap seeker,possibly ir,and guidance system that could be retro fitted to the front of unguided rockets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

old news
*

MODAFL unveils Qamar radar among 16 IEI defense technology achievements
*




















*Above: IRINN video still of Qamar ("Moon") 3-D mobile phased array radar

According to Fars News Agency:
General Dehqan unveiled 16 new defense projects of SAIran Electronic Industries (Shiraz Electronic Industries) Company in the Southern city of Shiraz today.


The most important projects unveiled during the ceremony included a Radar system with the capability of tracking different semi-heavy and heavy weapons and providing the global positioning system (GPS) specifications for taking action during electronic warfare, Qamar 3-D search and control radar system with the capability of tracking different kinds of targets, including fighter jets and drone, up to a distance of 450 kilometers at different low and high altitudes and transferring the relevant data to the air defense network and Absar video-imaging system which can be mounted on fighter jets and drones.


General Dehqan also inaugurated the production line of air and airport navigation systems, including Multilateration (MLAT), ELINT (Electronic signals intelligence) and Communications Intelligence (COMINT) systems.

"The most important achievement of today is the manufacture of different radars which can identify and track threats and defend the country," General Dehqan said, addressing the unveiling ceremony.


He reiterated that the SAIran Electronic Industries Company has mass produced different radar systems that can cover a range of objects in distances up to 500 kilometers.


General Dehqan pointed to the indigenization of the navigation systems of warplanes as another achievement of SAIran Electronic Industries, and said, "We have made outstanding advancement in area of software production for confronting enemies' electronic warfare.


"COMMENTARY: Observers have speculated the Qamar ("Moon") 3D phased array radar may be an element of the Bavar-373 ("Belief-373") air defense system currently under development.
*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## T-72B

Any sneak peak on B-373? we are closing to Persian new year

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

iranian upgraded hawk missiles: shalamche & shaheen versions

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
there is a clear difference between hawk and shaheen missiles

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

Mithridates said:


> iranian upgraded hawk missiles: shalamche & shaheen versions
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram
> there is a clear difference between hawk and shaheen missiles
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



slightly old news, I think pics are from 2011 or so...
but as you can see, very impressive how upgraded a system can be despite the same look
some guys are laughing at iranian systems because they look exactly like the old ones (S-200, Mersad, F-14, F-4...) but if you open them its something completly different, dont underestimate upgrades...



T-72B said:


> Any sneak peak on B-373? we are closing to Persian new year



patience ... we are all waiting

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

That is a I-HAWK seeker.

The I-HAWK was a 70's vintage system with a planar slotted array seeker.
The original HAWK was a 50's vintage system with parabolic antenna seeker.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-72B

PeeD said:


> That is a I-HAWK seeker.
> 
> The I-HAWK was a 70's vintage system with a planar slotted array seeker.
> The original HAWK was a 50's vintage system with parabolic antenna seeker.


@PeeD any B-373 sneak peak?


----------



## PeeD

Here is a interesting video:






Note the speed with which the Mesbah-2 is moving at the end. This is due to its specialized CIWS role, instead of traditional AAA such as the Samavat/Oerlikon 35mm.

Plus a mobile variant of the Sarir 100mm long range AAA was shown in the Iraqi defense expo.
Together with the truck mounted Mesbah-2 those two are a ideal, mobile combination for affordable mobile system protection. A mobile Samavat with AEHAD munitions would be the perfect addition to these two (and a AHEAD like munition was already shown).

100mm Sarir starts tackling the (areal) target at extended range and altitude of 6-10km
35mm AHEAD Samavat takes over if the (crossing) target gets within 3,5km with low ROF bursts
23mm Mesbah-2 takes over when the (inbound) target is still on a direct approach threatening the protected object via a single high ROF burst at around 1,5km.
Kill-cost increases as the caliber decreases.


@T-72B 

No, but things are moving on.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

**text was google translated*

Lightning Defense System -1

Upgrading the SA-6 missile system (Sam-6) and installing it on a truck launcher
The upgrade is based on the SEO's search engine, which made the missile compatible with electronegativity







The mobility of this system has been enhanced with new launchers, and due to the commerciality of the truck, it has been provided with better homing.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*can anyone tell me that the missile that is being fired is it from an Iranian system or a S300 system?*


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> *can anyone tell me that the missile that is being fired is it from an Iranian system or a S300 system?*
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 547056



Seems like it's a target rocket/missile. Iran said it had used the S-300 a rocket target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> Seems like it's a target rocket/missile. Iran said it had used the S-300 a rocket target.


it could be, but fateh family dose not have that speed at lunch phase it looks alot more like SAM and as you can see in the picture, it's not cold lunched missile, so I doubt it is Russian its looks to me like an Iranian SAM missile but it like S300 missile that has an extraordinary speed as you know. i hope its Sayyad 4.


----------



## T-72B

Any Bavar 373 news?


----------



## SOHEIL

T-72B said:


> Any Bavar 373 news?



No !


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


>


a funny fact about this system is it's searching range is 50km and it's interception range is 80 km just opposite of radar systems which have bigger search range than interception range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

SOHEIL said:


> No !



For a good reason.


----------



## mohsen

Iran and Iraq air defense will share data!

*توافق ایران و عراق برای همکاری در بخش دفاع هوایی*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> Iran and Iraq air defense will share data!
> 
> *توافق ایران و عراق برای همکاری در بخش دفاع هوایی*


Very big deal. This is how long term alliances are made and not like the fake Saudi nato-wannabe initiatives.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Iran and Iraq air defense will share data!
> 
> *توافق ایران و عراق برای همکاری در بخش دفاع هوایی*


I wonder if the systems are compatible ?


----------



## Aramagedon

Iran’s nasty surprise for the U.S:
*
Report: Iran targets U.S. military satellites with lasers*

by Paul Bedard

Council on Foreign Relations indicates that China, without warning, is poised to knock out U.S. satellites, especially those used by the Pentagon.

"The threats to U.S. space assets are significant and growing," said the "contingency planning memo" titled " Dangerous Space Incidents." It also cited Iran, North Korea, space junk and electromagnetic pulse as threats.

Around since 1921 and co-founded by former President Herbert Hoover, the Council on Foreign Relations is a thoughtful group, making its warnings about an attack on U.S. satellites a real concern.

As President Obama visits Asia this week, the memo suggests that he push his diplomatic team to cut deals with China and others to keep low earth orbit where most satellites fly a war-free zone.

The memo said that there are several indications from China, Iran and North Korea about a coming attack. "Warning indicators would suggest that a dangerous space event is forthcoming," said the council memo.

*And that includes EMP, possibly from a sun burst, that would zap high-tech machines in space. Concern about EMP has recently reached Washington where the Senate is considering ways to prevent a shutdown of critical electric lines and transformers. *

Author Micah Zenko puts China at the top of the threats, revealing that it has conducted “at least six” anti-satellite tests since 2005 without warning. He also said that People's Liberation Army Air Force publications “argue that shooting down U.S. early-warning satellites would be a de-escalatory and stabilizing action in a naval encounter with the United States.”

*Iran, meanwhile, “undertakes more purposeful interference” with U.S. satellites using lasers and jammers. “Although these actions have not resulted in irreparable damage to U.S. assets, this practice increases the possibility that the United States will misinterpret unintended harm caused by such interference.”*

China’s threat doesn’t have to be premeditated, he added in the memo. He described how China is filling the low earth orbit with space junk with its anti-satellite tests. Just one test, said the memo, boosted the amount of space garbage 40 percent.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ry-satellites-with-lasers-china-with-missiles

توضیح داستان به فارسی:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It smells like Bavar 373, do you feel it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Two days left until the unveiling. will bavar_373 be there too?

S_300 PMU2 and Sayyad 2 missiles and Sayyad 3 missiles and Talash 
air defense system and Short and long range radar systems and electronic warfare systems will be there.

The commander also announced the mass production and, ( Army will purchase Karar tank ) purchase of the Karar tank for this year.

تولید انبوه تانک «کرار» در سال جاری/ رونمایی دستاوردهای جدید زرهی و پهپادی در ۲۹ فروردین*


*فرمانده نزاجا در ادامه به توان دفاعی این نیرو اشاره و عنوان کرد: در سال گذشته نمونه‌هایی از تانک «کرار» را از وزارت دفاع دریافت کردیم. امسال نیز با انعقاد قراردادی که با این وزارتخانه خواهیم داشت، این تانک به طور انبوه در اختیار ما قرار خواهد گرفت.

وی افزود: تانک کرار در سطح تانک‌های روز دنیاست و این تانک حتی از آپشن‌هایی برخوردار است که سطح آن از تانک‌های روز دنیا بالاتر است.

سرتیپ حیدری گفت: امسال در حوزه تسلیحات زرهی و ضدزره، سامانه‌های پهپادی، انواع جمر‌ در فرکانس‌های مختلف و انواع کوادکوپتر‌ دستاورد‌هایی داشته‌ایم که در روز ۲۹ فروردین از این تجهیزات رونمایی خواهیم کرد.

فرمانده نیروی زمینی ارتش ادامه داد: همچنین توانستیم با کمک متخصصان نزاجا خودرو‌های زرهی بی‌.ام.پی ۱ را به خودرو‌های زرهی بی‌.ام.پی ۲ ارتقا دهیم.

رمانده نزاجا در خصوص رژه دیگر نیرو‌های ارتش در روز ۲۹ فروردین گفت: قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا (ص) در این رژه سامانه‌های پدافندی اس ۳۰۰، موشک‌های صیاد ۲ و صیاد ۳، سامانه موشکی تلاش، سامانه‌های راداری برد بلند و کوتاه و سیستم‌های جنگ الکترونیک را به نمایش خواهد گذاشت.

http://defapress.ir/fa/news/341962/تولید-انبوه-تانک-کرار-در-سال-جاری-رونمایی-دستاوردهای-جدید-زرهی-و-پهپادی-در-۲۹-فروردین*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Two days left until the unveiling. will bavar_373 be there too?
> 
> S_300 PMU2 and Sayyad 2 missiles and Sayyad 3 missiles and Talash
> air defense system and Short and long range radar systems and electronic warfare systems will be there.
> 
> The commander also announced the mass production and, ( Army will purchase Karar tank ) purchase of the Karar tank for this year.
> 
> تولید انبوه تانک «کرار» در سال جاری/ رونمایی دستاوردهای جدید زرهی و پهپادی در ۲۹ فروردین*
> 
> 
> *فرمانده نزاجا در ادامه به توان دفاعی این نیرو اشاره و عنوان کرد: در سال گذشته نمونه‌هایی از تانک «کرار» را از وزارت دفاع دریافت کردیم. امسال نیز با انعقاد قراردادی که با این وزارتخانه خواهیم داشت، این تانک به طور انبوه در اختیار ما قرار خواهد گرفت.
> 
> وی افزود: تانک کرار در سطح تانک‌های روز دنیاست و این تانک حتی از آپشن‌هایی برخوردار است که سطح آن از تانک‌های روز دنیا بالاتر است.
> 
> سرتیپ حیدری گفت: امسال در حوزه تسلیحات زرهی و ضدزره، سامانه‌های پهپادی، انواع جمر‌ در فرکانس‌های مختلف و انواع کوادکوپتر‌ دستاورد‌هایی داشته‌ایم که در روز ۲۹ فروردین از این تجهیزات رونمایی خواهیم کرد.
> 
> فرمانده نیروی زمینی ارتش ادامه داد: همچنین توانستیم با کمک متخصصان نزاجا خودرو‌های زرهی بی‌.ام.پی ۱ را به خودرو‌های زرهی بی‌.ام.پی ۲ ارتقا دهیم.
> 
> رمانده نزاجا در خصوص رژه دیگر نیرو‌های ارتش در روز ۲۹ فروردین گفت: قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا (ص) در این رژه سامانه‌های پدافندی اس ۳۰۰، موشک‌های صیاد ۲ و صیاد ۳، سامانه موشکی تلاش، سامانه‌های راداری برد بلند و کوتاه و سیستم‌های جنگ الکترونیک را به نمایش خواهد گذاشت.
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/341962/تولید-انبوه-تانک-کرار-در-سال-جاری-رونمایی-دستاوردهای-جدید-زرهی-و-پهپادی-در-۲۹-فروردین*



What are they unveiling?


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> What are they unveiling?




for now they just said Short and long range radar systems and electronic warfare systems and jammers and armored vehicles and anti-armor weapons and UAVs and quadcopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sepasgozar

My bet is they will focus on unveiling defensive achievements. Indeed it is a time to allay fear and alleviate pressure internally. Solidarity can be built around advancement in defensive technologies such as Bavar-373, which is likely to be a focus of the upcoming parades. Iran is facing opposition that even she has not encountered to this degree before with the Bolton/Pompeo/AIPAC/Zionist/al-Saudi alliance's machinations. Had Iran built Nuclear weapons already, it would have had the upper hand. But alas, in this game of chicken, Iranian patience is running thin... and centrifuges may soon start running at full-speed. The two cars are running towards each other at full speed, and Iran ought to throw out the steering wheel to show that she is steadfast and vehement in her resolve to pursue her defensive capabilities. Nukes have limited practical purpose in today's world, but since our enemies have them in the hundreds and thousands, so should Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kastor

sepasgozar said:


> My bet is they will focus on unveiling defensive achievements. Indeed it is a time to allay fear and alleviate pressure internally. Solidarity can be built around advancement in defensive technologies such as Bavar-373, which is likely to be a focus of the upcoming parades. Iran is facing opposition that even she has not encountered to this degree before with the Bolton/Pompeo/AIPAC/Zionist/al-Saudi alliance's machinations. Had Iran built Nuclear weapons already, it would have had the upper hand. But alas, in this game of chicken, Iranian patience is running thin... and centrifuges may soon start running at full-speed. The two cars are running towards each other at full speed, and Iran ought to throw out the steering wheel to show that she is steadfast and vehement in her resolve to pursue her defensive capabilities. Nukes have limited practical purpose in today's world, but since our enemies have them in the hundreds and thousands, so should Iran.


I was initially against nukes but after what I’ve seen from the U.S. and the others I now realize the only forward is with nukes...as I said in another thread we have nothing to lose, they have already declared war on us.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

Kastor said:


> I was initially against nukes but after what I’ve seen from the U.S. and the others I now realize the only forward is with nukes...as I said in another thread we have nothing to lose, they have already declared war on us.



Weird isn't it? I also was initially against Iran getting nukes since I naively thought Iran's missiles and regional standing was enough to safe-guard it against regional opponents as well as I was worried that Iran obtaining nukes would start a war immediately but with Trump's administration and just how volatile Israel/Saudi Arabia have become, you'd have to crazy to think Iran can just 'get along' with its neighbors when no one else wants to concede even an inch. 

Pros, Cons, If Iran wants to secure its independence as a nation it needs to have a power equal to that of its enemies. Nukes will give Iran that parity.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## sepasgozar

It really is weird @BlueInGreen2. 

From the start of mankind, civilization has faced greed and warfare -- has built and has destroyed. Atrocities are in the bloodline of us all and the Persian empire before has faced huge losses when neighbouring empires wished to conquer and expand. I want to believe that things are not as they seem, that under the curtains those who pull all strings have manufactured this discourse, and that stability and peace will ultimately prevail for all. But it seems, at least at the surface that Trump and his neocon ultra hawks, under the influence of conspirators from SA, Israel, UAE, and more, have left the nest and our out looking for a fight. I know brothers in the IRGC are ready for war, and I know many in Iran will welcome war with no fear and no diminishment in their resolve. I hope cooler heads prevail, and I hope that we can all find the path to peace. But alas, I am growing less and less optimistic as day goes by.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> for now they just said Short and long range radar systems and electronic warfare systems and jammers and armored vehicles and anti-armor weapons and UAVs and quadcopters.


hope they don't unveil anything in parade, or else we all will regret it!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Weird isn't it? I also was initially against Iran getting nukes since I naively thought Iran's missiles and regional standing was enough to safe-guard it against regional opponents as well as I was worried that Iran obtaining nukes would start a war immediately but with Trump's administration and just how volatile Israel/Saudi Arabia have become, you'd have to crazy to think Iran can just 'get along' with its neighbors when no one else wants to concede even an inch.
> 
> Pros, Cons, If Iran wants to secure its independence as a nation it needs to have a power equal to that of its enemies. Nukes will give Iran that parity.



Look like you guys are getting my idea about IRAN should have Nukes ....

We should be strong and relay on our own power to secure ourselves rather than hope in some useless speculations and assumptions ....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

OldTwilight said:


> Look like you guys are getting my idea about IRAN should have Nukes ....
> 
> We should be strong and relay on our own power to secure ourselves rather than hope in some useless speculations and assumptions ....


Agreed.Relying on the force of international law and trusting in the good will of your enemies seems like a very foolish choice for iran,indeed the last 100 years of recent history should make this clear beyond all doubt.
Attempts at compromise,or worse appeasement,will not work when it comes to dealing with neo fascists like the chumpists and their fellow travelers/vassals,they will only perceive it to be weakness,and showing weakness in front of sub-human creatures like this can be fatal.
The more time goes by the less iran has to lose by going nuclear.I think a lot will ultimately depend on whether the chump regime gets a second term or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kastor

Sineva said:


> Agreed.Relying on the force of international law and trusting in the good will of your enemies seems like a very foolish choice for iran,indeed the last 100 years of recent history should make this clear beyond all doubt.
> Attempts at compromise,or worse appeasement,will not work when it comes to dealing with neo fascists like the chumpists and their fellow travelers/vassals,they will only perceive it to be weakness,and showing weakness in front of sub-human creatures like this can be fatal.
> The more time goes by the less iran has to lose by going nuclear.I think a lot will ultimately depend on whether the chump regime gets a second term or not.


Well, you see I was relying on the old world order where men’s word, treaties and such meant something. But now I see that all of that tradition and decorum died with the last generation of leaders. These populist animals Trump, Netanyahu, MBS and the rest the of them only respect power and force.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

to be honest i thought with negotiating over our nuclear project we would get better economical state so i voted to rouhani but it seems like after leader was right and we can't trust US. now with arab nato, israeli-arab relationship and saudis getting nukes and ballistic missiles i think it's time for us to make a move. we should make nukes, EMP devices small enough to place them inside soumar cruise missiles and pump money to our projects that are in prototype/pre mass production stages.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Kastor

Mithridates said:


> to be honest i thought with negotiating over our nuclear project we would get better economical state so i voted to rouhani but it seems like after leader was right and we can't trust US. now with arab nato, israeli-arab relationship and saudis getting nukes and ballistic missiles i think it's time for us to make a move. we should make nukes, EMP devices small enough to place them inside soumar cruise missiles and pump money to our projects that are in prototype/pre mass production stages.


Folks, Pompeo is setting the stage for an attack on Iran, we must act and behave like we are at war now! We need to be ready, we need to do whatever we can to deter such foolish ideas, and we all know nukes are the best detternt.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## OldTwilight

Kastor said:


> Folks, Pompeo is setting the stage for an attack on Iran, we must act and behave like we are at war now! We need to be ready, we need to do whatever we can to deter such foolish ideas, and we all know nukes are the best detternt.



I was reading history books , do you know after a series of victory and just minor defeat against Russians we signed the cursed Golestan treaty and Do you know when we signed this treaty !? in middle of Napoleon Bonapart grand invasion of Russia ... in fact we should have signed the Golestan but in our favor because in overall situation we had upper-hand and Russians were the one who need peace to divert all of their force to confront Napelone .... 

the sad part is that we lose so many things because some ignorant didn't knew about world politics and were afraid of confronting enemy ( or get bribed by Britain empire which was scared of Napelone )

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

OldTwilight said:


> I was reading history books , do you know after a series of victory and just minor defeat against Russians we signed the cursed Golestan treaty and Do you know when we signed this treaty !? in middle of Napoleon Bonapart grand invasion of Russia ... in fact we should have signed the Golestan but in our favor because in overall situation we had upper-hand and Russians were the one who need peace to divert all of their force to confront Napelone ....
> 
> the sad part is that we lose so many things because some ignorant didn't knew about world politics and were afraid of confronting enemy ( or get bribed by Britain empire which was scared of Napelone )



the point is that those ignorant and traitor are living in this era and people like Rouhani and his co are representing them ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kastor

OldTwilight said:


> the point is that those ignorant and traitor are living in this era and people like Rouhani and his co are representing them ...


I don’t believe the traitor talk, they relied on the old paradigm which was treaties and agreement meant something. It would have worked with any other president it’s just Trump is a useful idiot and Israel use him to upend JCPOA. No one could have predicted this idiot’s election.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Kastor said:


> I don’t believe the traitor talk, they relied on the old paradigm which was treaties and agreement meant something. It would have worked with any other president it’s just Trump is a useful idiot and Israel use him to upend JCPOA. No one could have predicted this idiot’s election.



JCPOA was not a treaty and thus not legal binding.

Iran’s fault for negotiating something that is not legally binding on the other party or at the very least repurcussion for quiting.

Lastly Fordow and Arak should have been renovated at certain points of deal not right in beginning, Iran lost all leverage.


----------



## Kastor

TheImmortal said:


> JCPOA was not a treaty and thus not legal binding.
> 
> Iran’s fault for negotiating something that is not legally binding on the other party or at the very least repurcussion for quiting.
> 
> Lastly Fordow and Arak should have been renovated at certain points of deal not right in beginning, Iran lost all leverage.


Fair enough, I know it wasn’t a treaty, if it was it would have never passed in the Republican controlled congress at that time. We trusted the international system and lost. However, the JCPOA was an agreement in the UNSC, which used to mean something.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Kastor said:


> Fair enough, I know it wasn’t a treaty, if it was it would have never passed in the Republican controlled congress at that time. We trusted the international system and lost. However, the JCPOA was an agreement in the UNSC, which used to mean something.



If we're being completely practical here, the notion that international treaties/accords and or bodies like the UN matter when nations like US/China/Israel and Russia and many others do what they want anyway is naive on the part of us 'regular' people. We should simply accept the reality in which we live in and move on knowing that things are gonna be like this for a little while (honestly man, it's been like this since the dawn of man: it wont change). There is no rule of law, only rule of power.

Hindsight is always 20/20, Iran made a HORRIBLE strategic decision with the JCPOA. Let's hope to high heavens Iran doesn't make that mistake EVER again.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Just one main news:

Talash operating outside the S-200 system will get a Meraj-4 as long range search radar. That would be one component of the Bavar-373 shown I guess.

It also means that after equipping S-200 with Talash's Sayyad-2/3, the IRIADF will probably set up more batteries of Talash, which would act as "city air defense" assets with no heavy off-road capability such as the Bavar-373. Their Meraj-4 will surely improve radar picture for the Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

PeeD said:


> Just one main news:
> 
> Talash operating outside the S-200 system will get a Meraj-4 as long range search radar. That would be one component of the Bavar-373 shown I guess.
> 
> It also means that after equipping S-200 with Talash's Sayyad-2/3, the IRIADF will probably set up more batteries of Talash, which would act as "city air defense" assets with no heavy off-road capability such as the Bavar-373. Their Meraj-4 will surely improve radar picture for the Bavar-373.







in this video at 20:05 , the radar they showed, r u referring that....? if so then, it does looks like meraj-4 but for certain reason i cant be sure....i tried to match old pics...


----------



## skyshadow

*new jammer*






*new radar




*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> *new radar
> 
> View attachment 554065
> *
> 
> View attachment 554066


Moragheb radar, neither new, nor unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Aramagedon

mohsen said:


> Moragheb radar, neither new, nor unveiled.


They look pretty awesome.


----------



## mohsen

Meraj-4 radar:

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shams313

mohsen said:


> Meraj-4 radar:


Finally i'm clear.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Iran can't be concerned with America's internal politics & squabbles. From Iran's point of view, the P5 +1 including the USA wanted Iran to go along with the nuclear deal in exchange for sanctions relief. Historically in the US, presidents tend to uphold international agreements such as the nuclear deal. 

At the end of the day, the US, via Trump, back stabbed Iran. Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal not because it's beneficial for America or the average American, but rather because he's a puppet of the Rothschild family. In the 80's Trump's financial situation was extreme dire, with Trump facing an imminent bankruptcy. It was the Rothschild's who bailed him out. At this point he has no choice but to do what he's told. 

Right now, with gasoline prices going through the roof, it's unlikely that Trump will cancel the waivers for the remaining nations buying Iranian oil. Keep in mind that Iran is selling a significant amount of oil through the backdoor, however if this trend continues to escalate, with additional pressure mounting on Iran, then Iran will eventually have no choice but to withdraw from the nuclear deal & take the North Korean route. It won't take Iran very long to begin enriching Uranium on a large scale & it's very unlikely that the US will do anything militarily. Despite all the threats, all the fire & fury bluff & bluster, the US has never acted military against North Korea. Iran won't be any different

In any case, in the long run, looking at the big picture, these sanctions may in fact end up being a blessing in disguise. It may sound ludacris at the moment however, look at Saudi Arabia for example. Despite all their efforts & lofty goals, their economy is completely dependent on oil revenues, hands down. Iran is also dependent on oil revenues however these sanctions are forcing Iran to cope with a reality without oil revenues. In the next 20-30 years, as electric cars become more & more popular, the demand for gasoline from the average consumer will slowly but surely diminish. Saudi Arabia produces 10 million barrels a day & they're pumping like there's no tomorrow with no tangible plans to wean off oil dependence. On the other hand these sanctions that are being imposed on Iran are forcing the nation to become less dependent on oil & focus on other potential sectors, alternative means of producing revenue. Basically in the long run, as global demand for gasoline diminishes, because of the pressures that Iran is currently experiencing, Iran will be in a much better position to cope than say a country like Saudi Arabia



TheImmortal said:


> JCPOA was not a treaty and thus not legal binding.
> 
> Iran’s fault for negotiating something that is not legally binding on the other party or at the very least repurcussion for quiting.
> 
> Lastly Fordow and Arak should have been renovated at certain points of deal not right in beginning, Iran lost all leverage.



On the other hand, Iran is only under threat because it is is involving itself in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, rather than leaving it up to Arabs to figure out. Some will argue that Iran's current foreign policy is not in Iran's national interest. However at the end of the day, the ruling establishment have a die hard support base. Iran is over 90% Shia Muslim so when groups like Hezbollah plead for help, a large segment of Iranian society wants to respond. At the end of the day though, the whole "death to America" slogan & Ahmadinejad's speeches against Israel only assist Iran's enemies to antagonize & demonize Iran to the people in the west. Like Obama said, "death to America" doesn't create jobs. Look at the Americans, they ravage & decimate entire nations, however they don't send people out in public to burn flags & create a negative image. Even if the mullah's want to be successful in their endeavors, for example, helping the Palestinians, liberating Golan, etc the best way to move forward is to make moves, yet simultaneously avoid creating negative imagery / soundbites that can be used by Iran's enemies as ammunition against Iran & its economy / people. 



Sineva said:


> Agreed.Relying on the force of international law and trusting in the good will of your enemies seems like a very foolish choice for iran,indeed the last 100 years of recent history should make this clear beyond all doubt.
> Attempts at compromise,or worse appeasement,will not work when it comes to dealing with neo fascists like the chumpists and their fellow travelers/vassals,they will only perceive it to be weakness,and showing weakness in front of sub-human creatures like this can be fatal.
> The more time goes by the less iran has to lose by going nuclear.I think a lot will ultimately depend on whether the chump regime gets a second term or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

sha ah said:


> Iran can't be concerned with America's internal politics & squabbles. From Iran's point of view, the P5 +1 including the USA wanted Iran to go along with the nuclear deal in exchange for sanctions relief. Historically in the US, presidents tend to uphold international agreements such as the nuclear deal.
> 
> At the end of the day, the US, via Trump, back stabbed Iran. Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal not because it's beneficial for America or the average American, but rather because he's a puppet of the Rothschild family. In the 80's Trump's financial situation was extreme dire, with Trump facing an imminent bankruptcy. It was the Rothschild's who bailed him out. At this point he has no choice but to do what he's told.
> 
> Right now, with gasoline prices going through the roof, it's unlikely that Trump will cancel the waivers for the remaining nations buying Iranian oil. Keep in mind that Iran is selling a significant amount of oil through the backdoor, however if this trend continues to escalate, with additional pressure mounting on Iran, then Iran will eventually have no choice but to withdraw from the nuclear deal & take the North Korean route. It won't take Iran very long to begin enriching Uranium on a large scale & it's very unlikely that the US will do anything militarily. Despite all the threats, all the fire & fury bluff & bluster, the US has never acted military against North Korea. Iran won't be any different
> 
> In any case, in the long run, looking at the big picture, these sanctions may in fact end up being a blessing in disguise. It may sound ludacris at the moment however, look at Saudi Arabia for example. Despite all their efforts & lofty goals, their economy is completely dependent on oil revenues, hands down. Iran is also dependent on oil revenues however these sanctions are forcing Iran to cope with a reality without oil revenues. In the next 20-30 years, as electric cars become more & more popular, the demand for gasoline from the average consumer will slowly but surely diminish. Saudi Arabia produces 10 million barrels a day & they're pumping like there's no tomorrow with no tangible plans to wean off oil dependence. On the other hand these sanctions that are being imposed on Iran are forcing the nation to become less dependent on oil & focus on other potential sectors, alternative means of producing revenue. Basically in the long run, as global demand for gasoline diminishes, because of the pressures that Iran is currently experiencing, Iran will be in a much better position to cope than say a country like Saudi Arabia
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand, Iran is only under threat because it is is involving itself in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, rather than leaving it up to Arabs to figure out. Some will argue that Iran's current foreign policy is not in Iran's national interest. However at the end of the day, the ruling establishment have a die hard support base. Iran is over 90% Shia Muslim so when groups like Hezbollah plead for help, a large segment of Iranian society wants to respond. At the end of the day though, the whole "death to America" slogan & Ahmadinejad's speeches against Israel only assist Iran's enemies to antagonize & demonize Iran to the people in the west. Like Obama said, "death to America" doesn't create jobs. Look at the Americans, they ravage & decimate entire nations, however they don't send people out in public to burn flags & create a negative image. Even if the mullah's want to be successful in their endeavors, for example, helping the Palestinians, liberating Golan, etc the best way to move forward is to make moves, yet simultaneously avoid creating negative imagery / soundbites that can be used by Iran's enemies as ammunition against Iran & its economy / people.


could not have said it better..you are a wise man indeed...must be that cold Canadian climate that make us a breed apart..lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

sha ah said:


> On the other hand, Iran is only under threat because it is is involving itself in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, rather than leaving it up to Arabs to figure out. Some will argue that Iran's current foreign policy is not in Iran's national interest. However at the end of the day, the ruling establishment have a die hard support base. Iran is over 90% Shia Muslim so when groups like Hezbollah plead for help, a large segment of Iranian society wants to respond. At the end of the day though, the whole "death to America" slogan & Ahmadinejad's speeches against Israel only assist Iran's enemies to antagonize & demonize Iran to the people in the west. Like Obama said, "death to America" doesn't create jobs. Look at the Americans, they ravage & decimate entire nations, however they don't send people out in public to burn flags & create a negative image. Even if the mullah's want to be successful in their endeavors, for example, helping the Palestinians, liberating Golan, etc the best way to move forward is to make moves, yet simultaneously avoid creating negative imagery / soundbites that can be used by Iran's enemies as ammunition against Iran & its economy / people.



Excellent analysis!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

mohsen said:


> Moragheb radar, neither new, nor unveiled.



no the big green one is Arash radar also not unveiled.
and meraj 4 radar that show's that Bavar _ 373 is being mass produced.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

تجهیزات قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) ارتش 

سامانه موشکی اس ۳۰۰ به همراه متعلقات
سامانه پدافند هوایی اس ۲۰۰
سامانه پدافند هوایی تلاش و ادوات مربوطه
موشک صیاد ۲ و صیاد ۳ 
سامانه تاکتیکی مرصاد 
رادار پسیو افتاباز 
پروژه یاور 
سامانه سراج 
رادار اسکای‌گارد
توپ هائل
رادار معراج ۴
سامانه صادق سه 
سامانه مجید 
رادار های کاوش و آرش


----------



## PeeD

Another detail: IRIADF is now using the Kavosh/Kasta of the IRGC (which the IRGC copied from their Kasta).

Their Iranized HAWK PAR variant for Mersad is also called Kavosh and also works in UHF band.
Hence it seems like they selected it as a general gapfiller, since the Mersad already has that PAR as UHF search radar.

Generally beside the MoF series, foremost the MoF-2, the Kavosh/Kasta is introduced in very high numbers in Iran. It is now Irans main gapfilling radar to secure valleys against low flying intruders, foremost CM's.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar




----------



## Mr Iran Eye

mohsen said:


> Meraj-4 radar:



Hum hum ?

Looking at this radar presented in this parade, we see a folded section on each side and here on the pictures of the Maraj-4 there are not these folded sections. This radar seems to me to be different from the Maraj-4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Hum hum ?
> 
> Looking at this radar presented in this parade, we see a folded section on each side and here on the pictures of the Maraj-4 there are not these folded sections. This radar seems to me to be different from the Maraj-4
> 
> View attachment 554221


So what of it my Israeli friend?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Hum hum ?
> 
> Looking at this radar presented in this parade, we see a folded section on each side and here on the pictures of the Maraj-4 there are not these folded sections. This radar seems to me to be different from the Maraj-4
> 
> View attachment 554221


These are not folded sections, and they do exist in all pictures of Meraj4 rear view (just slight difference in the shape of heat sinks)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

mohsen said:


> These are not folded sections, and they do exist in all pictures of Meraj4 rear view (just slight difference in the shape of heat sinks)



False! I have the pictures from the back of the radar and this one really has different


----------



## Jäger

Iran new 35mm Seraj Sadeg SPAAG

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

Bundeswehr said:


> Iran new 35mm Seraj Sadeg SPAAG
> View attachment 555007


 Seraj is something, Sadeq is some other thing, and this one is Ha'el

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jäger

mohsen said:


> Seraj is something, Sadeq is some other thing, and this one is Ha'el


oh I got this from Army recognition and I didn't know this had a different name


----------



## TheImmortal

Bundeswehr said:


> Iran new 35mm Seraj Sadeg SPAAG
> View attachment 555007



Come on it is the 21st century, why is that MANNED. Should be automatically radar/optically guided.

Completely stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Come on it is the 21st century, why is that MANNED. Should be automatically radar/optically guided.
> 
> Completely stupid.


The only thing that gun is good for engaging infantry . the effect is fantastic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

It works either in automatic or in manual mode. Normally crew is only there for reloading the magazine.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

"The aerospace force is ready to provide any assistance and transfer of experience to the Iraqi defense forces, with the acquisition of radar, command and control centers, ground-to-air missile systems and electronic warfare equipment," said the commander of the Revolutionary Guards Air Force.

http://defapress.ir/fa/news/344762/فرمانده-پدافند-هوایی-عراق-با-سردار-حاجی-زاده-دیدار-کرد

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

skyshadow said:


> "The aerospace force is ready to provide any assistance and transfer of experience to the Iraqi defense forces, with the acquisition of radar, command and control centers, ground-to-air missile systems and electronic warfare equipment," said the commander of the Revolutionary Guards Air Force.
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/344762/فرمانده-پدافند-هوایی-عراق-با-سردار-حاجی-زاده-دیدار-کرد


I noticed he said "transfer of experience" rather than "transfer of technology"...Transfer of experience is fine but transfer of technology to any one outside of Iran will be foolish.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.

مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی

1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.

2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.

3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).

4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.

5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.



*After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *


https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-...ی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.
> 
> مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی
> 
> 1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.
> 
> 2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.
> 
> 3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).
> 
> 4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.
> 
> 5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> *After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *
> 
> 
> https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-رئیس-جمهور-برای-اولویت-بخشی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی



Finally we're seeing some news about them pushing for new space rocket engines.

I am still waiting to see them start a macro defence project for development of air breathing scramjet hypersonic systems.
I am disappointed we have not seen anything in field of laser defence system and electromagnetic gun systems, these two systems are well within our capabilities. Hopefully we will see something soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Finally we're seeing some news about them pushing for new space rocket engines.
> 
> I am still waiting to see them start a macro defence project for development of air breathing scramjet hypersonic systems.
> I am disappointed we have not seen anything in field of laser defence system and electromagnetic gun systems, these two systems are well within our capabilities. Hopefully we will see something soon.



well in the case of leaser IRGC said they are working on a top secret program for anti_leaser materials.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> well in the case of leaser IRGC said they are working on a top secret program for anti_leaser materials.



Anti-laser material is good, but we also need to build laser weapons our selves.
I am sure it will happen soon, Iran is good in laser technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

skyshadow said:


> The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.
> 
> مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی
> 
> 1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.
> 
> 2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.
> 
> 3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).
> 
> 4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.
> 
> 5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> *After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *
> 
> 
> https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-رئیس-جمهور-برای-اولویت-بخشی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی


Good, This is very very good news.
Hope to see Besa't submarine in next year 1399.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

SubWater said:


> Good, This is very very good news.
> Hope to see Besa't submarine in next year 1399.


doubt it happen in just one year

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.
> 
> مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی
> 
> 1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.
> 
> 2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.
> 
> 3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).
> 
> 4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.
> 
> 5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> *After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *
> 
> 
> https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-رئیس-جمهور-برای-اولویت-بخشی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی



someone should slap those so called reformist, who think westerns r more reliable then their own people..
Ahmadinejad was way too better..at least he had belief on his own people.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raghfarm007

Ahmadinejad was a jew... his people are not Iranians


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Raghfarm007 said:


> Ahmadinejad was a jew... his people are not Iranians



That "Jew" did more for Iran than this "Muslim Cleric" we have for president now!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

Shams313 said:


> someone should slap those so called reformist, who think westerns r more reliable then their own people..
> Ahmadinejad was way too better..at least he had belief on his own people.


They are corrupt thugs, some of them must be thrown in jail for life.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007

You´d probably find Rohani (Fereydoon) is a jew or Bahai of origin too.... you just have to watch his early speeches after the revolution to see how he is a NOFOOZIE.
The guy wanted the army dissolved a few months before Iraq attacked!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shapur Zol Aktaf

Raghfarm007 said:


> You´d probably find Rohani (Fereydoon) is a jew or Bahai of origin too.... you just have to watch his early speeches after the revolution to see how he is a NOFOOZIE.
> The guy wanted the army dissolved a few months before Iraq attacked!


would not surprise me at all.. I believe there are some hidden jews and more bahais in the system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> The President's permission to prioritize five security and defense plans from radars to submarines.
> 
> مجوز رئیس جمهور برای اولویت بخشی به ۵ طرح امنیتی و دفاعی از رادار تا زیردریایی
> 
> 1. localization and development of sub-surface technologies.
> 
> 2. acquisition technology for the design, construction and testing of a cold-driven space carrier engines.
> 
> 3. architectural design and implementation of the National Center for Cyber Defense and Infrastructure Systems for cyber space (MDSA).
> 
> 4. a comprehensive plan for the development of technologies for equipping and updating the national air defense radar network.
> 
> 5. development plan for military science and technology of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> *After 6 years, stopping these important plans by the the president Ruhani him self. After six GOD DAMN years, he concluded that he should continue where Ahmady nejad delivered Iran's military program to the president Ruhani. *
> 
> 
> https://snn.ir/fa/news/764064/مجوز-رئیس-جمهور-برای-اولویت-بخشی-به-۵-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی-از-رادار-تا-زیرسطحی



It's not just that! 
1.I want to know why is Rohani categorizing PBV cold start engines as a Mega Project!! Unless Iran plans on building a fleet of spaceships this makes no sense to me! Yes building a 3.5 meters in diameter SLV for Iran's space program would be a mega project or building a bunch of 3 tone multi purpose com sats to be placed in GSO but how exactly does it make sense to make the post boost cold start engine a Mega Project I have no clue!
Maybe @PeeD could answer this! Why are they categorizing Cold start engines as a Mega project? 

I know the Brits are working on a Jet Engine that's capable of being cooled to achieve extreme speeds and something like that would no doubt be a Mega project but that's not what their talking about!

2.why is he categorizing coding separately from Cyber as two separate "Mega" projects when all communications today are digital and require software....
It should be one Mega project for computer Hardwar, Software, Network & Security under which they address
1.Building newer and more advanced Supercomputers 2.Installation of a vast number of Server Farms all across the country 3.Fully indigenous software's 4.Cyber, network & communication Security 5.R&D (From developing Iranian processors to Iranian logic algorithms to SSD and finding new ways of storing and processing memory!) 

And I'd have no problem with his proposals if they weren't being categorized as MEGA projects! Porojeh KALLAN!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

VEVAK said:


> It's not just that!
> 1.I want to know why is Rohani categorizing PBV cold start engines as a Mega Project!! Unless Iran plans on building a fleet of spaceships this makes no sense to me! Yes building a 3.5 meters in diameter SLV for Iran's space program would be a mega project or building a bunch of 3 tone multi purpose com sats to be placed in GSO but how exactly does it make sense to make the post boost cold start engine a Mega Project I have no clue!
> Maybe @PeeD could answer this! Why are they categorizing Cold start engines as a Mega project?
> 
> I know the Brits are working on a Jet Engine that's capable of being cooled to achieve extreme speeds and something like that would no doubt be a Mega project but that's not what their talking about!
> 
> 2.why is he categorizing coding separately from Cyber as two separate "Mega" projects when all communications today are digital and require software....
> It should be one Mega project for computer Hardwar, Software, Network & Security under which they address
> 1.Building newer and more advanced Supercomputers 2.Installation of a vast number of Server Farms all across the country 3.Fully indigenous software's 4.Cyber, network & communication Security 5.R&D (From developing Iranian processors to Iranian logic algorithms to SSD and finding new ways of storing and processing memory!)
> 
> And I'd have no problem with his proposals if they weren't being categorized as MEGA projects! Porojeh KALLAN!



Probably because he is a Mega koon goshad?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> 1.I want to know why is Rohani categorizing PBV cold start engines as a Mega Project!! Unless Iran plans on building a fleet of spaceships this makes no sense to me! Yes building a 3.5 meters in diameter SLV for Iran's space program would be a mega project or building a bunch of 3 tone multi purpose com sats to be placed in GSO but how exactly does it make sense to make the post boost cold start engine a Mega Project I have no clue!
> Maybe @PeeD could answer this! Why are they categorizing Cold start engines as a Mega project?



Cold gas technology can be used in PBV, exo-atmospheric ABM interceptors, satellite bus systems, space probes and finally hypersonic glide vehicles.
Mastering the complete chain, requires work or even a specialized institute.
We saw this with Manouchehr Mantegi's landing gear project. A group just specialized in various kinds of landing gears.
Having such a expert institute in the defense industry means that this critical technology feature can always be outsources to that institute if required.
At least I hope that this is what he talks about and not just about Simorghs Saman bus system, that may have been so underfunded that it still hasn't been mastered (bottleneck technology hurdle).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> It's not just that!
> 1.I want to know why is Rohani categorizing PBV cold start engines as a Mega Project!! Unless Iran plans on building a fleet of spaceships this makes no sense to me! Yes building a 3.5 meters in diameter SLV for Iran's space program would be a mega project or building a bunch of 3 tone multi purpose com sats to be placed in GSO but how exactly does it make sense to make the post boost cold start engine a Mega Project I have no clue!
> Maybe @PeeD could answer this! Why are they categorizing Cold start engines as a Mega project?
> 
> I know the Brits are working on a Jet Engine that's capable of being cooled to achieve extreme speeds and something like that would no doubt be a Mega project but that's not what their talking about!
> 
> 2.why is he categorizing coding separately from Cyber as two separate "Mega" projects when all communications today are digital and require software....
> It should be one Mega project for computer Hardwar, Software, Network & Security under which they address
> 1.Building newer and more advanced Supercomputers 2.Installation of a vast number of Server Farms all across the country 3.Fully indigenous software's 4.Cyber, network & communication Security 5.R&D (From developing Iranian processors to Iranian logic algorithms to SSD and finding new ways of storing and processing memory!)
> 
> And I'd have no problem with his proposals if they weren't being categorized as MEGA projects! Porojeh KALLAN!



1. im not a mind reader but 5 year ago IRGC said they are working on hydrogen powered engine but i can not find the news anymore and they did not said anything after that and its been 6 years now, i say as IRGC tolled us they made much more powerful missiles but ruhani put them in the warehouse so i guess they want to bring them out if my guess is right then Qhaem SLV would be 5 times more powerful than they said it would be or they want to use it for reentry engine for warheads to make them much much more faster. so im guessing IRGC already built the engine but they do not want to keep it a secret anymore.


2. well Iran military dose not have a Cyber defence force as a official branch of military* ( Cyber defence, it exist but not as official branch of military ) *so they want to build a massive building and name it national Cyber defence and make it official it will be very nice because they get there own budget from the Ministry of Defense and there will be only one chain of command from Ministry of Defense for both Army and IRGC personals, they will separate from being small groups from the army and irgc and they will form a large group, and they will be more focused.

like this

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> 1. im not a mind reader but 5 year ago IRGC said they are working on hydrogen powered engine but i can not find the news anymore and they did not said anything after that and its been 6 years now, i say as IRGC tolled us they made much more powerful missiles but ruhani put them in the warehouse so i guess they want to bring them out if my guess is right then Qhaem SLV would be 5 times more powerful than they said it would be or they want to use it for reentry engine for warheads to make them much much more faster. so im guessing IRGC already built the engine but they do not want to keep it a secret anymore.
> 
> 
> 2. well Iran military dose not have a Cyber defence force as a official branch of military* ( Cyber defence, it exist but not as official branch of military ) *so they want to build a massive building and name it national Cyber defence and make it official it will be very nice because they get there own budget from the Ministry of Defense and there will be only one chain of command from Ministry of Defense for both Army and IRGC personals, they will separate from being small groups from the army and irgc and they will form a large group, and they will be more focused.
> 
> like this


These guys till have not developed underground parking technology! what a waste of land!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


> 1. im not a mind reader but 5 year ago IRGC said they are working on hydrogen powered engine but i can not find the news anymore and they did not said anything after that and its been 6 years now, i say as IRGC tolled us they made much more powerful missiles but ruhani put them in the warehouse so i guess they want to bring them out if my guess is right then Qhaem SLV would be 5 times more powerful than they said it would be or they want to use it for reentry engine for warheads to make them much much more faster. so im guessing IRGC already built the engine but they do not want to keep it a secret anymore.
> 
> 
> 2. well Iran military dose not have a Cyber defence force as a official branch of military* ( Cyber defence, it exist but not as official branch of military ) *so they want to build a massive building and name it national Cyber defence and make it official it will be very nice because they get there own budget from the Ministry of Defense and there will be only one chain of command from Ministry of Defense for both Army and IRGC personals, they will separate from being small groups from the army and irgc and they will form a large group, and they will be more focused.
> 
> like this



That still doesn't explain why we would turn Cold start engines that are only used in the vacuum of space into a MEGA project.
Yes Submarine production is a MEGA project, Yes upgrading all the countries Radars is a MEGA project & Yes Cyber infrastructure and security if it involves building new Supercomputers, server farms, programing, security, putting down 1000's of km of fiberoptics… would no doubt be a mega project but I don't see how cold start engine or ion engine R&D and production would require any more than a few million usd a year in funding for it to be considered a Mega Project that usually require investment in the 100's of millions and sometimes billions annually. 

When it comes to the actual SLV's no doubt they should be a MEGA project & I believe we are so far behind in terms of sats in space that we need to be sending SLV's up on a monthly or at the very least bimonthly bases and I also believe for Iran the best option would be to do exactly what SpaceX did with the Falcon 9 in terms of clustering 9 engines together and I believe if we add the capability to increase and reduce thrust to our current engines we could potentially have a sufficient enough platform to put up to ~3 ton com sats in GEO or send probes to the moon or send a man into space....
I believe adding an efficient thrust control to our current liquid fuel rocket engines is key because rockets naturally lose weight as they climb and spend fuel so controlling how much fuel they use and when would be key in building more efficient boosters and in the future reusable boosters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Cold gas technology can be used in PBV, exo-atmospheric ABM interceptors, satellite bus systems, space probes and finally hypersonic glide vehicles.
> Mastering the complete chain, requires work or even a specialized institute.
> We saw this with Manouchehr Mantegi's landing gear project. A group just specialized in various kinds of landing gears.
> Having such a expert institute in the defense industry means that this critical technology feature can always be outsources to that institute if required.
> At least I hope that this is what he talks about and not just about Simorghs Saman bus system, that may have been so underfunded that it still hasn't been mastered (bottleneck technology hurdle).



Funding is the major issue with Iran's space Program because the Sat's they are building today are simply not worth as much as the fuel required in the SLV's they are using and one big part in building a viable sat would be cold gas engines or in future ion engines so I do understand that we absolutely need such project but what I still don't understand is how they would be MEGA project.
Yes a Rocket/Jet propulsion laboratories is absolutely a necessity an organization like JPL would be a MEGA project an organization that does all types of R&D in Air & Space propulsion where they design, develop & test everything from Jet Engines to rocket engines to ion engines to testing and developing various types of fuel & super alloys and composites capable of withstanding extreme temperature.... Now that is a Mega project I would love for Iran to have but I just don't see Cold gas engines by themselves requiring so much funding to be considered as a MEGA project.


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> That still doesn't explain why we would turn Cold start engines that are only used in the vacuum of space into a MEGA project.
> Yes Submarine production is a MEGA project, Yes upgrading all the countries Radars is a MEGA project & Yes Cyber infrastructure and security if it involves building new Supercomputers, server farms, programing, security, putting down 1000's of km of fiberoptics… would no doubt be a mega project but I don't see how cold start engine or ion engine R&D and production would require any more than a few million usd a year in funding for it to be considered a Mega Project that usually require investment in the 100's of millions and sometimes billions annually.
> 
> When it comes to the actual SLV's no doubt they should be a MEGA project & I believe we are so far behind in terms of sats in space that we need to be sending SLV's up on a monthly or at the very least bimonthly bases and I also believe for Iran the best option would be to do exactly what SpaceX did with the Falcon 9 in terms of clustering 9 engines together and I believe if we add the capability to increase and reduce thrust to our current engines we could potentially have a sufficient enough platform to put up to ~3 ton com sats in GEO or send probes to the moon or send a man into space....
> I believe adding an efficient thrust control to our current liquid fuel rocket engines is key because rockets naturally lose weight as they climb and spend fuel so controlling how much fuel they use and when would be key in building more efficient boosters and in the future reusable boosters.


 
i do not know why they put it with other MEGA project but im guessing IRGC already built there cold start engines and the want to use it ( military or civilian ). 

true true true true true but remember that our liquid fuel engines are very old and weak in the short distance they use a lot of fuel, with 4 engines simorgh will get you 500 km, make them 8 engines and it will get you 1000 km and you will raise the risk of failure almost twice and engines do not have the ability to keep up in the long run simorgh already dose not have a great success chart as you know that very well, unless they use Khorramshahr engines in your proposal that will get us almost 2 ton cargo capacity for let say the same range but much more appropriate results or build a new engine maybe solid fuel as they were going to do in Ghaem slv.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> exo-atmospheric ABM interceptors





PeeD said:


> finally hypersonic glide vehicles


don't count on that, Sir Issac Newton laws wont allow such uses



skyshadow said:


> i do not know why they put it with other MEGA project but im guessing IRGC already built there cold start engines and the want to use it ( military or civilian ).


let not attribute anything to IRGC. it is not their in their work field


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> don't count on that, Sir Issac Newton laws wont allow such uses
> 
> 
> let not attribute anything to IRGC. it is not their in their work field



Not as propulsion but for control and stabilization.


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Not as propulsion but for control and stabilization.


Even for that ,because of inertia and law of motion that cold propulsion either won't provide enough force or if it provide that won't be able to provide it in fast enough time to be used for such purposes. It's better to use normal propulsion for that.
After all don't forget intercepting an incoming missile is all about timing. You don't have hours of timing and planning all must happen in minutes and seconds.


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> Even for that ,because of inertia and law of motion that cold propulsion either won't provide enough force or if it provide that won't be able to provide it in fast enough time to be used for such purposes. It's better to use normal propulsion for that.
> After all don't forget intercepting an incoming missile is all about timing. You don't have hours of timing and planning all must happen in minutes and seconds.



Agreed. I didn't talk about major course changes via cold gas propulsion, just axis stabilization and fine course adjustments.
This is a major critical subsystem for all those systems I mentioned, without it its almost impossible.


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> That still doesn't explain why we would turn Cold start engines that are only used in the vacuum of space into a MEGA project.
> Yes Submarine production is a MEGA project, Yes upgrading all the countries Radars is a MEGA project & Yes Cyber infrastructure and security if it involves building new Supercomputers, server farms, programing, security, putting down 1000's of km of fiberoptics… would no doubt be a mega project but I don't see how cold start engine or ion engine R&D and production would require any more than a few million usd a year in funding for it to be considered a Mega Project that usually require investment in the 100's of millions and sometimes billions annually.
> 
> When it comes to the actual SLV's no doubt they should be a MEGA project & I believe we are so far behind in terms of sats in space that we need to be sending SLV's up on a monthly or at the very least bimonthly bases and I also believe for Iran the best option would be to do exactly what SpaceX did with the Falcon 9 in terms of clustering 9 engines together and I believe if we add the capability to increase and reduce thrust to our current engines we could potentially have a sufficient enough platform to put up to ~3 ton com sats in GEO or send probes to the moon or send a man into space....
> I believe adding an efficient thrust control to our current liquid fuel rocket engines is key because rockets naturally lose weight as they climb and spend fuel so controlling how much fuel they use and when would be key in building more efficient boosters and in the future reusable boosters.



do not forget that the plan for building and continuing the construction of the 150-person aircraft was also one of the MEGA projects.

https://namehnews.com/fa/news/537961/جزئیات-مجوز-رئیس-جمهور-برای-اولویت-بخشی-به-5-طرح-امنیتی-و-دفاعی

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

3th of khordad

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

Hovakhshatar said:


> I could be completely wrong; but could they be talking about this type of rocket engine??
> 
> I could be completely wrong; but could they be talking about this kind of rocket engine?



They most definitely are talking about a cryogenic engine, I am not sure why some did not see this rather obvious fact?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Hovakhshatar said:


> I could be completely wrong; but could they be talking about this type of rocket engine??
> 
> I could be completely wrong; but could they be talking about this kind of rocket engine?


doubt he meant that , that's a logical step if you want to have meaningful space program , but if he meant that , he would have said that and also let be honest our methodology is not in a grade to build that.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Hovakhshatar said:


> Wouldn’t it explain why it’s categorized as a mega project? Isn’t this engine the next technology jump for Iran?


to be honnest its two to three step away.
first we must build bigger engines , then you must think about cryogenic engines
By the way if they mean cryogenic engine then good


----------



## WinterNights

Hack-Hook said:


> to be honnest its two to three step away.
> first we must build bigger engines , then you must think about cryogenic engines



If they have clearly hinted at it being cryogenic, why are you assuming it's something else? Short of them saying "cryogenic" do you expect any bigger hints?


----------



## Hack-Hook

WinterNights said:


> If they have clearly hinted at it being cryogenic, why are you assuming it's something else? Short of them saying "cryogenic" do you expect any bigger hints?


They didn't hint at cryogenic engine . what he said was cold gas propulsion which is something else and is used to change satellite orbit and maneuvering satellites .


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar-373*

Bavar-373 is a long-range mobile air defense system Iran launched the project in 2009 _ 2010, system is 1.5 times more advanc and powerful than the Russian S-300 PMU 2 in terms of defense against aircraft and cruise missiles. it use three local radar and missile systems with a range of over 200 km and 40 km and 30 km altitude with high maneuverability and fully indigenous, Bavar-373 missile defense system uses two or three types of missiles to confront aerial targets in different layers Bavar-373 system uses a phased array radar like Russian 96L6 radar for tracking aerodynamic targets and ballistic missiles in medium to long ranges, mounted on the (10x10) ZAFAR heavy truck.



S-300 PMU 2, LEMZ 96L6 radar maximum detection range is 300 km and it can track up to 100 targets simultaneously.











Bavar-373, Meraj 4 radar maximum detection range is +500 km and it can track up to 200 targets simultaneously.















S-300 PMU 2, 48N6E2 missile with a range of 200 km, and altitude ranging up to 28 km.










Bavar-373, Sayyad 2c and Sayyad 3c and Sayyad 4 missiles with a range of ~120 km and ~200 km and ~250 km, and altitude ranging up to 27 km and 30 km and 40 km.


Sayyad 2c, range: ~120 km








Sayyad 3c, range: ~200 km








Sayyad 4, range: ~250 km














Bavar-373 launchers

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar-373*
> 
> Bavar-373 is a long-range mobile air defense system Iran launched the project in 2009 _ 2010, system is 1.5 times more advanc and powerful than the Russian S-300 PMU 2 in terms of defense against aircraft and cruise missiles. it use three local radar and missile systems with a range of over 200 km and 40 km and 30 km altitude with high maneuverability and fully indigenous, Bavar-373 missile defense system uses two or three types of missiles to confront aerial targets in different layers Bavar-373 system uses a phased array radar like Russian 96L6 radar for tracking aerodynamic targets and ballistic missiles in medium to long ranges, mounted on the (10x10) ZAFAR heavy truck.
> 
> 
> 
> S-300 PMU 2, LEMZ 96L6 radar maximum detection range is 300 km and it can track up to 100 targets simultaneously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bavar-373, Meraj 4 radar maximum detection range is +500 km and it can track up to 200 targets simultaneously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> S-300 PMU 2, 48N6E2 missile with a range of 200 km, and altitude ranging up to 28 km.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bavar-373, Sayyad 2c and Sayyad 3c and Sayyad 4 missiles with a range of ~120 km and ~200 km and ~250 km, and altitude ranging up to 27 km and 30 km and 40 km.
> 
> 
> Sayyad 2c, range: ~120 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayyad 3c, range: ~200 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayyad 4, range: ~250 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bavar-373 launchers


Sayyad-2C/3C/4 ranges are 70/120/200 km respectively. And it's thought Bavar-373 only uses the Sayyad-4. Lastly, Meraj 4 is more comparable to the 64N6 'Big Bird' radar, with similar capabilities and role.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> Sayyad-2C/3C/4 ranges are 70/120/200 km respectively. And it's thought Bavar-373 only uses the Sayyad-4. Lastly, Meraj 4 is more comparable to the 64N6 'Big Bird' radar, with similar capabilities and role.


6 years ago when they launched Sayyad 2 *SD2M *they said it has range of 75 km and one can not oppose with the range of 120 km for its radar, but you are ignoring the fact that Sayyad 2 was upgraded to *SD2AM* and *SD2CM *one can say range was upgraded each time too as IRGC already said 3th khordad has a range of 105 km so i say that SD2CM so that's that. and i believe its close to 120 km as they dose not say the real range.








and 2 years ago they said thay going to increase the range of Sayyad 3c

*برد موشک صیاد 3 افزایش می یابد*

http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/83133843


as Bavar only use one missile, well that not accurate as they showed Sayyad 3 and Sayyad 4 for Bavar 373 and they already confirm it.

On 30 September 2011, Commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili said that the Bavar-373 missile defense system uses two or three types of missiles to confront aerial targets in different layers. He stressed that the Iranian Defense Ministry has been actively pursuing the legal case over Russia's delivery of S-300 systems to Iran. The Iranian commander said the Bavar-373 surface-to-air missile system is more advanced than the Russian S-300 missile defense system.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/bavar-373.htm








as for Meraj 4 i agree with you i should have compared it with big bird and i should have compared this unknown Bavar radar with LEMZ 96L6 radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Type59

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 501618



Have they been upgraded and how many in service?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

it seems that this radar would be very powerful for detection and for electronic warfare. it would be a new, new generation radar. I think his name is Navid ... Who would have more detail on the forum?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

IRIADF S-300PMU2 has been moved to Asaluiye to protect the vast petro-chemical industry there. Probably the Bushehr battery.
Now only Bandar Abbas's Persian Star refinery is at direct risk.

Moving bombers, fighters and ships around sends a message to the enemy. Moving a S-300 battery has the same effect.

Possible that a limited, regionally restricted skirmish with Saudi Arabia/UAE is inbound.
This would be the first time Iran would engage in a high-tech conflict to show whether its own systems and concepts are credible or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Type59 said:


> Have they been upgraded and how many in service?


yes they have been upgraded by Iran, well we ordered 200 of them 50 was given to Iran and then the order for others was canceled but in Iran _ Iraq war unknown numbers of them were taken by Iran and some came to Iran to run from US air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1130482992370130945

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Type59

skyshadow said:


> yes they have been upgraded by Iran, well we ordered 200 of them 50 was given to Iran and then the order for others was canceled but in Iran _ Iraq war unknown numbers of them were taken by Iran and some came to Iran to run from US air force.



Any info on updates.


----------



## skyshadow

Type59 said:


> Any info on updates.


no, no information has yet been published by Iran


----------



## Type59

skyshadow said:


> no, no information has yet been published by Iran



No problem. I seen the Polish upgrade, that's impressive.

If have more pictures plz post. I flicked through 30 pages of this thread, will scan more over the weeks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

This video shows trucks traveling on a highway, but there's really nothing to it that proves that the missiles were in the move. 

Let us also not forget that it is a routine military tactic for military leaders to keep changing the positions of their forces and equipment, especially when they're expecting war. 



Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1130482992370130945

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1130482992370130945


Lol. I love how everybody is a missile expert. The guy who took the video shows the S300 missile canisters and says these are short range missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

Arminkh said:


> Lol. I love how everybody is a missile expert. The guy who took the video shows the S300 missile canisters and says these are short range missiles



Idiots are everywhere man, I'm not trying to act like I'm not one from time-to-time but ignorant fools who think they know it all are endless...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

Do we have any thing new to be unveiled as we getting close to 3rd Khordad day?Bavar?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> Do we have any thing new to be unveiled as we getting close to 3rd Khordad day?Bavar?


bavar and qhaher

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> bavar and qhaher


My hopes are for Bavar ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> My hopes are for Bavar ..


I think it is what they should focus on. Everyone is betting on the enemies' superior airforce. If Iran can show enough credibility in the field of AD, then no fool would even think about attacking Iran anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Oldman1

Arminkh said:


> I think it is what they should focus on. Everyone is betting on the enemies' superior airforce. If Iran can show enough credibility in the field of AD, then no fool would even think about attacking Iran anymore.



Enough credibility in AD you have to be like the Russians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Oldman1 said:


> Enough credibility in AD you have to be like the Russians.


That's definitely the intention.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Arminkh said:


> That's definitely the intention.



Do you even have that many?


----------



## WinterNights

I am not very familiar with Iranian dates, when is 3rd of Khordad? is it tomorrow? Are we expecting to see unveilings?
I think this is a very good time to show case some new toys given the recent tensions.


----------



## Saddam Hussein

WinterNights said:


> I am not very familiar with Iranian dates, when is 3rd of Khordad? is it tomorrow? Are we expecting to see unveilings?
> I think this is a very good time to show case some new toys given the recent tensions.



who needs dates, the only thing you must know is that everyday is ashura

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> I am not very familiar with Iranian dates, when is 3rd of Khordad? is it tomorrow? Are we expecting to see unveilings?
> I think this is a very good time to show case some new toys given the recent tensions.


yes its tomorrow.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> yes its tomorrow.



Thanks bro, hopefully we will get some good unveilings, such as Bavar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Thanks bro, hopefully we will get some good unveilings, such as Bavar.


yes im hoping for that too


----------



## Arminkh

Oldman1 said:


> Do you even have that many?


There is no data available about the number of home made systems that Iran has. But if the Ballistic Missiles is any clue, they are able to mass produce the AD systems in high numbers. They also have given it priority for almost a decade now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

No unveiling?


----------



## PeeD

Here a S-300 scenario from the simulation DCS:






Our friend in the video is doing a good work but in the real world, his scenario would only have the chance to work with up to S-300PM/PMU level system not generally against all radar guided SAMs.
It may work for command guided SAM systems but SARH (to some extend) and certainly SAGG equipped systems are immune to such a beam maneuver.
They effectively represent a bi-static radar system of which one of the receivers will always have to chance to receive the necessary doppler shift to distinguish the target.

Hence for Iranian S-300PMU-2, this tactic won't work and most likely also not for systems like the 3rd Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Arminkh said:


> There is no data available about the number of home made systems that Iran has. But if the Ballistic Missiles is any clue, they are able to mass produce the AD systems in high numbers. They also have given it priority for almost a decade now.



ADS is the most important of the weapon systems and military equipment of any country. Now there is a threat from stealth cruise missiles and hypersonic maneuvering missiles and jamming missiles that may be involved in a war in the 2020s. ADS have to be on top game so the nation is not pushed around in a war.

Having spare ADS that will defend from regular cruise missiles is always good for Iran. Ample mobile radar too is vital to pick up that the enemy is attacking with regular cruise missiles and to send out ADS from underground cover to intercept. Although jamming missiles will mess up this strategy. These are the new arrivals of the next decade and Iran is prepare for the three if they want to not just win the war, but to stop it early on.

There is a reason to have limited ADS on deployment and have ample reserves is for this reason, the enemy will want to use up stockpiles of old cruise missiles on Iran, stockpiles that old ADS will hit. The newer cruise missiles should be up to ten times the cost of old cruise missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


>


Lol i want to upload the seame thing to btw

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Iran's automatic AA guns are the first line of defence





















Iran's ZSU-23-4 are the second line of defence















Iran's automatic SAMAVAT AA guns are the third line of defence
















Iran's automatic SAEAR AA guns are the fourth line of defence






















Iran's YA ZAHRA and FM 80 and HEZR _ 9 and RAPIER short range SAM are the fifth and sixth line of defence




























Iran's TOR M 1 short range SAM are the seventh line of defence











Iran's SAM _ 6 and upgraded RAAD _ 1 and upgraded RAAD _ 2 SAM are the eighth line of defence






















Iran's Hawk and upgraded SHALAMCHE SAM are the ninth line of defence

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Iran's MEHRAAB SAM are the tenth line of defence

















Iran's TABBAS SAM are the eleventh line of defence


















Iran's 3rd of Khordad SAM are the twelfth line of defence

















Iran's upgraded S _ 200 SAM are the thirteenth line of defence















Iran's TALASH _ 1 SAM are the fourteenth line of defence


















Iran's TALASH _ 2 SAM are the fifteenth line of defence


















Iran's S 300 PMU 2 SAM are the sixteenth line of defence



















Iran's Bavar 373 SAM are the seventeenth line of defence

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

skyshadow said:


> Iran's MEHRAAB SAM are the tenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TABBAS SAM are the eleventh line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's 3rd of Khordad SAM are the twelfth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's upgraded S _ 200 SAM are the thirteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TALASH _ 1 SAM are the fourteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TALASH _ 2 SAM are the fifteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's S 300 PMU 2 SAM are the sixteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Bavar 373 SAM are the seventeenth line of defence


Wow cool. I wonder how much line of defences does Pakistan have

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Wow cool. I wonder how much line of defences does Pakistan have



thanks, tag me if you find out i would love to know

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sepasgozar

skyshadow said:


> thanks, tag me if you find out i would love to know


Pashmam rikht. Excuse the obscenity, but this is rather impressive. Most video analyses skip the first ten lines...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

sepasgozar said:


> Pashmam rikht. Excuse the obscenity, but this is rather impressive. Most video analyses skip the first ten lines...



 thanks. yes it is, i wanted to show Iran's ability to hit cruise missile as some ppl say Iran dose not have the Layer defense in SAMs for that task so from AA guns i worked my way up so everyone can see what options Iran have to hit cruise missiles and other low flying missiles or bombs or fighter jets or UAVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> Iran's MEHRAAB SAM are the tenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TABBAS SAM are the eleventh line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's 3rd of Khordad SAM are the twelfth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's upgraded S _ 200 SAM are the thirteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TALASH _ 1 SAM are the fourteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's TALASH _ 2 SAM are the fifteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's S 300 PMU 2 SAM are the sixteenth line of defence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran's Bavar 373 SAM are the seventeenth line of defence


Great showing all of them in one post.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Any modern military should have a MANPAD per squad with multiple missiles. And a radar based night vision MANPAD for each platoon.


----------



## TheImmortal

zectech said:


> Any modern military should have a MANPAD per squad with multiple missiles. And a radar based night vision MANPAD for each platoon.



Manpads are not really that lethal to modern fighter jets especially if the fighter jet is flying at sufficent altitude.

Against CAS or helicopters it is a threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

I wished for someone in this forum to open up a new and stand alone topic about the EMP weapons.. When I read about all the electronic based weapon system that Iran is producing what come in to my mind is always how do these systems perform under EMP environment.. having worked on the Chip manufacturing and failure analysis I have seen first hand what happens to any electronic component exposed to these environments.. US military spend lots of $$$ on the specific methods to harden electronics against EMP effects.. so here is the question...Does Iran have techniques to harden their products..and also does Iran have EMP weapons...in the first few hours of any large scale conflict we will surely see the extensive use of EMP by the US forces to degrade most of Iran's defensive (AD) and offensive (missiles) equipment. EMP deserves its own section..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I wished for someone in this forum to open up a new and stand alone topic about the EMP weapons.. When I read about all the electronic based weapon system that Iran is producing what come in to my mind is always how do these systems perform under EMP environment.. having worked on the Chip manufacturing and failure analysis I have seen first hand what happens to any electronic component exposed to these environments.. US military spend lots of $$$ on the specific methods to harden electronics against EMP effects.. so here is the question...Does Iran have techniques to harden their products..and also does Iran have EMP weapons...in the first few hours of any large scale conflict we will surely see the extensive use of EMP by the US forces to degrade most of Iran's defensive (AD) and offensive (missiles) equipment. EMP deserves its own section..



Any significant type of EMP is created by a thermonuclear explosion. So please explain to us how Iran would be exposed to “extensive use” of EMPs.

https://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/emp.htm

This site has simple table comparing effect of an EMP source type weapon vs nuclear weapon vs natural emp sources (solar flare). As you can see EMP source weapons (ex CHAMP) effect range is either severely reduced to non existent.

Also explains how to insulate electronics against an EMP attack.

EMP shouldn’t be a major concern for Iran, instead cyber attacks on critical infastructure is much more probable threat.


----------



## Blue In Green

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension

Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:

What do you guys make of this?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension
> 
> Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:
> 
> What do you guys make of this?


There could be many reasons. Here are what I think:


With S-400, Iran can theoretically shoot down US, Emirate's and KSA's jets well inside Arabian peninsula. That could increase the tensions even more and increase the chance of a war as a result of miscalculations
Russia and Iran are allies in some respects and competitors in others. For example, despite what it seems, Russia should be more than happy about recent sanctions on Iran. Reason is, Iran was working on an oil pipeline that would pass through Iraq and Syria and move Iran's crude oil and gas to Mediterranean sea. That would be a big problem for Russia as it would lose its monopolistic position as the sole owner of oil pipe to Europe. So Russia will do its best to maintain the status quo and make sure Iran doesn't become too strong.
Iran is opening a new naval base in Syria right next to those of Russia. Russia is not happy about this as it would mean more possible attacks from Israel on those areas and possibility of casualties in the crossfire. And again this would help Iran even more with the above pipeline plan. So it may be a show of discontent from Russian side.
I think Iran is technically advanced enough to build its own AD. Even less complicated local product is preferred to a high-tech imported one in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Any significant type of EMP is created by a thermonuclear explosion. So please explain to us how Iran would be exposed to “extensive use” of EMPs.
> 
> https://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/emp.htm
> 
> This site has simple table comparing effect of an EMP source type weapon vs nuclear weapon vs natural emp sources (solar flare). As you can see EMP source weapons (ex CHAMP) effect range is either severely reduced to non existent.
> 
> Also explains how to insulate electronics against an EMP attack.
> 
> EMP shouldn’t be a major concern for Iran, instead cyber attacks on critical infastructure is much more probable threat.


Although I am no expert in this field I know at the component level they try to protect the inputs of a CMOS device by special diode arrangements.. This is at the chip level..same at the card level and they use enclosure shielding at the box level..same goes for the cabling extensive shielding and that includes the power sources...the buildings housing sensitive equipments. Are also shielded...all of this costs lots of money and makes equipments heavier and difficult to repair...so if Emp is not a significant issue they must be crazy...I like to hear from anyone who has any expertise on this.. Why...because this is one weapon that if you have it you will keep it very quiet..



Arminkh said:


> There could be many reasons. Here are what I think:
> 
> 
> With S-400, Iran can theoretically shoot down US, Emirate's and KSA's jets well inside Arabian peninsula. That could increase the tensions even more and increase the chance of a war as a result of miscalculations
> Russia and Iran are allies in some respects and competitors in others. For example, despite what it seems, Russia should be more than happy about recent sanctions on Iran. Reason is, Iran was working on an oil pipeline that would pass through Iraq and Syria and move Iran's crude oil and gas to Mediterranean sea. That would be a big problem for Russia as it would lose its monopolistic position as the sole owner of oil pipe to Europe. So Russia will do its best to maintain the status quo and make sure Iran doesn't become too strong.
> Iran is opening a new naval base in Syria right next to those of Russia. Russia is not happy about this as it would mean more possible attacks from Israel on those areas and possibility of casualties in the crossfire. And again this would help Iran even more with the above pipeline plan. So it may be a show of discontent from Russian side.
> I think Iran is technically advanced enough to build its own AD. Even less complicated local product is preferred to a high-tech imported one in my opinion.


There is one more reason.....Russia does not want to be identified as being hostile to sunni Arab population...they have large sunni population and they see no reason to make enemies out of sunnies..they have plans to sell them lots of equipment..this reason has been identified by many Russian exper

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

aryobarzan said:


> Although I am no expert in this field I know at the component level they try to protect the inputs of a CMOS device by special diode arrangements.. This is at the chip level..same at the card level and they use enclosure shielding at the box level..same goes for the cabling extensive shielding and that includes the power sources...the buildings housing sensitive equipments. Are also shielded...all of this costs lots of money and makes equipments heavier and difficult to repair...so if Emp is not a significant issue they must be crazy...I like to hear from anyone who has any expertise on this.. Why...because this is one weapon that if you have it you will keep it very quiet..
> 
> 
> There is one more reason.....Russia does not want to be identified as being hostile to sunni Arab population...they have large sunni population and they see no reason to make enemies out of sunnies..they have plans to sell them lots of equipment..this reason has been identified by many Russian exper


well the protection youre saying will cost twice the original power grid.


----------



## skyshadow

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension
> 
> Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:
> 
> What do you guys make of this?



well i told some one that if Iran put an order for S400 then Russia will do what they did to us with S300 that's why when they offered S400 we said to them NO we want S300 PMU 2. and who you guys going to believe Iran or Russia after what Russia did to Iran in 2009?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

2 days ago air defence unit became part of the Army 


*ارتقای عملیاتی قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا با تشکیل نیروی چهارم ارتش*

http://defapress.ir/fa/news/348406/...-هوایی-خاتم‌الانبیا-با-تشکیل-نیروی-چهارم-ارتش

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension
> 
> Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:
> 
> What do you guys make of this?



Russia only provides S-400 and other high tech weapon systems to banana countries like Turkey and Persian Gulf Arabs.

And some naive individuals on this board thought that one day Russia would be selling SU-35 to Iran once weapons embargoes are up. Russia is arguing that a DEFENSIVE weapon system is going to stroke tensions. What kind of logic is that. But of course Saudi Arabia’s purchase of THAAD does not? Lol like I said Russia is a joke.

One thing is clear, Russia will not upset Israel or the US or the Arab countries. Only reason they gave the S-300 to Iran, was they were facing high penalty (billions in fines) for breach of contract in International Court.

Russia is on a slow path to its own destruction. Putin has done nothing but slowly erode and destroy any integrity this once great power had. He will soon be gone due to term limits and then US/NATO will tear that country to pieces like they did to Ukraine.

I agree with Iran seeking S-400. They didn’t purchase enough S-300 systems for a country the size of Iran and Bavar 373 is unproven.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Russia only provides S-400 and other high tech weapon systems to banana countries like Turkey and Persian Gulf Arabs.
> 
> And some naive individuals on this board thought that one day Russia would be selling SU-35 to Iran once weapons embargoes are up. Russia is arguing that a DEFENSIVE weapon system is going to stroke tensions. What kind of logic is that. But of course Saudi Arabia’s purchase of THAAD does not? Lol like I said Russia is a joke.
> 
> One thing is clear, Russia will not upset Israel or the US or the Arab countries. Only reason they gave the S-300 to Iran, was they were facing high penalty (billions in fines) for breach of contract in International Court.
> 
> Russia is on a slow path to its own destruction. Putin has done nothing but slowly erode and destroy any integrity this once great power had. He will soon be gone due to term limits and then US/NATO will tear that country to pieces like they did to Ukraine.
> 
> I agree with Iran seeking S-400. They didn’t purchase enough S-300 systems for a country the size of Iran and Bavar 373 is unproven.



I don't have a high opinion of Russians personally...That's all I have to really ad to this since I agree with you for the most part.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension
> 
> Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:
> 
> What do you guys make of this?



It's really anything because Iran does not need the S-400


----------



## Aramagedon

Arminkh said:


> There could be many reasons. Here are what I think:
> 
> 
> With S-400, Iran can theoretically shoot down US, Emirate's and KSA's jets well inside Arabian peninsula. That could increase the tensions even more and increase the chance of a war as a result of miscalculations
> Russia and Iran are allies in some respects and competitors in others. For example, despite what it seems, Russia should be more than happy about recent sanctions on Iran. Reason is, Iran was working on an oil pipeline that would pass through Iraq and Syria and move Iran's crude oil and gas to Mediterranean sea. That would be a big problem for Russia as it would lose its monopolistic position as the sole owner of oil pipe to Europe. So Russia will do its best to maintain the status quo and make sure Iran doesn't become too strong.
> Iran is opening a new naval base in Syria right next to those of Russia. Russia is not happy about this as it would mean more possible attacks from Israel on those areas and possibility of casualties in the crossfire. And again this would help Iran even more with the above pipeline plan. So it may be a show of discontent from Russian side.
> I think Iran is technically advanced enough to build its own AD. Even less complicated local product is preferred to a high-tech imported one in my opinion.




We should either be with West or East.. If Zarif is doing his best to promote relations with Europe we can't be stragic allies with East anymore..

Anyway our story is repeating again.. During Iran-Iraq war nor East or West sold us weapons.

At this time we should work on Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SubWater

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Russia only provides S-400 and other high tech weapon systems to banana countries like Turkey and Persian Gulf Arabs.
> 
> And some naive individuals on this board thought that one day Russia would be selling SU-35 to Iran once weapons embargoes are up. Russia is arguing that a DEFENSIVE weapon system is going to stroke tensions. What kind of logic is that. But of course Saudi Arabia’s purchase of THAAD does not? Lol like I said Russia is a joke.
> 
> One thing is clear, Russia will not upset Israel or the US or the Arab countries. Only reason they gave the S-300 to Iran, was they were facing high penalty (billions in fines) for breach of contract in International Court.
> 
> Russia is on a slow path to its own destruction. Putin has done nothing but slowly erode and destroy any integrity this once great power had. He will soon be gone due to term limits and then US/NATO will tear that country to pieces like they did to Ukraine.
> 
> I agree with Iran seeking S-400. They didn’t purchase enough S-300 systems for a country the size of Iran and Bavar 373 is unproven.





BlueInGreen2 said:


> I don't have a high opinion of Russians personally...That's all I have to really ad to this since I agree with you for the most part.


Agreed,the russians are totally worthless politically and economically,*but then they always were*,so this isnt exactly a new phenomenon I`m afraid.
Considering both russias political untrustworthiness and economic unreliability Iran should be looking to ween itself off of russian nuclear fuel for bushehr as soon as possible,and the tearing up of the jcpoa would allow iran to do this by massively increasing its enrichment program,in addition this would also provide iran with large quantities of spent fuel to reprocess and from which acquire the plutonium which could be used for mox fuel...or other things..
Ultimately both irans security and the future that that security guarantees lays in irans hands...and no one elses.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

From left to right: 

Kavosh Radar 
Raad passive system 
SevomeKhordad SAM system

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Navigator

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension
> Russia rejected Irans S-400 AD system request:
> What do you guys make of this?



All Russian sources today reported that it's fake news and that Russia didn't receive orders from Iran for the S-400.
https://www.interfax.ru/world/663202
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6493585

Moreover, Iran itself has previously (in 2016) stated that it does not plan to order the C-400 ..

“The Russian side has offered the S-400 systems to Iran,” said the minister, according to Tasnim News Agency of Iran. “But we don’t have plans to purchase them.”
https://news.am/eng/news/342609.html

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## mohsen

Navigator said:


> All Russian sources today reported that it's fake news and that Russia didn't receive orders from Iran for the S-400.
> https://www.interfax.ru/world/663202
> https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6493585
> 
> Moreover, Iran itself has previously (in 2016) stated that it does not plan to order the C-400 ..
> 
> “The Russian side has offered the S-400 systems to Iran,” said the minister, according to Tasnim News Agency of Iran. “But we don’t have plans to purchase them.”
> https://news.am/eng/news/342609.html


This news was the continuation of the same ongoing psyops of the past weeks.
Obviously the goal was the morale of Iranian people.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Navigator said:


> All Russian sources today reported that it's fake news and that Russia didn't receive orders from Iran for the S-400.
> https://www.interfax.ru/world/663202
> https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6493585
> 
> Moreover, Iran itself has previously (in 2016) stated that it does not plan to order the C-400 ..
> 
> “The Russian side has offered the S-400 systems to Iran,” said the minister, according to Tasnim News Agency of Iran. “But we don’t have plans to purchase them.”
> https://news.am/eng/news/342609.html



Of course Russia would deny the reports, it makes them look like an unreliable supplier in future arms deals with other countries.

Fact is they still haven’t delivered Yak-130’s to Syria and withheld S-300 for years from Syria and only gave it to Syria after Israel publically embarrassed them by causing the shot down of an Russian military aircraft.

History shows Russia’s actions



mohsen said:


> This news was the continuation of the same ongoing psyops of the past weeks.
> Obviously the goal was the morale of Iranian people.



Yeah it’s not like since 1990’s Russia has violated multiple arms deals with Iran.

Some of you need to get your head out of the sand, if you think Russia will ever be a true ally to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Navigator said:


> All Russian sources today reported that it's fake news and that Russia didn't receive orders from Iran for the S-400.
> https://www.interfax.ru/world/663202
> https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6493585
> 
> Moreover, Iran itself has previously (in 2016) stated that it does not plan to order the C-400 ..
> 
> “The Russian side has offered the S-400 systems to Iran,” said the minister, according to Tasnim News Agency of Iran. “But we don’t have plans to purchase them.”
> https://news.am/eng/news/342609.html



Fair enough, there is two sides to every coin but actions speak volumes compared to words and Russias track record record regarding arms shipments to Iran is abysmal, down right predatory.

Russia used the national security of Iran as a geopolitical bargaining chip for nine-ish years (if I'm not mistaken) and only when the real threat of litigation via international courts was put into play by Iran did they finally capitulate and honor a deal that should have been completed long ago. I'm open to the idea that the news surrounding a supposed S-400 Iran transfer are riddled with misinformation, sure, but that doesn't exonerate Russia from its past actions whatsoever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Of course Russia would deny the reports, it makes them look like an unreliable supplier in future arms deals with other countries.
> 
> Fact is they still haven’t delivered Yak-130’s to Syria and withheld S-300 for years from Syria and only gave it to Syria after Israel publically embarrassed them by causing the shot down of an Russian military aircraft.
> 
> History shows Russia’s actions
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah it’s not like since 1990’s Russia has violated multiple arms deals with Iran.
> 
> Some of you need to get your head out of the sand, if you think Russia will ever be a true ally to Iran.


I'm not counting on Russia for anything, and I'm not a fan of importing anything.
But this is news is about Iran, not Russia.

Only a fool orders a system, just to order a different one, shortly after, all the extra expenses for what? what changed suddenly?
Nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Manpads are not really that lethal to modern fighter jets especially if the fighter jet is flying at sufficent altitude.
> 
> Against CAS or helicopters it is a threat.


But Mohammad Jafari stated some years ago that from research, 60% of US's air attacks in wars are via helicopters. I guess thats why there are alot of MANPAD with IRGC/Iranian army high mobility units on ATVs, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> I'm not counting on Russia for anything, and I'm not a fan of importing anything.
> But this is news is about Iran, not Russia.
> 
> Only a fool orders a system, just to order a different one, shortly after, all the extra expenses for what? what changed suddenly?
> Nothing.



Iran’s version of S-300 specifications and S-400 are not THAT much different.

And Iran needs more SAMs and since S-300 is no longer produced Iran would either have to buy S-400 or wait for S-500 export version.

Iran’s S-300 order was small and not enough to stand up against a concerted air campaign. Iran needs more long range SAMs and Iran would have to be a fool to hang its entire long range air defense doctrine on an unproven system like Bavar-373.

Iran would benefit from S-400 or S-500 along with another order of TOR short range system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s version of S-300 specifications and S-400 are not THAT much different.
> 
> And Iran needs more SAMs and since S-300 is no longer produced Iran would either have to buy S-400 or wait for S-500 export version.
> 
> Iran’s S-300 order was small and not enough to stand up against a concerted air campaign. Iran needs more long range SAMs and Iran would have to be a fool to hang its entire long range air defense doctrine on an unproven system like Bavar-373.
> 
> Iran would benefit from S-400 or S-500 along with another order of TOR short range system.


Being similar doesn't mean that the training, supply and maintenance is the same, do you think our commanders woke up the next day and realized they have ordered short of threats?!

Bavar is way better than S300, not because of it's performance (which is superior), but because of the domestic chain of supply, they can apply any update that they want, unlike S400, which during a war, even a malfunctioning screw can suspend it's operation for an unspecified time.
Also wide users of S400, gives Americans a good chance to study it and compromise it's weaknesses.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

My god!

Iran does not need the S-400. And for the famous S-300 PMU the truth is that it is not a PMU2 but a PMU3 or better still a S-300 IR. The S-300 of Iran is unique in the world include elements of the S-400 and even S-350 Vityaz ...

With the arrival of Bavar 373, Iran becomes autonomous in the construction of long-range air defense system. Iran is supported by the S-300 IR, the Tallash 3 which has become a long carry with the Sayyade 3 missile and the S-200 is greatly improved.

Iran would already work on Bavar 373 II

So Iran does not need S-400

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s S-300 order was small and not enough to stand up against a concerted air campaign. Iran needs more long range SAMs and Iran would have to be a fool to hang its entire long range air defense doctrine on an unproven system like Bavar-373



IRI does not buy to use in case of war. Even the s300 was most probably bought to rest and compare to indigenous systems. The fact that that it was such small quantity goes to strengthen that hypothesis. They can’t compromise a non functioning system and disrupted maintenance in case of war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

I have to jump in to this Russia bashing...In this one I am with Russia...why ..because as the famous war criminal Winston Churchil said.*"countries do not have friends ..they have interests". *So why are we Iranians so upset when Russia is looking after her own interests..Being friend with Iran does not make them enemy of our enemies.....and if some one offers them to give up Iran and gain some thing in return of course they should do that...we are not in a school yard...But I know the Iranian way of life is to stick with your friends to the end..and that is fine but do not expect others to have the same code of conduct..Make your Bavar and the hell with them all..the strength should come from within.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> I have to jump in to this Russia bashing...In this one I am with Russia...why ..because as the famous war criminal Winston Churchil said.*"countries do not have friends ..they have interests". *So why are we Iranians so upset when Russia is looking after her own interests..Being friend with Iran does not make them enemy of our enemies.....and if some one offers them to give up Iran and gain some thing in return of course they should do that...we are not in a school yard...But I know the Iranian way of life is to stick with your friends to the end..and that is fine but do not expect others to have the same code of conduct..Make your Bavar and the hell with them all..the strength should come from within.



That is why Russia is weak and alone.
That is why US/NATO are on it’s doorstep.

It sold Iran out for lies and false promises. It backed sanctions on Iran and believed the US when it said the missile shield in Europe was for Iranian missiles.

Well karma is truly a bitch. Russia now has Missile shields and US military on its borders and lost its last major ally and Soviet Union satellite country (Ukraine) to the West.

Saddam is gone (Russia didn’t help
That ally).
Gaddafi is gone (Russia didn’t help that ally).
Ukraine is gone (half *** effort by Russia to save it)
Arabs are aligned with US so Russia has no in roads there.

Outside of poor Syria and crumbling Venezuela, NO ONE likes Russia.

China expanded its power, but doesn’t throw Pakistan under the bus to achieve a quick concession from the West. Because China like Iran thinks decades ahead not months like the Russians. China is a real global power and not some spurned Whore who is desperate to Get their former lover’s attention and respect.

Russia will pay for its actions across history and not one country will lift a finger to help it.

At the end of the day Russia envies Iran as a rising power both in competing spaces (natural gas) and military/influence. Iran has allies and deep relationships across the Middle East, something Russia cannot even do in Europe in its own backyard.

Russia has no allies no friends, hell US bombed 300 Russian mercenaries and Russia agreed with the US! This is a bi ghayrat country.

Anyone who supports Russia is a Vatan foroosh and no different than the likes of Rouhani and Co who think by groveling and capitulating to the US they can be accepted by the West.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sanel1412

That seems to be just fake news...Iran didn't even asked for S-400,...no news reported that story and that source brings tons of such claims every day...I saw many claims Russia didn't even received request,and there is no logic...Russia offered Iran S-400 already...these days there is tons is media B.S ...seems they try to make division between Iran and Russia,they see maybe opportunity ,but Iran and Russia are aware to what level their cooperation goes,they are not strategic ally but they share some strategic interest and they learn how to work together where they can...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

sanel1412 said:


> That seems to be just fake news...Iran didn't even asked for S-400,...no news reported that story and that source brings tons of such claims every day...I saw many claims Russia didn't even received request,and there is no logic...Russia offered Iran S-400 already...these days there is tons is media B.S ...seems they try to make division between Iran and Russia,they see maybe opportunity ,but Iran and Russia are aware to what level their cooperation goes,they are not strategic ally but they share some strategic interest and they learn how to work together where they can...


this is in the track of the same series of events like trump dispatching B-52, carrier, 250,000 soldier, EMP missiles and etc. these are psychological warfare, they want to show that iran's air defence is weak.

3rd hkordad tracking radar vs buk m-2:

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

sanel1412 said:


> That seems to be just fake news...Iran didn't even asked for S-400,...no news reported that story and that source brings tons of such claims every day...I saw many claims Russia didn't even received request,and there is no logic...Russia offered Iran S-400 already...these days there is tons is media B.S ...seems they try to make division between Iran and Russia,they see maybe opportunity ,but Iran and Russia are aware to what level their cooperation goes,they are not strategic ally but they share some strategic interest and they learn how to work together where they can...


As i remember;the Russian government has recomended Iran to deliver S-400 instead of S-300;but we said as americans wanted to ban us buying it;we just want S-300.


----------



## Navigator

Russia offered S-400 in 2015, but in this case, Iran had to stand in line after China and wait at least 3-4 years before the start of the deliveries. China signed a contract for S-400 in 2014, but began to receive first S-400 only in 2018. 
However from frozen Syrian order in Russian remained launchers and some other elements of S-300PMU-2. Therefore, as i understand, Russia and Iran have agreed that Russian side on this basis will make an upgraded version specifically for Iran. This allowed to supply this upgraded S-300PMU-2 SAM systems to Iran in 2016.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater

Navigator said:


> Russia offered S-400 in 2015, but in this case, Iran had to stand in line after China and wait at least 3-4 years before the start of the deliveries. China signed a contract for S-400 in 2014, but began to receive first S-400 only in 2018.
> However from frozen Syrian order in Russian remained launchers and some other elements of S-300PMU-2. Therefore, as i understand, Russia and Iran have agreed that Russian side on this basis will make an upgraded version specifically for Iran. This allowed to supply this upgraded S-300PMU-2 SAM systems to Iran in 2016.


Thank you for your clarification.


----------



## TheImmortal

Navigator said:


> Russia offered S-400 in 2015, but in this case, Iran had to stand in line after China and wait at least 3-4 years before the start of the deliveries. China signed a contract for S-400 in 2014, but began to receive first S-400 only in 2018.
> However from frozen Syrian order in Russian remained launchers and some other elements of S-300PMU-2. Therefore, as i understand, Russia and Iran have agreed that Russian side on this basis will make an upgraded version specifically for Iran. This allowed to supply this upgraded S-300PMU-2 SAM systems to Iran in 2016.



Exactly, the S-400 was a stalling tactic by Russia.

If Iran had agreed they would be STILL be waiting for the shipments. Under this US administration they would pressure Russia to not deliver them and the whole cycle would have started all over again.

Iran thought strategically.

Russia is not reliable arms dealer especially when it comes to power shifting arms (Fighter jets, submarines, Air defense systems, etc).

Russia doesn’t want to make US, Israel, and the Arabs upset. If you were Iran, would you want to buy arms from such an unreliable source?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zzzz

TheImmortal said:


> That is why Russia is weak and alone.
> That is why US/NATO are on it’s doorstep.
> 
> It sold Iran out for lies and false promises. It backed sanctions on Iran and believed the US when it said the missile shield in Europe was for Iranian missiles.
> 
> Well karma is truly a bitch. Russia now has Missile shields and US military on its borders and lost its last major ally and Soviet Union satellite country (Ukraine) to the West.
> 
> Saddam is gone (Russia didn’t help
> That ally).
> Gaddafi is gone (Russia didn’t help that ally).
> Ukraine is gone (half *** effort by Russia to save it)
> Arabs are aligned with US so Russia has no in roads there.
> 
> Outside of poor Syria and crumbling Venezuela, NO ONE likes Russia.
> 
> China expanded its power, but doesn’t throw Pakistan under the bus to achieve a quick concession from the West. Because China like Iran thinks decades ahead not months like the Russians. China is a real global power and not some spurned Whore who is desperate to Get their former lover’s attention and respect.
> 
> Russia will pay for its actions across history and not one country will lift a finger to help it.
> 
> At the end of the day Russia envies Iran as a rising power both in competing spaces (natural gas) and military/influence. Iran has allies and deep relationships across the Middle East, something Russia cannot even do in Europe in its own backyard.
> 
> Russia has no allies no friends, hell US bombed 300 Russian mercenaries and Russia agreed with the US! This is a bi ghayrat country.
> 
> Anyone who supports Russia is a Vatan foroosh and no different than the likes of Rouhani and Co who think by groveling and capitulating to the US they can be accepted by the West.



No, preserving your own interests doesnt make you weak and alone.
But barking at someone who is supporting you definitely does.

Though your theory that all Russia's problems are the result of Russia's unwillingness to satisfy all wishes and requests of other countries was funny.

BTW US never bombed 300 Russian mercenaries, stop parroting this BS. And do something about Israel first, before touching this topic. Have some shame at least.


----------



## zectech

aryobarzan said:


> I have to jump in to this Russia bashing...In this one I am with Russia...why ..because as the famous war criminal Winston Churchil said.*"countries do not have friends ..they have interests". *So why are we Iranians so upset when Russia is looking after her own interests..Being friend with Iran does not make them enemy of our enemies.....and if some one offers them to give up Iran and gain some thing in return of course they should do that...we are not in a school yard...But I know the Iranian way of life is to stick with your friends to the end..and that is fine but do not expect others to have the same code of conduct..Make your Bavar and the hell with them all..the strength should come from within.



The only issue is zionism is not the interest of Russia or Putin. That is why the Chinese path is the way out of our European mess. They are not screwed up, many European are, independence though Huawei and Chinese firms and Chinese friendship. We need friends, Chinese don't. Putin independence will come from Beijing, not from hell aviv.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

zzzz said:


> No, preserving your own interests doesnt make you weak and alone.
> But barking at someone who is supporting you definitely does.
> 
> Though your theory that all Russia's problems are the result of Russia's unwillingness to satisfy all wishes and requests of other countries was funny.
> 
> BTW US never bombed 300 Russian mercenaries, stop parroting this BS. And do something about Israel first, before touching this topic. Have some shame at least.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.amp.html

The news is widespread and Russian families in Russia were left in the dark about the whole thing. Russia applied a major censorship on the topic. So unless you have access to Russian intelligence files the true number of Russian casualties will not be known. It’s probably not 300 but it’s not zero either.

Let’s not even talk about Ukraine as the Russian forces proved how much of an amateur they were in helping pro Russia Ukraine forces. Furthermore, the botched nerve agent attack by Russian Intelligence security was another embarrassment to Russia’s reputation.

Iran do something about Israel? First of all since 1979, Iran has pushed Israel out of Lebanon and single handily expanded across the Middle East. Since 1980, Iran has inflicted the most casualties on US & Israeli forces. What has Russia or China done besides sit in a corner and pound their chest?

Iran thinks decades ahead while Russians are too busy thinking about today. These chess pieces don’t magically fall into place, If you understood geopolitical strategy you would get it. Meanwhile, Mother Russia has gone steadily backwards and then NATO pissed all over Russia and stole Ukraine. The biggest disgrace in modern Russian history.

Iran has achieved manyt things without an airforce and while under a massive weapons/economic embargo that is unprecedented in modern history. What do you think iran would have done with a modern airforce and 1+ trillion dollar economy to back it? You think Iran is hard to contain now, that Iran would be a god damn war machine. Because instead of just valuing the weapon you deploy, Iran values creating a wave of proxies, which can create a force multiplier that no conventional weapon can match.

So just remember Russia is a damn paper tiger. First Turkey shot down your fighter jet and NATO backed Turkey to the hilt, NOT ONE Country in Europe stood up for Russia. Turkey even refused to apologize till months after. Then Israel used your recon aircraft as a decoy to attack Syria and got them killed as well. So at this point no one is afraid of Russia.

Russia is a joke on the international stage right now. When a country like Turkey has the balls to shoot your fighter jet out of the sky and tiny country like Israel uses your patrol aircraft as human shields then you obviously got problems. Even the Chinese don’t respect Russia.

Your comment that Russia “Unwillingness to Sastify all of a country’s wishes” is absurd. Are you seriously that dense? ALL of Iran’s wishes? You mean supplying an air defense system that Iran paid for? Or do you mean the billions in arms contracts in the 90’s/2000’s that Russia violated while on its knees asking the US for a concession like a beggar?

Meanwhile if an banana country Arabian sheik show much waves a dollar in the air, the Russians will run to them and sell anything from S-400 to SU-35 to probably Ballistic missiles. That’s how desperate Russia is to gain acceptance in the region.

I am not sure if your Russian or not, but enjoy the show, that country is on a path to Irrelevance. Internal domestic opposition to Putin is rising. Putin can’t kill them all. Also the oligarchs that run that country can switch on a dime when they see the tide turning. Putin will soon be gone unless he installs himself as dictator for life. If not then there will be no strongman to keep those idiots from devouring one another. NATO/US are just bidding their time. After all, Gorbachev single handily destroyed the Soviet Union trying to be friends with the US. Won’t be long till another Gorbachev comes along.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> 2 days ago air defence unit became part of the Army
> 
> 
> *ارتقای عملیاتی قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیا با تشکیل نیروی چهارم ارتش*
> 
> http://defapress.ir/fa/news/348406/ارتقای-عملیاتی-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم‌الانبیا-با-تشکیل-نیروی-چهارم-ارتش

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

yavar said:


>



hopefully this was they can get more money and founding from Army.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zzzz

TheImmortal said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.amp.html
> 
> The news is widespread and Russian families in Russia were left in the dark about the whole thing. Russia applied a major censorship on the topic. So unless you have access to Russian intelligence files the true number of Russian casualties will not be known. It’s probably not 300 but it’s not zero either.
> 
> Let’s not even talk about Ukraine as the Russian forces proved how much of an amateur they were in helping pro Russia Ukraine forces. Furthermore, the botched nerve agent attack by Russian Intelligence security was another embarrassment to Russia’s reputation.
> 
> Iran do something about Israel? First of all since 1979, Iran has pushed Israel out of Lebanon and single handily expanded across the Middle East. Since 1980, Iran has inflicted the most casualties on US & Israeli forces. What has Russia or China done besides sit in a corner and pound their chest?
> 
> Iran thinks decades ahead while Russians are too busy thinking about today. These chess pieces don’t magically fall into place, If you understood geopolitical strategy you would get it. Meanwhile, Mother Russia has gone steadily backwards and then NATO pissed all over Russia and stole Ukraine. The biggest disgrace in modern Russian history.
> 
> Iran has achieved manyt things without an airforce and while under a massive weapons/economic embargo that is unprecedented in modern history. What do you think iran would have done with a modern airforce and 1+ trillion dollar economy to back it? You think Iran is hard to contain now, that Iran would be a god damn war machine. Because instead of just valuing the weapon you deploy, Iran values creating a wave of proxies, which can create a force multiplier that no conventional weapon can match.
> 
> So just remember Russia is a damn paper tiger. First Turkey shot down your fighter jet and NATO backed Turkey to the hilt, NOT ONE Country in Europe stood up for Russia. Turkey even refused to apologize till months after. Then Israel used your recon aircraft as a decoy to attack Syria and got them killed as well. So at this point no one is afraid of Russia.
> 
> Russia is a joke on the international stage right now. When a country like Turkey has the balls to shoot your fighter jet out of the sky and tiny country like Israel uses your patrol aircraft as human shields then you obviously got problems. Even the Chinese don’t respect Russia.
> 
> Your comment that Russia “Unwillingness to Sastify all of a country’s wishes” is absurd. Are you seriously that dense? ALL of Iran’s wishes? You mean supplying an air defense system that Iran paid for? Or do you mean the billions in arms contracts in the 90’s/2000’s that Russia violated while on its knees asking the US for a concession like a beggar?
> 
> Meanwhile if an banana country Arabian sheik show much waves a dollar in the air, the Russians will run to them and sell anything from S-400 to SU-35 to probably Ballistic missiles. That’s how desperate Russia is to gain acceptance in the region.
> 
> I am not sure if your Russian or not, but enjoy the show, that country is on a path to Irrelevance. Internal domestic opposition to Putin is rising. Putin can’t kill them all. Also the oligarchs that run that country can switch on a dime when they see the tide turning. Putin will soon be gone unless he installs himself as dictator for life. If not then there will be no strongman to keep those idiots from devouring one another. NATO/US are just bidding their time. After all, Gorbachev single handily destroyed the Soviet Union trying to be friends with the US. Won’t be long till another Gorbachev comes along.



Unwillingness to sastify other wishes. Yes. You have just invented a theory that Russia is "weak and alone" because it failed to protect Saddam and Qaddafi in addition to fullfiling Iranian requests.. So their fall is not their own problem, not Iran problem, not someone else problem, its Russia's problem. LOL

With all your ravings you sound like a spoiled kid who is cursing someone who refused to give you a candy. Im just confused with all such complaints since Iran according to you is so much more powerful country than Russia and has such a bright future. Looks like you dont need any help from such a weak country like Russia LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

zzzz said:


> Unwillingness to sastify other wishes. Yes. You have just invented a theory that Russia is "weak and alone" because it failed to protect Saddam and Qaddafi in addition to fullfiling Iranian requests.. So their fall is not their own problem, not Iran problem, not someone else problem, its Russia's problem. LOL
> 
> With all your ravings you sound like a spoiled kid who is cursing someone who refused to give you a candy. Im just confused with all such complaints since Iran according to you is so much more powerful country than Russia and has such a bright future. Looks like you dont need any help from such a weak country like Russia LOL



Ignore that guy. These people are clueless it seems and don't realise how realpolitik works. All nations looks out for their own interests. There is no "friendships" in the real world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

WinterNights said:


> Ignore that guy. These people are clueless it seems and don't realise how realpolitik works. All nations looks out for their own interests. There is no "friendships" in the real world.


It's just about the survival of fittest in this real world

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

T-72B said:


> It's just about the survival of fittest in this real world



Precisely. Governments even screw their own people if it suits their interests, never mind other nations.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

WinterNights said:


> Ignore that guy. These people are clueless it seems and don't realise how realpolitik works. All nations looks out for their own interests. There is no "friendships" in the real world.



look, if russia is signing a deal it hat so be fullfilled.
Iran was waiting 10 years and only got the S300-PMU2 bcz it was on the right track to produce a version which has the same capabilities + Iran filed suit in the International Court of Justice for not honoring the deal.
Syria ordered and payd for more then 30 YAK-130 and is still waiting since 2012.
Russia could say from beginning "no, we dont accept the order", but signing the deal, getting prepayment and then playing stupid games just to please Israel and western "partners" is not acceptable.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

Draco.IMF said:


> look, if russia is signing a deal it hat so be fullfilled.
> Iran was waiting 10 years and only got the S300-PMU2 bcz it was on the right track to produce a version which has the same capabilities.
> Syria ordered and payd for more then 30 YAK-130 and is still waiting since 2012.
> Russia could say from beginning "no, we dont accept the order", but signing the deal, getting prepayment and then playing stupid games just to please Israel and western "partners" is not acceptable.



Only people which no understanding of real politics believe signing a contract is somehow sacred and must be fulfilled. That's not how realpolitik works. If nations believe something is in their interests, they will do it. I am not saying whether that decision will always be in their true interests, but from their persecutive it was.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

guys do you remember northrop and bell sued us for reverse engineering the bell-214 and f-5?? did russians sued us for kh-55, va-111, small arms, ATGMs or trying to smuggle the kh-31 and reverse engineering it?? 
the reason they delayed to deliver the s-300 was our copies of their techs. russians are the ones who were developing fighter jets with us, which nation would do that?? 
that s-400 news is fake, also keep in mind we are not officially an ally of russia, means their wars are theirs and ours are ours, so for a neutral party they were good.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> look, if russia is signing a deal it hat so be fullfilled.
> Iran was waiting 10 years and only got the S300-PMU2 bcz it was on the right track to produce a version which has the same capabilities + Iran filed suit in the International Court of Justice for not honoring the deal.
> Syria ordered and payd for more then 30 YAK-130 and is still waiting since 2012.
> Russia could say from beginning "no, we dont accept the order", but signing the deal, getting prepayment and then playing stupid games just to please Israel and western "partners" is not acceptable.



Common sense won’t work with some people. These guys throwing terms around like “real politik” like they even know what it means and just parroting it over and over as if the more they say it the smarter they sound. Realpolitik doesn’t mean sign contracts and then void them, dumbest thing I have ever heard.

There is a reason why international court was going to fine Russia billions for breach of contract that is because it was against the contract. Iran likely had fine print installed that gave Russia VERY FEW reasons to be able to breach contract. Russia’s excuse (United Nations Resolution) did not apply for defensive weapons.



Mithridates said:


> guys do you remember northrop and bell sued us for reverse engineering the bell-214 and f-5?? did russians sued us for kh-55, va-111, small arms, ATGMs or trying to smuggle the kh-31 and reverse engineering it??
> the reason they delayed to deliver the s-300 was our copies of their techs. russians are the ones who were developing fighter jets with us, which nation would do that??
> that s-400 news is fake, also keep in mind we are not officially an ally of russia, means their wars are theirs and ours are ours, so for a neutral party they were good.



First of all KH-55 was supplied by Ukraine arms company not Russia. Second Iran’s version of Kh-55 is not “identical” like Bell-214 or F-5. Either way Russia couldn’t even sue China who basically ripped off most of what they bought from Russia. It got so bad that Russia had to beg China not to reverse engineer arms it sells or to buy licenses.

Iran still buys small arms from Russia and a lot of what you mentioned is covered by license production. Just because Iran doesn’t announce it doesn’t mean they don’t have licenses. Iran’s G-3s for example are made under license.

And Russia was developing fighter jets for iran? You mean the project they left in early prototype stage and when Iran decided to go about itself they refused to supply RD-33? Oh yeah what a great help.

I mean some of you have memories of goldfish, Russia refused to modernize Iran’s kilo subs in Iran in last 10 years. They said they should be transferred to Russia for modernization. They refused to share blueprints or tech. Iran was so worried that Russia would confiscate the kilo subs and not return them that they did modernization in Iran by themselves!

Does that sound like a “neutral party”? Or are one of you guys gonna scream “realpolitik” again like you know something? Laughable.

SU-57 was a disaster, India was a partner with Russia on the project and pulled out after complaining about Russian backstabbing and incompetence. The issue is not limited to Iran.

Right now Russia is challenging Iran in Syria by preventing Iran from gaining access to permanent bases and ports. Even though Iran is the one who had balls to put boots on the ground while Russia stayed in the air and learned how to hit targets (look at some of the Russia MoD videos some of their airstrikes were terribly bad).

Whatever Russia is doing they need to do opposite because they are going backwards. Last 20 years China has risen, Turkey has risen, Iran has risen, Hezbollah has risen. Russia has GONE BACKWARDS. How is that even possible?

Russia Agreed to U.N. sanctions on Iran in order to not get Missile shields placed in Europe. RESULT: Missile shields placed in Europe anyway

Russia Agreed to more U.N. sanctions on Iran in order to gain more respect from International community.
RESULT: Libya overthrown and NATO encroachment on its borders

More *** kissing by Russia in last 10 years
RESULT: Hit with sanctions, lost Ukraine, and now almost a social pariah like Iran. Furthermore, now the last remaining European countries want to join NATO and get under the umbrella. Russia is being squeezed.

The ONLY decision that has worked well is syria and that was Iran (Soleimani) convincing Russia to have some balls and come into Syria to save its port/interests and flex some of its power.

So if Russia is engaging in “realpolitik” it really sucks at it because it literally has made one mistake after another.

Russia’s leverage on Europe is because of one thing: Natural Gas.

What will happen once Iran is reintegrated to the international community? Iran one of the leaders in the world in natural gas reserves starts supplying large amounts of natural gas to Europe? What will happen once Qatar also starts supplying Even more Natural Gas?

Like I said, Russia is not in a strong position. Most of the world is aligned with the West and dependent on Western arms. In the future, who is Russia gonna supply arms to? Some random Asian or South American banana countries?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> Common sense won’t work with some people. These guys throwing terms around like “real politik” like they even know what it means and just parroting it over and over as if the more they say it the smarter they sound. Realpolitik doesn’t mean sign contracts and then void them, dumbest thing I have ever heard.



Here is the definition of realpolitik since you're incapable

"a system of politics or principles based on *practical* rather than moral or ideological considerations."

Now try to understand nations follow their interests and not ideological mumbojumbo like "once we sign a contract we must fulfil it"



> There is a reason why international court was going to fine Russia billions for breach of contract that is because it was against the contract. Iran likely had fine print installed that gave Russia VERY FEW reasons to be able to breach contract.



No one is saying by not fulfilling a contract, that the law is not broken. We're not talking about laws here but whether nations can break such things to follow their own interests. Look at the Americans, does it look like they follow regulations and laws if it does not coincide with their interests?




> Russia’s excuse (United Nations Resolution) did not apply for defensive weapons.



Obviously it does not matter what they *say*. One has to apply common sense to realise the true reason behind why they did not deliver on their contractual obligations.


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> Like I alluded to, you'e obviously clueless. Here is the definition of realpolitik since you're incapable of searching it:
> 
> "a system of politics or principles based on *practical* rather than moral or ideological considerations."
> 
> Now use your head and try to understand nations follow their interests and not ideological mumbojumbo like "once we sign a contract we must fulfil it"
> 
> 
> 
> What an infantile comment. No one is saying by not fulfilling a contract, that the law is not broken. We're not talking about laws here but whether nations can break such things to follow their own interests. Look at the Americans, does it look like they follow regulations and laws if it does not coincide with their interests?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously incapable of rational thinking? Obviously it does not matter what they *say*. One has to apply common sense to realise the true reason behind why they did not deliver on their contractual obligations.



Again your picking and choosing a lengthy rebuttal of mine to justify your position. A common propaganda tactic to twist words in your favor. I gave several examples of Russian “realpolitik” ending up badly for Russia in the end. But you conveniently glossed over them.

I’m sure your so proud you can use google and come up with a definirion. Every nation looks out for its own interests so by default every nation engages in realpolitik in some shape or form.

So again using the term adds nothing to conversation. The argument is Russia is not a reliable ANYTHING (partner, country, ally, neutral party, whore, etc). So you can sit here and say well it’s because Russia does Realpolitik, okay still doesn’t change the argument that Russia is useless to Iran.

Answer me this, what was Russia’s INTEREST that you keep babbling about in not supplying S-300 to Iran? What did it ACHIEVE? I mean surely if you are going to say it was realpolitik that Russia was looking out for its own interest then such a brilliant decision must have ACHIEVED something? What was it?

Because the way I look at, Iran got the system in the end and beat Russia (either way Iran would have gotten the system or gotten billions in fines). Russia sat on falses promises and was unable to look past the corner. 10 years later they are now sanctioned, pariah’d, and lost Ukraine to a west backed revolution.

I will tell you, it achieved nothing. Like a fly that flies at a lamp light in the night. Russian is in a vicious cycle of committing the same mistakes over and over and getting the same results. Realpolitik or not.

My point still stands, 20 years has seen Russia get played by the West. Realpolitik is what got Russia in this situation. When all you do is make the PRACTICAL decision (prioritize today over tomm) then you are effectively a man without a strategy. You are reactive versus proactive.

Read rational articles about China and they will say that China thinks decades if not a century ahead when making critical decisions. It has a strategy it has a ideological reason. Iran has a strategy and a ideological reason. Even Israel and US have a strategy and an ideological reason.

Russia can look after its own “interests” all it wants. After all, every nation does to a certain extent. Except true powers realize the long term ramifications of certain chess moves while amateurs look at merely what piece they can take off the board immediately.

Initially you might be better off making that practical move, but in the end you might see your Queen has been checkmated to a longer thinking opponent.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> Again your picking and choosing a lengthy rebuttal of mine to justify your position. A common propaganda tactic to twist words in in favor.
> 
> I’m sure your so proud you can use google and come up with a definirion. Every nation looks out for its own interests so by default every nation engages in realpolitik in some shape or form.
> 
> So again using the term adds nothing to conversation. The argument is Russia is not a reliable ANYTHING (partner, country, ally, neutral party, whore, etc). So you can sit here and say well it’s because Russia does Realpolitik, okay still doesn’t change the argument that Russia is useless to Iran.



You claimed I did not understand what the term realpolitik meant and hence my first reply.



> Answer me this, what was Russia’s INTEREST that you keep babbling about in not supplying S-300 to Iran? What did it ACHIEVE? I mean surely if you are going to say it was realpolitik that Russia was looking out for its own interest then such a brilliant decision must have ACHIEVED something? What was it?



They were being pressured by the Americans and Israelis (at minimum) to not supply the systems. If they had, they would have received certain backlashes at the time. What these backlashes would have been only those nations would be aware of. However, it is more than clear, it was because of external pressure that they did not deliver the system.



> Because the way I look at, Iran got the system in the end and beat Russia (either way Iran would have gotten the system or gotten billions in fines). Russia sat on falses promises and was unable to look past the corner. 10 years later they are now sanctioned, pariah’d, and lost Ukraine to a west backed revolution.



The question you should be asking, is why they did end up delivering it in the end? Was it due to the court case or is there more to this than these simple on the surface facts?



> I will tell you, it achieved nothing. Like a fly that flies at a lamp light in the night. Russian is in a vicious cycle of committing the same mistakes over and over and getting the same results. Realpolitik or not.



Like I said earlier, I never said their actions would end being in their benefit in the long term. All I said was that from their perspective, they were doing it in their interests. There are factors to consider that we are simply not aware of. Who knows what deals were being made behind the scenes between the Russians and Israelis etc.




> Initially you might be better off making that practical move, but in the end you might see your Queen has been checkmated to a longer thinking opponent.



I agree. Whether their actions end up biting them in the long term is one factor to consider. But at the end of the day, these people have their calculations and we have ours. Sadly for people like you and I, we will never have enough information to see the full picture. Too much is happening behind the scenes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> You claimed I did not understand what the term realpolitik meant and hence my first reply.
> 
> 
> 
> They were being pressured by the Americans and Israelis (at minimum) to not supply the systems. If they had, they would have received certain backlashes at the time. What these backlashes would have been only those nations would be aware of. However, it is more than clear, it was because of external pressure that they did not deliver the system.
> 
> 
> 
> The question you should be asking, is why they did end up delivering it in the end? Was it due to the court case or is there more to this than these simple on the surface facts?
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said earlier, I never said their actions would end being in their benefit in the long term. All I said was that from their perspective, they were doing it in their interests. There are factors to consider that we are simply not aware of. Who knows what deals were being made behind the scenes between the Russians and Israelis etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. Whether their actions end up biting them in the long term is one factor to consider. But at the end of the day, these people have their calculations and we have ours. Sadly for people like you and I, we will never have enough information to see the full picture. Too much is happening behind the scenes.



The system was delivered because Putin made the decision. He saw that:

A) Western promises/carrots were all lies and nothing was going to change moving forward

B) The threat of war between US/Iran had dropped substantially

C) Russia was facing a several billion dollar fine to Iran for breach of contract. Such an amount is not chump change for ANY country let alone someone like Russia who might not have as much as cash to throw around as China or US.

The issue here is Russia has a restive Muslim population that can be overrun by takfiris fairly quickly (one reason why Russia came into Syria). So the West knows Russian pain points fairly well. It can cause domestic unrest for Russia and make Putin feel the heat.

The issue here is realpolitik never was intended to mean “screw” over others any chance you can get. Even in the mafia it was well known that there were unwritten rules to how business was done. Did they screw each other over? Sure but it was done in calculated fashion. If you are going to constantly screw over your enemies, allies, partners, then one day you will face the consequences of such a foolish policy.

It begs the question did Russia enter in that contract knowing that they were screw Iran over for its own interest? Because If that is how Russia chooses to do business then the road ahead is a long and lonely one.

After all, I think Julius Ceaser is a good example of why one should always be mindful of his actions to others.

I don’t believe your views and mine are that much different regarding this matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Tabas system with Taeer 1 ( A ) missiles, first generation

range : 50 KM

altitude : 20 KM











Tabas system with Taeer 2 missiles, second generation

range : 75 KM

altitude : 27 KM









Tabas system with Taeer 2 ( A ) missiles, upgraded second generation

range : classified

altitude : classified










Tabas system with Taeer 2 ( C ) missiles, fully upgraded second generation

range : 105 KM

altitude : 27 _ 30 KM















Tabas system with Taeer ( 1 , 2A , 2C )














3th Khordad system with Taeer 2C missiles













3th Khordad system with Sayyad 2C missiles the most advanced of them all, that we know

















and there is another classified air defence missile named Sadid 630, its bigger than Taeer 2C missile

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## sanel1412

Russians officially rejected claims they refused delivery of S-400,they didn't say is Iran requested.... just said they didn't refused .Source RT

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

sanel1412 said:


> Russians officially rejected claims they refused delivery of S-400,they didn't say is Iran requested.... just said they didn't refused .Source RT


Russians DID deny Iran's S400 request, but its not because they dont want to sell it to Iran- its because of the timing. Iran requested it in the middle of escalated tensions with GCC + US so Russia said no so as to keep peace between both parties. It was a wise move. Maybe Iran made the S400 as a sort of bluff/threatening move against US..


----------



## Navigator

Iran not order S-400, thereforе Russia could not refuse what was not. Recently, a lot of fake news about Iran, Russia, China etc..



925boy said:


> Russians DID deny Iran's S400 request, but its not because they dont want to sell it to Iran- its because of the timing. Iran requested it in the middle of escalated tensions with GCC + US so Russia said no so as to keep peace between both parties. It was a wise move. Maybe Iran made the S400 as a sort of bluff/threatening move against US..



For Iran, it makes no sense to order the S-400 at the time of escalated tensions, given that Russia, in the best case, will be able to deliver them only after 2-3 years due to existing production lag between contracts and deliveries. Everyone knows that.
This is absolutely not a system that can be urgently ordered. They can be ordered only in the framework of the long-term program of building air defense. However, as we know, Iran is betting on its own long-range systems that are now being tested.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL

Navigator said:


> Iran not order S-400, thereforе Russia could not refuse what was not. Recently, a lot of fake news about Iran, Russia, China etc..
> 
> 
> 
> For Iran, it makes no sense to order the S-400 at the time of escalated tensions, given that Russia, in the best case, will be able to deliver them only after 2-3 years due to existing production lag between contracts and deliveries. Everyone knows that.
> This is absolutely not a system that can be urgently ordered. They can be ordered only in the framework of the long-term program of building air defense. However, as we know, Iran is betting on its own long-range systems that are now being tested.



You are one of the few sane people still existing here !

I'm a member since 2011 and now 8 years older ... I left more than 15000 posts and now I feel so bad about the time wasted on this stupid forum !

Yeah my English improved so much but I could achieve that in another way ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Try sale and transfer of technology, and license production are the way to handle arms sales in 2020 after the embargo on arms/weapons stop in Oct 2020.

Or go the Chinese route.


----------



## arashkamangir

SOHEIL said:


> You are one of the few sane people still existing here !
> 
> I'm a member since 2011 and now 8 years older ... I left more than 15000 posts and now I feel so bad about the time wasted on this stupid forum !
> 
> Yeah my English improved so much but I could achieve that in another way ...



Hahaha


----------



## skyshadow

*Sayyad 2C missiles*














*Talash SAM*







*
Sayyad SAM*







*3th Khordad SAM base with unusual equipment for it*







*IRGC 3th Khordad and HQ-2 hybrid SAM base *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

925boy said:


> Russians DID deny Iran's S400 request, but its not because they dont want to sell it to Iran- its because of the timing. Iran requested it in the middle of escalated tensions with GCC + US so Russia said no so as to keep peace between both parties. It was a wise move. Maybe Iran made the S400 as a sort of bluff/threatening move against US..


So you know better than Russian minister I saw on RT denied that quoting"Russia didn't rejected Iran request for s-400"... Did not say Iran didn't order or did...just said it was fake news that "Russia reject it", next time when you denied something provide source.... As I said,you and everyone can check this on RT USA,also spokesman of Kremlin told has no clue about this...
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Friday he did not have information that Russia had allegedly refused to supply S-400 air defence systems to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

*Moscow receives no purchase order from Iran for S-400 system: Russia*
*IRNA – Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov said on Friday that Moscow has not received any purchase order from Tehran for S-400 missile defense system.*

Yuri Borisov said in an interview with RIA Novosti, a Russian media digest on Friday.

He said the news is a mere rumor.

The Russian deputy prime minister underlined that “They can spread rumors but cooperation between the two countries is on the right track.”

It should be noted that on May 30, ahead of other media, the Bloomberg news agency, owned by Michael Bloomberg, had claimed that Iran has called for purchase of S-400, missile system but Russia refused their request.

Russia’s presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied the Bloomberg report about Russia’s refusal to sell the S-400 missile defense system to Iran, announcing that the sources of news should be considered and double checked in advance.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*The Modafean Harim Velayat's (Guardians of the Jurist’s) confines war games*
*





*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

new air defence system have been unveiled the name of the system is 15th of Khordad


15th of Khordad SAM

*combat readiness:* less than 5 minutes

*Radar:* upgraded Navid (AESA) radar with a range of 150 km it can engage 4++ generation fighter jets and bombers and drones and ballistic missiles and cruises missile and it has a 85 km detection range for 5 generation fighter jets and bombers it can track and follow 6 targets and engage the same 6 targets simultaneously.

*Missiles:* Sayyad 2 and Sayyad 3 with a ranges of 75 km and 120 km













https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/03/19/2027922/جدیدترین-سامانه-موشکی-پدافند-هوایی-تحویل-ارتش-شد-به-کارگیری-موشک-صیاد3-در-سامانه-15-خرداد-جزئیات


*video

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/146211/VIDEO-15th-of-Khordad-air-defense-system*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran’s Defense Ministry on Sunday unveiled a sophisticated air defense system capable of hitting several targets with homegrown ‘Sayyad-3’ missiles.*

*




*

*In a ceremony in Tehran, Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami unveiled the homegrown air defense system, dubbed ‘Khordad 15th’.

Developed by the Defense Ministry’s experts, it was formally delivered to the Air Defense Force of the Iranian Army.

In comments at the event, Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the new air defense system has been paired with the ‘Sayyad-3’ long-range missiles and is capable of detecting various targets, including warplanes and intruding drones, within a range of 150 kilometers and tracking them at a range of 120 kilometers.

According to the minister, the Khordad 15th system can also detect stealth targets within a range of 85 kilometers and hit them in a range of 45 kilometers.

It is capable of intercepting 6 targets simultaneously, the minister said, adding that its ease of mobility would allow servicemen to prepare the air defense system for engagement in less than 5 minutes.

The general said that the air defense system is equipped with a phased array radar and independent launch pads and can effectively take action against various aerial targets, such as reconnaissance aircraft, bombers and tactical warplanes.

The minister went on to say that the Khordad 15th can be operated for shooting down targets at a maximum height of 27 kilometers and within a range of 75 kilometers.

Iranian military experts and technicians have in recent years made great headways in manufacturing a broad range of indigenous equipment, making the armed forces self-sufficient in the defense sphere.

Iran maintains that its military might poses no threat to regional countries, stressing that the Islamic Republic’s defense doctrine is entirely based on deterrence.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/06/09/2028057/iran-unveils-new-air-defense-missile-system
*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar

Iran delivery to Army Khatam al-Anbia Air defence base ‘Khordad 15th’ air defense system, with Sayyad-3 missile
https://tn.ai/2028057

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Interesting note: this Najm heritage radars like the 15th Khordad Navid are not like similar S-band AESAs like that of the Iron Dome. They use much cheaper to produce TRMs.
To achieve the necessary performance of the almost double size Najm-802, it uses extensive cooling. Look at those flexible coolant pipes and large heat exchangers at the rear.

This allows higher power levels of lower rated TRMs. That's the key to being able to acquire them in the necessary numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Interesting note: this Najm heritage radars like the 15th Khordad Navid are not like similar S-band AESAs like that of the Iron Dome. They use much cheaper to produce TRMs.
> To achieve the necessary performance of the almost double size Najm-802, it uses extensive cooling. Look at those flexible coolant pipes and large heat exchangers at the rear.
> 
> This allows higher power levels of lower rates Terms. That's the key to being able to acquire then in the necessary numbers.




I wonder what defends the radar against anti radiation missiles and SDM at reduced costs. We have some candidates but I wonder if any are chosen to take that role as part of 15th Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

What I wonder is I only see tracking Radar that can track and engage 6 target , what about a radar to detect the targets and for example detect 180 different target something like 76N6 or 64N6 or 96L6E ? 
without that type of radars that can detect 100s of target, the system won't have that much practical use in case of war


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> What I wonder is I only see tracking Radar that can track and engage 6 target , what about a radar to detect the targets and for example detect 180 different target something like 76N6 or 64N6 or 96L6E ?
> without that type of radars that can detect 100s of target, the system won't have that much practical use in case of war


Let me know when you are ready to learn -- why and why not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

gambit said:


> Let me know when you are ready to learn -- why and why not.


PLZ do educate me tell me what you know. all of it , tell me your analysis on the system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> What I wonder is I only see tracking Radar that can track and engage 6 target , what about a radar to detect the targets and for example detect 180 different target something like 76N6 or 64N6 or 96L6E ?
> without that type of radars that can detect 100s of target, the system won't have that much practical use in case of war



You are referring to acquisition radar vs engagement radar 

Acquisition radar does not need to accompany a medium range SAM system.
Long range Acquisition radar finds targets relays to command/control post Who analyzes relays it to the engagement radars and batteries near target.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Only 6 targets!.Jesus!,that only puts it at around early 1990s pmu1 level in terms of the numbers of targets it can engage at any one time.I hope it can at least engage each target with 2 missiles like the pmu1 does,that would at least substantially increase the kill probability against the 6 targets at any rate.
Personally I hope that somebodies just been misquoted on this figure,if its true then irans either going to have to build a lot of these or procure a lot more bavars and raads to make up for the performance shortfall with this system.
I wonder if its got any secondary abm capabilities?


----------



## Navigator

Sineva said:


> Only 6 targets!.Jesus!,that only puts it at around early 1990s pmu1 level in terms of the numbers of targets it can engage at any one time.



6 targets simultaneously - it's good number for one radar, for example latest version of 92N6 radar for S-400 can simultaneously engage 10 targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Only 6 targets!.Jesus!,that only puts it at around early 1990s pmu1 level in terms of the numbers of targets it can engage at any one time.I hope it can at least engage each target with 2 missiles like the pmu1 does,that would at least substantially increase the kill probability against the 6 targets at any rate.
> Personally I hope that somebodies just been misquoted on this figure,if its true then irans either going to have to build a lot of these or procure a lot more bavars and raads to make up for the performance shortfall with this system.
> I wonder if its got any secondary abm capabilities?



First get your facts straight.

S-300PMU2 can engage 6 targets at once (12 missiles total - 2 per target).

Patriot system can track 9 outbound Patriot missiles.

This system can do 6 targets (unknown how many missiles total given system was shown of with two launchers max might be 8 missiles)

So it really depends what engagement radar this system is paired with.

I’d say the stats are suitable and in line with modern Air defense systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## yavar

Iran test of ‘Khordad 15th’ air defense system & delivery to Army Khatam al-Anbia Air defence base

https://tn.ai/2028057

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sepasgozar

yavar said:


> Iran test of ‘Khordad 15th’ air defense system & delivery to Army Khatam al-Anbia Air defence base
> 
> https://tn.ai/2028057


Long live the brains and muscle behind steadfast growth and military innovation in the face of 40 years of cruel and inhumane sanctions. The Iranian willpower is mighty, and throughout history has stood its ground against those who have wished for its demise.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## SubWater

The good thing about 15th of Khurdad, 3rd of khurdad and Tabas and many other Iranian air defenses is that They can move in secret without attracting attentions.
They can turn to any other trucks in Iran road by light chador on them.

Just compare that with S-300 movements in Iran which always appear on social medias.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> What I wonder is I only see tracking Radar that can track and engage 6 target , what about a radar to detect the targets and for example detect 180 different target something like 76N6 or 64N6 or 96L6E ?
> without that type of radars that can detect 100s of target, the system won't have that much practical use in case of war


This is multi purpose engagement radar with integrated FCS,early warning,search and acquisition radar are dedicated systems you can integrate with different kind of air defense systems....So you have Kasta 2E for example,it is used with BUK,TOR...and many other as search and acquisition radar...In other words,you can used any radar for that...but for this system they will use something with greater range...AD work like this....You have early warning and search radar scan 360 degree in azimuth... Than when target is detected, they alert fire position and provide azimuth,velocity, speed...etc to them so they can direct engagement radar which will than be turned on in sector mode and after it detect target,they will lock on and fire...This can all be set in auto mode,in integrated network ...You use different radars for search and target data acquisition.... Engagement sector radars are much powerful than search and acquisition radars but they have narrow wave snop...any way,there are multipurpose radars capable for more than one role,but you want to have many different radars in system...



sanel1412 said:


> This is multi purpose engagement radar with integrated FCS,early warning,search and acquisition radar are dedicated systems you can integrate with different kind of air defense systems....So you have Kasta 2E for example,it is used with BUK,TOR...and many other as search and acquisition radar...In other words,you can used any radar for that...but for this system they will use something with greater range...AD work like this....You have early warning and search radar scan 360 degree in azimuth... Than when target is detected, they alert fire position and provide azimuth,velocity, speed...etc to them so they can direct engagement radar which will than be turned on in sector mode and after it detect target,they will lock on and fire...This can all be set in auto mode,in integrated network ...You use different radars for search and target data acquisition.... Engagement sector radars are much powerful than search and acquisition radars but they have narrow wave snop...any way,there are multipurpose radars capable for more than one role,but you want to have many different radars in system...


So,basically Iran has bunch of different radars, truth is I don't know country with so many different radars in inventory... They will probably integrate these in to existing AD network...,they can use any existing radars in combination with these system. Any way engagement 6 target in same time is very good actuality, and that is 6 targets per one system.Buk can engage 4 per system,S-300PMU1 can 6 also but you can add multiple systems.. In fact that is how SAMs are deployed... In batteries, puk,battalion, brigade,divisions....etc

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sanel1412 said:


> This is multi purpose engagement radar with integrated FCS,early warning,search and acquisition radar are dedicated systems you can integrate with different kind of air defense systems....So you have Kasta 2E for example,it is used with BUK,TOR...and many other as search and acquisition radar...In other words,you can used any radar for that...but for this system they will use something with greater range...AD work like this....You have early warning and search radar scan 360 degree in azimuth... Than when target is detected, they alert fire position and provide azimuth,velocity, speed...etc to them so they can direct engagement radar which will than be turned on in sector mode and after it detect target,they will lock on and fire...This can all be set in auto mode,in integrated network ...You use different radars for search and target data acquisition.... Engagement sector radars are much powerful than search and acquisition radars but they have narrow wave snop...any way,there are multipurpose radars capable for more than one role,but you want to have many different radars in system...
> 
> 
> So,basically Iran has bunch of different radars, truth is I don't know country with so many different radars in inventory... They will probably integrate these in to existing AD network...,they can use any existing radars in combination with these system. Any way engagement 6 target in same time is very good actuality, and that is 6 targets per one system.Buk can engage 4 per system,S-300PMU1 can 6 also but you can add multiple systems.. In fact that is how SAMs are deployed... In batteries, puk,battalion, brigade,divisions....etc



Thank you for your intelligent comment. Exactly Iran is incredible in radar diversity. It can be said that Iran is part of the club of the 4 largest power network air defense system in the world.

Russia
The USA
China
Iran

With the official arrival of Bavar 373 and an Iranian pantsir. Iran will be at the common air power defense system

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

yavar said:


> Iran delivery to Army Khatam al-Anbia Air defence base ‘Khordad 15th’ air defense system, with Sayyad-3 missile
> https://tn.ai/2028057


Wow, even i am very shocked at the rate of development of Iranian air defense equipment. I remember very clearly, what felt like not too long ago(prolly 5-10 years ago)all Iran had were HAWKS and S200s. Now Iran is fielding systems that global powers either 1) used as leverage over Iran or 2) delayed delivery off or 3)dont sell to "non-compliant" developing countries. wow, its quite amazing.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## PeeD

The 15th Khordad is the cost-effectiveness and high altitude king. Previously the Sayyad-2---Najam-802 and then the Sayyad-2---Najm-802B had that title.


I need to clear up some points:


It is not directly comparable to S-300PM/Patriot or Bavar-373 like systems. It will remain restricted to that 45km range with the cost-effective Sayyad-2. I won't detail why it is restricted to 45km despite the Sayyad-2 being capable of 75km.


Iran needs a cover for the high altitude envelope in all its major IADS locations and cities. A city will not be larger than the 90km circle it protects.


Its radar is literally magnitudes cheaper than a Patriot engagement radar, or the new $300 million G/ATOR (a high power S-band AESA). It will be much cheaper than a S-300PM series engagement radar.


So lets make a calculation:


+ It protects a whole city

- It will never do the job of the Bavar-373 in terms of area protection


+ The TWS based low power S-band concept is magnitudes or at least significantly cheaper than those X-band systems

- 45km is the limit


+ It may have no command post, due to the simplicity of the system and miniaturization.

- No complex SAGG-like guidance to drastically reduce enemy ECM efforts.


+ The high power Sayyad-2 SAM can cover highest altitudes within its 45km range, at high kinematic state (high PK)

- Again, 45km is the limit


+ Footprint extremely low: Commercial truck based (whole) system, no CP and sealed canister based missile system.


+ Low EM footprint: Low power S-band AESA with LPI modes and beam forming



In war scenarios possible for Iran, it's IADS will be the key target. Once it has lost its high altitude layer, safe neutralization of the rest of the IADS can be done at high altitude, even with cheap drones.

To avoid this scenario, the 15th Khordad would be the key.

The IRGC tried to do this with huge efforts from 1985-2010 with the HQ-2/Sayyad-1. A huge and complex system, without the necessary numbers.

This role can now also be performed by the IRIADF with the 15th Khordad.

Now a last word: A 15th Khordad with 3 launcher trucks wont cost Iran more than between $5-15 million. Now compare it with the costs of a high altitude system, capable of 6 simultaneous engagements and 45km range.

Most systems of that class will offer more than 45km range (often at lower kinematic PK), but they normally cost at least 10 times as much.

10 times then applies to the 15th Khordad --> Iran can get 10 times the amount of systems. 10 times is good and needed for a country with the size of Iran. Bear in mind: 

- No CP means the system has low trained personell requirements

- Sealed solid fuel canister SAM means low, maintenance and long stand-by time


So in total, it's the (at least) 10 multiplier in front of this system that makes the difference.

Credit goes to the IRGC-ASF: The 15th Khordad is just the first name officially announced, the original (little larger) system was already around much earlier. 

Plus the miracle of the unique guidance concept: They were not foolish to try their luck with a ARH seeker Sayyad variant, as they knew that would not work out well enough economically.

The day they decide to get a ARH Sayyad for it, is the day in which the 15th Khordad will get a longer range than 45km and the day in which the missile will cost 2-3 times as much than the older 45km rated one. That means your whole SAM inventory would be down to 30% just for having 100km or so instead of 45km (at lower kinematic PK).

It may would be better to let the enemy aircraft approach the city and launch a salvo of 3 Sayyad-2 at a high kinematic state at the single target…

Such considerations are very important here.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Interesting note: this Najm heritage radars like the 15th Khordad Navid are not like similar S-band AESAs like that of the Iron Dome. They use much cheaper to produce TRMs.
> To achieve the necessary performance of the almost double size Najm-802, it uses extensive cooling. Look at those flexible coolant pipes and large heat exchangers at the rear.
> 
> This allows higher power levels of lower rated TRMs. That's the key to being able to acquire them in the necessary numbers.




So are you saying that they are using off the shelf high powered 2-4GHz transmitters & receivers on a systems that has been mechanically tweaked to handle higher outputs and range? 

I wonder how much more capable this system is compared to the 3rd of Khordad (Upgraded with SD-3 Missiles) since the 3rd of Khordad would naturally be able to go operational at a much faster pace and can clear out at a much faster pace. 

All and all if you could provide the proper security in development and production, it looks like a great mobile, low footprint system to have if you have and can maintain a good Air Defense network, that could task each unit with the proper designated target(s) before going radar on. That's if we can produce them in sufficient numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> So are you saying that they are using off the shelf high powered 2-4GHz transmitters & receivers on a systems that has been mechanically tweaked to handle higher outputs and range?
> 
> I wonder how much more capable this system is compared to the 3rd of Khordad (Upgraded with SD-3 Missiles) since the 3rd of Khordad would naturally be able to go operational at a much faster pace and can clear out at a much faster pace.
> 
> All and all if you could provide the proper security in development and production, it looks like a great mobile, low footprint system to have if you have and can maintain a good Air Defense network, that could task each unit with the proper designated target(s) before going radar on. That's if we can produce them in sufficient numbers.



3rd Khordad is certainly the more expensive and more potent system compared to the 15th Khordad.
3rd Khordad has a high power X-band ESA illuminator that enables a attack at a extend range of 105km. No compromise on performance for it.

Also note the intended leak made in the video:

The system does a automatic signal analysis:
In worst case it is just a return signal signature analysis.
In best case it does a doppler signal analysis of the engine inlet, combined with a database RCS-aspect model comparison.
If feed by a multi-band comparison from IADS side, all this data can be fused with advanced algorithms to distinguish the real target from decoys and chaff/cutter or even identify which target it is (IFF and kill allocation).
But this intended leak was already done when the Najm-802---SD-2 was shown years ago and 3rd Khordad a while ago. Time to talk about it openly now after a third display of this feature.

Plus another important + for the 15th Khordad:
It is impossible for the target to know that an attack is inbound due to illumination or ARH seeker activation. A last warning would be received when it is too late for any evasive maneuver. Only an optical/IR warning system can help here as the missile is already "cold" and has no smoke signature.
This adds to the silent nature of this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## gambit

skyshadow said:


> PLZ do educate me tell me what you know. all of it , tell me your analysis on the system


Here we go...And we will start with the standard single beam, single antenna, pulsed system architecture that is common to %90 of the world's radars -- military and civilian.

The single beam, single antenna, pulsed system architecture is called 'mono-static'. The main advantages of this architecture are modularity, flexibility, and mobility. This design is found on land and air. Even with the advent of the ESA radar, most of the world's radars are still mechanically scanned, meaning the antenna actually sweeps from side/side or up/down (nodding).

When the beam contacts a body, assuming %100 return for ease of discussion, the body becomes a target and is assigned a memory physical space. As the beam sweeps away from the target, the radar computer have only that memory physical space to remember that it has a target. As the beam contacts another body, the new body is assigned a memory physical space, and so on. As the beam sweeps back and if those bodies are still within the beam, all targets are updated with new memory physical spaces.

To 'track' a body is to simply update the target with new physical memory locations.

To 'target' a body is to devote more memory allocation to that target to enhance these four target resolutions:

- Altitude
- Speed
- Heading
- Aspect angle

And because the body is airborne, the update requires more memory.

This is why the quantity of targets is always lower than the quantity of tracks -- memory availability.

With the common single beam, single antenna, pulsed system architecture, there is no such thing as 'simultaneous' target tracking. There is only *ONE* beam. It is a virtual track, not a true real-time track.

With the AESA system, there is a true multi-track/targeting capability but that is for another explanation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> The 15th Khordad is the cost-effectiveness and high altitude king. Previously the Sayyad-2---Najam-802 and then the Sayyad-2---Najm-802B had that title.
> 
> 
> I need to clear up some points:
> 
> 
> It is not directly comparable to S-300PM/Patriot or Bavar-373 like systems. It will remain restricted to that 45km range with the cost-effective Sayyad-2. I won't detail why it is restricted to 45km despite the Sayyad-2 being capable of 75km.
> 
> 
> Iran needs a cover for the high altitude envelope in all its major IADS locations and cities. A city will not be larger than the 90km circle it protects.
> 
> 
> Its radar is literally magnitudes cheaper than a Patriot engagement radar, or the new $300 million G/ATOR (a high power S-band AESA). It will be much cheaper than a S-300PM series engagement radar.
> 
> 
> So lets make a calculation:
> 
> 
> + It protects a whole city
> 
> - It will never do the job of the Bavar-373 in terms of area protection
> 
> 
> + The TWS based low power S-band concept is magnitudes or at least significantly cheaper than those X-band systems
> 
> - 45km is the limit
> 
> 
> + It may have no command post, due to the simplicity of the system and miniaturization.
> 
> - No complex SAGG-like guidance to drastically reduce enemy ECM efforts.
> 
> 
> + The high power Sayyad-2 SAM can cover highest altitudes within its 45km range, at high kinematic state (high PK)
> 
> - Again, 45km is the limit
> 
> 
> + Footprint extremely low: Commercial truck based (whole) system, no CP and sealed canister based missile system.
> 
> 
> + Low EM footprint: Low power S-band AESA with LPI modes and beam forming
> 
> 
> 
> In war scenarios possible for Iran, it's IADS will be the key target. Once it has lost its high altitude layer, safe neutralization of the rest of the IADS can be done at high altitude, even with cheap drones.
> 
> To avoid this scenario, the 15th Khordad would be the key.
> 
> The IRGC tried to do this with huge efforts from 1985-2010 with the HQ-2/Sayyad-1. A huge and complex system, without the necessary numbers.
> 
> This role can now also be performed by the IRIADF with the 15th Khordad.
> 
> Now a last word: A 15th Khordad with 3 launcher trucks wont cost Iran more than between $5-15 million. Now compare it with the costs of a high altitude system, capable of 6 simultaneous engagements and 45km range.
> 
> Most systems of that class will offer more than 45km range (often at lower kinematic PK), but they normally cost at least 10 times as much.
> 
> 10 times then applies to the 15th Khordad --> Iran can get 10 times the amount of systems. 10 times is good and needed for a country with the size of Iran. Bear in mind:
> 
> - No CP means the system has low trained personell requirements
> 
> - Sealed solid fuel canister SAM means low, maintenance and long stand-by time
> 
> 
> So in total, it's the (at least) 10 multiplier in front of this system that makes the difference.
> 
> Credit goes to the IRGC-ASF: The 15th Khordad is just the first name officially announced, the original (little larger) system was already around much earlier.
> 
> Plus the miracle of the unique guidance concept: They were not foolish to try their luck with a ARH seeker Sayyad variant, as they knew that would not work out well enough economically.
> 
> The day they decide to get a ARH Sayyad for it, is the day in which the 15th Khordad will get a longer range than 45km and the day in which the missile will cost 2-3 times as much than the older 45km rated one. That means your whole SAM inventory would be down to 30% just for having 100km or so instead of 45km (at lower kinematic PK).
> 
> It may would be better to let the enemy aircraft approach the city and launch a salvo of 3 Sayyad-2 at a high kinematic state at the single target…
> 
> Such considerations are very important here.


The problem is that the enemy aircrafts won't come near the city . if you want to get the picture look at Syria.



VEVAK said:


> So are you saying that they are using off the shelf high powered 2-4GHz transmitters & receivers on a systems that has been mechanically tweaked to handle higher outputs and range?
> 
> I wonder how much more capable this system is compared to the 3rd of Khordad (Upgraded with SD-3 Missiles) since the 3rd of Khordad would naturally be able to go operational at a much faster pace and can clear out at a much faster pace.
> 
> All and all if you could provide the proper security in development and production, it looks like a great mobile, low footprint system to have if you have and can maintain a good Air Defense network, that could task each unit with the proper designated target(s) before going radar on. That's if we can produce them in sufficient numbers.


Well if we consider SA-11 as a measure it take up to 5 min to make 3rd of khordad battle ready and for 15th of Khordad they said it's also 5 min to make it ready so I don't think 3rd of K hordad is faster than 15th of Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> First get your facts straight.
> 
> S-300PMU2 can engage 6 targets at once (12 missiles total - 2 per target).
> 
> Patriot system can track 9 outbound Patriot missiles.
> 
> This system can do 6 targets (unknown how many missiles total given system was shown of with two launchers max might be 8 missiles)
> 
> So it really depends what engagement radar this system is paired with.
> 
> I’d say the stats are suitable and in line with modern Air defense systems.



Actually there are various different sources online that give the number of possible target engagements ranging from as low as 6 to a high of 36.The reason why I tend to doubt the claim of 6 is twofold,for a start the s300ps deployed into service way back in 1982 had the capability to engage 6 targets with 12 missiles,and secondly and more importantly there was an article written back in 2009 by 3 of the almaz-antey staff,two of whom were in fact chief designers,which gave some of the basic performance data for the pmu2.In the article the claimed maximum number of targets that can be engaged is not 6,nor is it even 24,it is in fact 36[!!].
However you`re quite right about the fire control radar making a lot of the difference when it comes to the performance of the system.Now it could be that this is simply the less technologically demanding radar system thats just been put into production first with the possibility of software or processor upgrades to improve its performance in the near future,as many of the performance upgrades for both the patriot and s300 came about thru improved software and processor power.It could be that this system is only intended to back up the bavar and to deal with any leakers which have survived and got past it,or it could be intended to be a cheap system that can be deployed in large numbers with the promise of future upgrades greatly improving its overall capabilities.Ultimately theres still a hell of a lot that we dont know about this system and its intended uses and deployments.
Now dont get me wrong,I happen to think that the rest of the quoted specs are actually quite good and are pretty much in line with what I was expecting from a medium range system.

You can find the almaz-antey article reprinted here:
https://www.valka.cz/clanek_13084.html
[its a czech site so you`ll need google trans or something similar]

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Not sure why do these guys bother to even write anything!

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...aft-missile-system-wont-shoot-down-f-35-62107

He has written all these to say Sayyad 3 is probably copy of foreign tech even though he doesn't say why or which foreign tech he is referring to and then say without any reasoning : Sayyad 3 will* probably* prove to be not much of a deterrent against US!

I guess the only good thing about this is that Iran's AD is also starting to grab attention of people outside Iran just like its ballistic missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Arminkh said:


> Not sure why do these guys bother to even write anything!
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...aft-missile-system-wont-shoot-down-f-35-62107
> 
> He has written all these to say Sayyad 3 is probably copy of foreign tech even though he doesn't say why or which foreign tech he is referring to and then say without any reasoning : Sayyad 3 will* probably* prove to be not much of a deterrent against US!
> 
> I guess the only good thing about this is that Iran's AD is also starting to grab attention of people outside Iran just like its ballistic missiles.



An article of an American lost in space who speculates but knows absolutely nothing. It smells of fear !!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> Not sure why do these guys bother to even write anything!
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...aft-missile-system-wont-shoot-down-f-35-62107
> 
> He has written all these to say Sayyad 3 is probably copy of foreign tech even though he doesn't say why or which foreign tech he is referring to and then say without any reasoning : Sayyad 3 will* probably* prove to be not much of a deterrent against US!
> 
> I guess the only good thing about this is that Iran's AD is also starting to grab attention of people outside Iran just like its ballistic missiles.


i said this before we are under propaganda attack, do you remember when MOD unveiled qaher the same so called specialists said that it can carry up to 2*2000 lb bombs then they started to mock us and saying that iran says it can carry two mark-84 bombs.
like the analizes on su-57 and j-20 that confidently states their RCS number, i'm sure putin himself does not know pak-fa RCS number.
the truth is iran achieved more than their allies in region while being heavily sanctioned and because of our enmity they won't admit it. the problem is people look at their media out put and trust them, like the PDF kids that quote of them without looking at their speciality at that matter, the author i mentioned before that mocked qaher was a global politic PHD. !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> Not sure why do these guys bother to even write anything!
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...aft-missile-system-wont-shoot-down-f-35-62107
> 
> He has written all these to say Sayyad 3 is probably copy of foreign tech even though he doesn't say why or which foreign tech he is referring to and then say without any reasoning : Sayyad 3 will* probably* prove to be not much of a deterrent against US!
> 
> I guess the only good thing about this is that Iran's AD is also starting to grab attention of people outside Iran just like its ballistic missiles.


Even though you said it was garbage, I had to check it out. Wow! He really couldn’t find a more suitable premise for that conclusion?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Arminkh said:


> Not sure why do these guys bother to even write anything!
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...aft-missile-system-wont-shoot-down-f-35-62107
> 
> He has written all these to say Sayyad 3 is probably copy of foreign tech even though he doesn't say why or which foreign tech he is referring to and then say without any reasoning : Sayyad 3 will* probably* prove to be not much of a deterrent against US!
> 
> I guess the only good thing about this is that Iran's AD is also starting to grab attention of people outside Iran just like its ballistic missiles.


LOL!,Yes,the author of this piece[P.O.S] also quotes a "researcher" at the notorious fdd,the foundation for the defence of dicatorships...er..I mean "democracies"[lol!].
Basically its just more dreck,tho I`m sure dr goebbels would be proud to see his legacy being upheld.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> The problem is that the enemy aircrafts won't come near the city . if you want to get the picture look at Syria.



Each major city has one missile base in Iran.
The enemy is forced to take them out, otherwise they just keep on firing.

Hence the 15th Khordad protects a 90km circle around the missile base and population center.
Up to 18km altitude can be covered by HAWK/Mersad. Where the 15th Khordad is best suited is the 10-25km altitude regime where in future expandable enemy drones will operate. Such future stealth drones are the ideal/main targets for the 15th Khordad and its natural anti-stealth capabilities.

Glide weapons will almost never reach a target from 45km so to avoid it stand-off weapons are necessary and they have to be rock-penetrating ones to have an useful effect on the missile bases.

A 15th Khordad with 3 x 4 missiles at each city will complement the HAWK/Mersad batteries there and effectively be a kind of "base defense".
Talash-2/3 will do longer range coverage with the Sayyad-3 and S-200 stand-off defense of the major missile/population centers.
IRGC's own Najm---SD2 batteries, replacing old HQ-2 will additionally protect their missile bases.
S-300PMU2 will do the ABM defense of the centers and secondary stand-off protection against air targets.

Outside these systems then Iran has its hunting systems: Raad, Tabas, Mobile-Mersad and 3rd Khordad. These will spread outside those missile/population centers and try to kill enemy packages intended for the centers. The will create a continuous threat that forces the enemy into a high-threat operation behavior.
I don't talk about the mid and low altitude envelope, there Iran has all kinds of assets...

To all of this the Bavar-373 will add up. Complementing the ABM and stand-off defenses of the centers. Most importantly it will allow those hunting systems to get an area protection themselves that could eventually lead to an area defense all around Irans borders if 20+ Bavar-373 batteries become operational one day.
Off-road capable Bavar-373 would operate outside the centers and cover the smaller hunting systems that do the bulk of the engagements.

So in this IADS concept, the 15th Khordad is no front-line system, but a second-line support system of Irans offensive missile system. It can of course be used outside that role but there, front-line systems like the 3rd Khordad are much better.

For Iran, there is a good chance of the scenario in which its enemy is forced to take out a 15th Khordad protected missile base at any cost, without time for a SEAD/DEAD campaign. In such desperate situations frontal attacks are likely and 15th Khordad gives Iran the numbers it needs to defend against it. Not too long ago such centers just had a 1-2 channel HAWK and a single channel HQ-2 to fend off a mid to high altitude attack, each 15th Khordad alone now has 6 channels and 12 ready to fire missiles.
So a Israeli hit and run scenario like in Syria would not be the main concern there.

PS: just to bust some myths: 15th Khordad will not engage low-subsonic glide PGMs. They almost never can hit a 45km distant target and are easy targets for Irans cost effective automatic AAA systems. Higher capability stand-off weapons and ARMs will also be mainly a target for protecting low altitude systems.
Hence saturation is not easy: The 15th Khordad will concentrate on the targets it is designed for: air breathing, manned and unmanned stealth targets at 10-25km altitude regime.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> So a Israeli hit and run scenario like in Syria would not be the main concern there.
> 
> PS: just to bust some myths: 15th Khordad will not engage low-subsonic glide PGMs. They almost never can hit a 45km distant target and are easy targets for Irans cost effective automatic AAA systems. Higher capability stand-off weapons and ARMs will also be mainly a target for protecting low altitude systems.
> Hence saturation is not easy: The 15th Khordad will concentrate on the targets it is designed for: air breathing, manned and unmanned stealth targets at 10-25km altitude regime.


well if you look at GBU-39


> *All SDB I variants*
> more than 60 nmi (110 km)[6]
> *SDB II (GBU-53/B)*
> 45 miles (72km) against moving targets[9]


you see they can still use hit and run tactics unless Bavar become operational and we also protect systems like Bavar , 15th khordad and Talash with lots of short range air defense system right now our strategy is to engage those bombs a their target and that's the problem if you fail at those several seconds ,its the end for the target but if you engage the target several time in its path the chance of failure is reduced and it make enemy have no choice and come closer and get in the range of your defense

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> well if you look at GBU-39
> 
> you see they can still use hit and run tactics unless Bavar become operational and we also protect systems like Bavar , 15th khordad and Talash with lots of short range air defense system right now our strategy is to engage those bombs a their target and that's the problem if you fail at those several seconds ,its the end for the target but if you engage the target several time in its path the chance of failure is reduced and it make enemy have no choice and come closer and get in the range of your defense



Well ideally a Tabas or 3rd Khordad would activate at a unknown location triggered by the IADS and suddenly engage the strike package that wants to engage the 15th Khordad. This is cheaper than a Bavar-373 engagement.

However the whole SDB issue is like this: First those ranges need to be cut by at least 30% because they are ideal scenarios: A clean aircraft releasing the SDB at max. altitude at full AB and max. speed.

Secondly: when the SDB arrives to its max. range it is a very slow and static target. The PK of AAA systems is high against such targets and preparation time plenty.

Realistic figures are 20km for JDAM-like PGMs and 40km for SDBs. If a F-15 just carries two SDB to reduce drag for max. release speed, it may achieve 70km or so.
Israelis did it like this: Just a few SDB per F-15 to allow high release speed coming from the Lebanese mountains. Now they have switched to a large supersonic stand-off missile, probably because the Pantsir proved so effective against SDBs (at least at those places where the few Syrian Pantsirs were available).
The SDB is in fact such a slow and easy target that a cheap single 100mm Sarir shot probably has something like 30-50% PK at 6km or so distance...

The Bavar-373 of course would have a secure high value kill if something is able to climb up to very high altitude at near mach 2 speed to release 2 or so unpowered low survivable PGMs. There the target is certainly no decoy and worth a salvo of at least two Sayyad-4.

In most combat scenarios SDB will be released at sub-sonic speed and there, the 45km range of the 15th Khordad is sufficient for the kill.
Expandable, subsonic and very stealthy drones and weapons are probably the bulk of targets that try to neutralize the missile bases.

PS: I bet that 110km PR figure for the SDB was achieved by a close to bingo fuel (no reserves for evasion, low altitude flight or the way back to base, just ready to be mid-air refueled after test-release), clean, F-15 on a hot summer day, @ max. afterburner and max. altitude and with storm like wind conditions to the back of the F-15 and SDB. Arriving to the target at speeds even hypercars can reach today on th road... US-MIC-PR

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Russel

45 kilometer is the range of the missile system against stealth target. 120 km for non-stealth target. Source-
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980322000406

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> 45km is the limit


You keep saying this despite the fact they said 45 km was the range against stealth targets, while the missiles can engage targets out to 75 km (Sayyad-2) and 120 km (Sayyad-3). I certainly think the radar can guide them to targets at those ranges.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Combined with the Talash-2/3 it would have 75km range with the SD-2M or 120km with the SD-3.

But the baseline system without Talash is just 45km, with the huge benefit of good anti-stealth capabilities and lowest missile cost.
I have good technical reasons to say this. Iran probably leaked it intentionally but as I'm not sure I won't go into the physics behind that statement.

The roadmap envisions that once all S-200 sites are upgraded with to Talash capability, future Talash can be allocated to 15th Khordad batteries to enable long range shots with SD-3. Footprint and cost per missile would then be increased, anti-stealth capability decreased, kinematic PK decreased, and warning time for the target provided. Nevertheless I hope to see that upgrade level for the 15th Khordad soon.
The 6 channel, low cost missile, 45km range, low footprint (physical, EM and personell), high anti-stealth capability, high kinematic PK and high altitude performance is for now good enough for the baseline variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> You keep saying this despite the fact they said 45 km was the range against stealth targets, while the missiles can engage targets out to 75 km (Sayyad-2) and 120 km (Sayyad-3). I certainly think the radar can guide them to targets at those ranges.


the missile can reach to those ranges but there is a big drawback , the farther the missile go it lose more kinetic energy and become less maneuverable .

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## T-72B

Does Iran ever reconsider to retire all it's HQ-2 and S-200 missile system with the already unveil 15th Khordad and older S-2/Talaash AD system?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

T-72B said:


> Does Iran ever reconsider to retire all it's HQ-2 and S-200 missile system with the already unveil 15th Khordad and older S-2/Talaash AD system?



Why would they? They are upgraded versions and still deadly against certain aircraft. As long as Iran’s got a healthy inventory of missiles, no point in destroying them, better to keep them deployed.

I’m sure Syria and Iraq would love to have them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

T-72B said:


> Does Iran ever reconsider to retire all it's HQ-2 and S-200 missile system with the already unveil 15th Khordad and older S-2/Talaash AD system?


Why would they do such idiotic thing??S-200 missile is one of the fastest missile ever built and hq-2 is also very good high altitude air defense...even without modernization these systems are very capable...they are not mobile but you have to defend many static targets any way,solution is just put s-200 and HQ-2 around these static targets...like air bases...and that is how these systems are deployed...Original S-200 flaw was huge minimal range which makes missile almost useless in medium rangeg(that is range where you fight against fighter jets)but these is solved and Iran demonstrated capability to target low altitude targets in short ranges with s-200(that is why they showed how s-200 targeted UAV at only few miles)...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

Talash-1 upgrade level gave S-200 sites the 45km range SD-2M
Talash-2 upgrade was the mature variant that entered service, increased range to 75km for the SD-2M and could support 120km range SD-3. Making it possible to save the valuable S-200 for ranger higher than 120km. It probably also replaced the static Square Pair fire control radar with a new mobile FCS.
Now Talash-3 is the addition of the Najm-804.

A Najm-804 radar added to a S-200 site upgraded to Talash-2 level, forms the Talash-3 capability level. *Hence I think Talash-3=Najm-804*.

A Talash-2 FCS added to the 15th Khordad creates a new system that operates 45km range SD-2, 75km range SD-2M and 120km range SD-3.

A 15th Khordad stand-alone, baseline, without Talash-2 FCS has 45km range with SD-2.

To benefit from a AESA S-band formerly the Hafez radar was added to S-200 Talash-2 level sites. Now the much higher capability offering Najm-804 can do the job, with added features.
Hafez radars can be completely allocated to HAWK/Mersad sites to offer them the benefits of an AESA S-band sensor.

This seems to be the somewhat complex but very wise approach of these IRIADF assets.

The S-200 as kinematic monster is certainly worth the effort to keep it in service.
But IRGC HQ-2/Sayyad-2 are well and cost effectively replaced by the SD-2. As said previously I would like to see resources saved and all HQ-2 systems combined to 1-2 "super sites" in Tehran. The training, maintenance and support requirements are high but worth to keep 1-2 groups trained on it (with most of the hardware stored).

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DoubleYouSee

T-72B said:


> Does Iran ever reconsider to retire all it's HQ-2 and S-200 missile system with the already unveil 15th Khordad and older S-2/Talaash AD system?


Mission of S200 is defending cities against strategic bombers........the authorities  has said that they want to keep optimizing S200 and giving it new capableties.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*
Iran's Air Defence Chief: 'We Are Warning the Enemy…Move as Far Away As You Can From Our Border'*



"We are warning the enemy: there is no safe zone for extraterritorial military aircraft in Iranian skies... Even approaching Iran's borders would be met with a strong response. Thus, I advise you to move as much away [from Iran's borders] as you can," the commander said, as quoted by PressTV.


https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/...ymove-as-far-away-as-you-can-from-our-border/

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## JohnWick

skyshadow said:


> *Iran's Air Defence Chief: 'We Are Warning the Enemy…Move as Far Away As You Can From Our Border'*
> 
> 
> 
> "We are warning the enemy: there is no safe zone for extraterritorial military aircraft in Iranian skies... Even approaching Iran's borders would be met with a strong response. Thus, I advise you to move as much away [from Iran's borders] as you can," the commander said, as quoted by PressTV.
> 
> 
> https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/...ymove-as-far-away-as-you-can-from-our-border/


Ever heard of word "Stealth"?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

JohnWick said:


> Ever heard of word "Stealth"?



yes, but they are not undetectable, we already warned F22 fighters even before they get close to our air space. you can not get close up to 500 km of an 3000 km over the horizon radar without being detected.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

T-72B said:


> Does Iran ever reconsider to retire all it's HQ-2 and S-200 missile system with the already unveil 15th Khordad and older S-2/Talaash AD system?


S-200 is by far the most formidable, effective, and longest range missile Iran has in its inventory, and whether or not you believe it won’t change this fact. It is extremely fast, and it’s effective range is even more than S-300 versions iran currently possesses. With the modifications a Belarusian company did for Iran a decade ago, it has become almost invincible with respect to ECM missions from foe fighters.
I wish Iran could purchase the last version of it which had a range of 300 km!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## T-72B

Myself said:


> S-200 is by far the most formidable, effective, and longest range missile Iran has in its inventory, and whether or not you believe it won’t change this fact. It is extremely fast, and it’s effective range is even more than S-300 versions iran currently possesses. With the modifications a Belarusian company did for Iran a decade ago, it has become almost invincible with respect to ECM missions from foe fighters.
> I wish Iran could purchase the last version of it which had a range of 300 km!


Last version is Dubna which has 400 km range

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Aramagedon

Bavar 373


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

T-72B said:


> Last version is Dubna which has 400 km range


Please don’t use Wikipedia for technical topics, buddy. Dubna has a range of 300 km, 60 km more than Vega. The question is how much is the range of the recently delivered version to Syria? Russians called it advanced S-200M, which apparently has a range of 300 km, way more than their S-300!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## T-72B

Myself said:


> Please don’t use Wikipedia for technical topics, buddy. Dubna has a range of 300 km, 60 km more than Vega. The question is how much is the range of the recently delivered version to Syria? Russians called it advanced S-200M, which apparently has a range of 300 km, way more than their S-300!


Well my bad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Myself said:


> Please don’t use Wikipedia for technical topics, buddy. Dubna has a range of 300 km, 60 km more than Vega. The question is how much is the range of the recently delivered version to Syria? Russians called it advanced S-200M, which apparently has a range of 300 km, way more than their S-300!



Yes and it has failed to intercept a single Israeli aircraft. Well actually One happened to explode near one forcing the pilot to eject. So in hundreds of israeli air raids and it failed to hit a single F-16.

So obviously the S-200 Syria has is not “advanced.”


----------



## PeeD

Note:

The Najm-804 beside its role as 15th Khordad radar is also the enabling system for the Talash-3 capability level of Iranian S-200 sites.

The reason is the cooling requirements for the AESA array: They ~ doubled compared to the Najm-802B.
The Najm-802B with the SD-2A is the IRGCASF equivalent to the IRIADF 15th Khordad and has the same 45km range.
However the IRIADF requirements also requested a capability to support S-200 sites upgraded to Talash-2 level.
Hence the increased the AESA power output that required more cooling.
Its main role would be to support 120km SD-3 engagements of S-200 Talash-2 sites. Drastically increasing the EW warfare robustness of the Talash-2 sites.
It can most likely also supports the S-200 in its most effective engagement envelope of 100-200km. Increasing EW robustness.

As for the S-200's performance: Its job is to keep the enemy out of the 10-25km altitude envelope at the 100-200km range.
There need to be other, more cost effective systems to cover the lower altitudes at more forward placed regions.
S-200 will never impact directly, but explode its directed frag-warhead at a effective kill distance. Even a small SD-2 is designed for proximity fusing at a pre-determined distance where max. fragmentation damage is expected.
So Israelis normally dive down behind the Golan or Lebanese mountains once the get a S-200 warning. Syrians can't forward deploy their Buk, too risky and easily masked by the mountains (possible due to Israeli hit and run tactics).
However the point here is that the 1960's vintage S-200 seeker should be jammable by newest Israeli self defense ECM system, chaff, decoys ect.
However that S-200 somehow managed to hit the Israeli F-16. No dive/masking maneuver, no notching/beaming, no ECM, no decoy, no chaff. Israelis were surprised by the kill.
Hence it's possible that it was a Talash related test by Iran. It clearly showed the potential of 1960's S-200 in near 2020 (50-60 years).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

@PeeD

Your thoughts on the following published article on War Is Boring. Is this pure propaganda ment to diminish Iran’s domestic production capability or is there some truth to this?

*China and Iran: Joining Forces to Beat U.S. Stealth Fighters?*
The rapid development of Iranian air defenses over the last few years raises some big questions. How much are China and Iran cooperating? Why is China’s involvement a mystery to so many observers?

In recent years, the Chinese defense sector has provided its export customers with top-notch products. Several well-known Chinese corporations are active on the international market for air-defense systems. The best-known are the China Electronic Technology Group Corporation, the China National Electronics Import & Export Corporation and the China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation.

_(This article __originally appeared__ at War is Boring in 2017.)_

But there could be another. “The Chinese company deepest involved in cooperation with us is named Poly Technologies,” an engineer working for the Iranian Electronic Industries told War Is Boring.

Unlikely to ring many bells in the public, Poly Technologies is renown among air-defense specialists for maintaining much closer ties to the top ranks of the People’s Liberation Army of China than any other company does.

This state-owned firm is a subsidiary – but also the backbone – of the China Poly Group Corporation, and has established business relations with hundreds of enterprises around the world. One of its better-known foreign trader partners is the Italian car-designer Ferrari.

Indeed, much of trade involving Poly Technologies is for civilian applications. However, another of its primary duties is the acquisition and import of equipment and technology to China for military use.

Curiously, for its export business in the air-defense sector, Poly Technologies partners with the 14th Institute of China Electronic Technology Group Corporation.

The 14th Institute is the founding company in China’s radar industry. Established in the 1950s with Soviet help, it employs around 9,000 people. In working with Poly Technologies, the Iranians gain access to the best of the Chinese air-defense industry.

Not that that’s obvious. “The Chinese are very open to modify their own product – and at least as skillful in giving you the illusion that all of what they do is coming from you,” the same IEI engineer said.

“Actually, many of the systems we now claim to be ours have existed in China for many years. All the necessary research and development for them was done even before we requested them. But they pay great attention to provide us with the illusion of everything being of our design, coming from us.”

This is why even most of people working for IEI don’t know that various radar systems they manufacture were at least designed in China – if not entirely manufactured there, too. On the contrary, nearly everybody interviewed in the course of research for this article is firmly convinced that everything is designed and manufactured in Iran.

The majority of “Iranian-developed” air-defense systems of Chinese origin are based on various Chinese or Russian designs. Some Chinese systems are themselves practically clones of Russian designs. For example, the missile-transport and launch-containers for the Bavar-373 system bear strong resemblances to those on the Chinese KS-1A missile system.

The origins of various other “Iranian” designs are at least as obvious. The Miraj-4 radar is a development of the Chinese JYL-1. The Iranian Bashir comes from the JY-11B. The Kashef derives from the YLC-6M. And so on.

Iran’s air-defense systems include roughly two dozen different radars. While certainly representing a maintenance nightmare, such a network is extremely hard to fight because any opponent must find a solution for facing multiple radars at once.

Although many of the radars fielded in Iran appear less flexible than their Russian or Chinese originals, the availability of multiple systems means redundancy. Should one system prove ineffective or easy to jam or even knock out in combat, there are two or more systems that can take its place.

Some of Iran’s radars possess very advanced capabilities. One example is the Qadir early-warning system. This Sino-Iranian variant of the Russian-made Rezonans is a fixed installation providing 360-degree coverage.

In 2015 the United Arab Emirates demonstrated its own variant of the same system. Developed with help of Ukrainian experts and named Rannen, the radar managed to detect and track a U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor stealth fighter while it was arriving for the Dubai Air Show – all without the U.S. plane using a transponder or any kind of radar reflector.

As far is known, this test was undertaken without U.S. consent.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/china-and-iran-joining-forces-beat-us-stealth-fighters-62647



PeeD said:


> Note:
> 
> The Najm-804 beside its role as 15th Khordad radar is also the enabling system for the Talash-3 capability level of Iranian S-200 sites.
> 
> The reason is the cooling requirements for the AESA array: They ~ doubled compared to the Najm-802B.
> The Najm-802B with the SD-2A is the IRGCASF equivalent to the IRIADF 15th Khordad and has the same 45km range.
> However the IRIADF requirements also requested a capability to support S-200 sites upgraded to Talash-2 level.
> Hence the increased the AESA power output that required more cooling.
> Its main role would be to support 120km SD-3 engagements of S-200 Talash-2 sites. Drastically increasing the EW warfare robustness of the Talash-2 sites.
> It can most likely also supports the S-200 in its most effective engagement envelope of 100-200km. Increasing EW robustness.
> 
> As for the S-200's performance: Its job is to keep the enemy out of the 10-25km altitude envelope at the 100-200km range.
> There need to be other, more cost effective systems to cover the lower altitudes at more forward placed regions.
> S-200 will never impact directly, but explode its directed frag-warhead at a effective kill distance. Even a small SD-2 is designed for proximity fusing at a pre-determined distance where max. fragmentation damage is expected.
> So Israelis normally dive down behind the Golan or Lebanese mountains once the get a S-200 warning. Syrians can't forward deploy their Buk, too risky and easily masked by the mountains (possible due to Israeli hit and run tactics).
> However the point here is that the 1960's vintage S-200 seeker should be jammable by newest Israeli self defense ECM system, chaff, decoys ect.
> However that S-200 somehow managed to hit the Israeli F-16. No dive/masking maneuver, no notching/beaming, no ECM, no decoy, no chaff. Israelis were surprised by the kill.
> Hence it's possible that it was a Talash related test by Iran. It clearly showed the potential of 1960's S-200 in near 2020 (50-60 years).



While Syria might not deploy its Pantsir or Buk systems it still has the older Kub, S-125, and S-75 systems it can forward deploy to allow for multiple missiles per target. Furthermore, a S-300 could also hit an F-16 during a dive maneuver.

Obviously the issue here is the close proximity between Israel and Damascus which allows for launches of stand off missiles but Israel before Damascus has proper time to locate and engage (ie a fighter jet striking Syria vs a Normal Israeli fighter jet patrolling through lebanon).

Nonetheless, the attacks on T-4 show israel reach into Syria and subquently the lack of Iran in being able to stop them. I do believe Iran has tried to bring in systems to protect their own assets but they are probably quickly destroyed as the only way to bring them into Syria is via easy to track massive cargo jets.

Once the Iranian port in Syria gets up and running, Iran can use closeness to Russian bases as a shield proximity to start moving in air defense systems for the strategic future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> @PeeD
> 
> Your thoughts on the following published article on War Is Boring. Is this pure propaganda ment to diminish Iran’s domestic production capability or is there some truth to this?
> 
> *China and Iran: Joining Forces to Beat U.S. Stealth Fighters?*
> The rapid development of Iranian air defenses over the last few years raises some big questions. How much are China and Iran cooperating? Why is China’s involvement a mystery to so many observers?
> 
> In recent years, the Chinese defense sector has provided its export customers with top-notch products. Several well-known Chinese corporations are active on the international market for air-defense systems. The best-known are the China Electronic Technology Group Corporation, the China National Electronics Import & Export Corporation and the China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation.
> 
> _(This article __originally appeared__ at War is Boring in 2017.)_
> 
> But there could be another. “The Chinese company deepest involved in cooperation with us is named Poly Technologies,” an engineer working for the Iranian Electronic Industries told War Is Boring.
> 
> Unlikely to ring many bells in the public, Poly Technologies is renown among air-defense specialists for maintaining much closer ties to the top ranks of the People’s Liberation Army of China than any other company does.
> 
> This state-owned firm is a subsidiary – but also the backbone – of the China Poly Group Corporation, and has established business relations with hundreds of enterprises around the world. One of its better-known foreign trader partners is the Italian car-designer Ferrari.
> 
> Indeed, much of trade involving Poly Technologies is for civilian applications. However, another of its primary duties is the acquisition and import of equipment and technology to China for military use.
> 
> Curiously, for its export business in the air-defense sector, Poly Technologies partners with the 14th Institute of China Electronic Technology Group Corporation.
> 
> The 14th Institute is the founding company in China’s radar industry. Established in the 1950s with Soviet help, it employs around 9,000 people. In working with Poly Technologies, the Iranians gain access to the best of the Chinese air-defense industry.
> 
> Not that that’s obvious. “The Chinese are very open to modify their own product – and at least as skillful in giving you the illusion that all of what they do is coming from you,” the same IEI engineer said.
> 
> “Actually, many of the systems we now claim to be ours have existed in China for many years. All the necessary research and development for them was done even before we requested them. But they pay great attention to provide us with the illusion of everything being of our design, coming from us.”
> 
> This is why even most of people working for IEI don’t know that various radar systems they manufacture were at least designed in China – if not entirely manufactured there, too. On the contrary, nearly everybody interviewed in the course of research for this article is firmly convinced that everything is designed and manufactured in Iran.
> 
> The majority of “Iranian-developed” air-defense systems of Chinese origin are based on various Chinese or Russian designs. Some Chinese systems are themselves practically clones of Russian designs. For example, the missile-transport and launch-containers for the Bavar-373 system bear strong resemblances to those on the Chinese KS-1A missile system.
> 
> The origins of various other “Iranian” designs are at least as obvious. The Miraj-4 radar is a development of the Chinese JYL-1. The Iranian Bashir comes from the JY-11B. The Kashef derives from the YLC-6M. And so on.
> 
> Iran’s air-defense systems include roughly two dozen different radars. While certainly representing a maintenance nightmare, such a network is extremely hard to fight because any opponent must find a solution for facing multiple radars at once.
> 
> Although many of the radars fielded in Iran appear less flexible than their Russian or Chinese originals, the availability of multiple systems means redundancy. Should one system prove ineffective or easy to jam or even knock out in combat, there are two or more systems that can take its place.
> 
> Some of Iran’s radars possess very advanced capabilities. One example is the Qadir early-warning system. This Sino-Iranian variant of the Russian-made Rezonans is a fixed installation providing 360-degree coverage.
> 
> In 2015 the United Arab Emirates demonstrated its own variant of the same system. Developed with help of Ukrainian experts and named Rannen, the radar managed to detect and track a U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor stealth fighter while it was arriving for the Dubai Air Show – all without the U.S. plane using a transponder or any kind of radar reflector.
> 
> As far is known, this test was undertaken without U.S. consent.
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/china-and-iran-joining-forces-beat-us-stealth-fighters-62647



 @Navigator was the first to reveal here from where all started for Irans S-band AESAs.
It was not China.
Someone feed Tom Cooper with a 1-dimensional information in regards to the Bashir/JY-11. It had some truth for this single case but is absolutely not applicable to the rest.
Many countries contributed to Irans initial jump in radar technology, I won't call any names or any details.

Chinas approach in total is very different to Irans today. Iran has become mature and created its own design signature.
So no: Irans systems are not Chinese, like described in the article, everyone should be sure about that. Some approaches are even pioneered by Iran today, without analogues.



TheImmortal said:


> Nonetheless, the attacks on T-4 show israel reach into Syria and subquently the lack of Iran in being able to stop them. I do believe Iran has tried to bring in systems to protect their own assets but they are probably quickly destroyed as the only way to bring them into Syria is via easy to track massive cargo jets.
> 
> Once the Iranian port in Syria gets up and running, Iran can use closeness to Russian bases as a shield proximity to start moving in air defense systems for the strategic future.



Iran is not in Syria to provide its air defense. Israel does not do devastating strikes that endanger the overall objective to provide Iran-connected forces with weapons.
If one day Iran would feel the need to do that, it would first make sure no PGMs can hit the SAM: Seraj passive detection system + 100mm Sarir, 35mm (AHEAD) Samavat and 23mm Mesbah-2 would make sure nothing hit the system. With those small, low footprint and passive systems in place something like the 15th Khordad + Talash-2 + SD-3 could be set up. More deadly would be 3rd Khordad systems protected by mobile variants of those automatic AAA protection systems or some kind of Iranian Pantsir (not as cost effective against saturation strikes) or Crotale.
Iran feel no need to deploy such systems in Syria, there may be already such systems there, waiting for the right time to be activated.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> @PeeD
> 
> Your thoughts on the following published article on War Is Boring. Is this pure propaganda ment to diminish Iran’s domestic production capability or is there some truth to this?
> 
> *China and Iran: Joining Forces to Beat U.S. Stealth Fighters?*
> The rapid development of Iranian air defenses over the last few years raises some big questions. How much are China and Iran cooperating? Why is China’s involvement a mystery to so many observers?
> 
> In recent years, the Chinese defense sector has provided its export customers with top-notch products. Several well-known Chinese corporations are active on the international market for air-defense systems. The best-known are the China Electronic Technology Group Corporation, the China National Electronics Import & Export Corporation and the China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation.
> 
> _(This article __originally appeared__ at War is Boring in 2017.)_
> 
> But there could be another. “The Chinese company deepest involved in cooperation with us is named Poly Technologies,” an engineer working for the Iranian Electronic Industries told War Is Boring.
> 
> Unlikely to ring many bells in the public, Poly Technologies is renown among air-defense specialists for maintaining much closer ties to the top ranks of the People’s Liberation Army of China than any other company does.
> 
> This state-owned firm is a subsidiary – but also the backbone – of the China Poly Group Corporation, and has established business relations with hundreds of enterprises around the world. One of its better-known foreign trader partners is the Italian car-designer Ferrari.
> 
> Indeed, much of trade involving Poly Technologies is for civilian applications. However, another of its primary duties is the acquisition and import of equipment and technology to China for military use.
> 
> Curiously, for its export business in the air-defense sector, Poly Technologies partners with the 14th Institute of China Electronic Technology Group Corporation.
> 
> The 14th Institute is the founding company in China’s radar industry. Established in the 1950s with Soviet help, it employs around 9,000 people. In working with Poly Technologies, the Iranians gain access to the best of the Chinese air-defense industry.
> 
> Not that that’s obvious. “The Chinese are very open to modify their own product – and at least as skillful in giving you the illusion that all of what they do is coming from you,” the same IEI engineer said.
> 
> “Actually, many of the systems we now claim to be ours have existed in China for many years. All the necessary research and development for them was done even before we requested them. But they pay great attention to provide us with the illusion of everything being of our design, coming from us.”
> 
> This is why even most of people working for IEI don’t know that various radar systems they manufacture were at least designed in China – if not entirely manufactured there, too. On the contrary, nearly everybody interviewed in the course of research for this article is firmly convinced that everything is designed and manufactured in Iran.
> 
> The majority of “Iranian-developed” air-defense systems of Chinese origin are based on various Chinese or Russian designs. Some Chinese systems are themselves practically clones of Russian designs. For example, the missile-transport and launch-containers for the Bavar-373 system bear strong resemblances to those on the Chinese KS-1A missile system.
> 
> The origins of various other “Iranian” designs are at least as obvious. The Miraj-4 radar is a development of the Chinese JYL-1. The Iranian Bashir comes from the JY-11B. The Kashef derives from the YLC-6M. And so on.
> 
> Iran’s air-defense systems include roughly two dozen different radars. While certainly representing a maintenance nightmare, such a network is extremely hard to fight because any opponent must find a solution for facing multiple radars at once.
> 
> Although many of the radars fielded in Iran appear less flexible than their Russian or Chinese originals, the availability of multiple systems means redundancy. Should one system prove ineffective or easy to jam or even knock out in combat, there are two or more systems that can take its place.
> 
> Some of Iran’s radars possess very advanced capabilities. One example is the Qadir early-warning system. This Sino-Iranian variant of the Russian-made Rezonans is a fixed installation providing 360-degree coverage.
> 
> In 2015 the United Arab Emirates demonstrated its own variant of the same system. Developed with help of Ukrainian experts and named Rannen, the radar managed to detect and track a U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor stealth fighter while it was arriving for the Dubai Air Show – all without the U.S. plane using a transponder or any kind of radar reflector.
> 
> As far is known, this test was undertaken without U.S. consent.
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/china-and-iran-joining-forces-beat-us-stealth-fighters-62647


Iran to supply Indonesia with radar technology

State level cooperations isn't based on claims but detailed understanding of capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Sina-1

TheImmortal said:


> @PeeD
> 
> Your thoughts on the following published article on War Is Boring. Is this pure propaganda ment to diminish Iran’s domestic production capability or is there some truth to this?
> 
> *China and Iran: Joining Forces to Beat U.S. Stealth Fighters?*
> The rapid development of Iranian air defenses over the last few years raises some big questions. How much are China and Iran cooperating? Why is China’s involvement a mystery to so many observers?
> 
> In recent years, the Chinese defense sector has provided its export customers with top-notch products. Several well-known Chinese corporations are active on the international market for air-defense systems. The best-known are the China Electronic Technology Group Corporation, the China National Electronics Import & Export Corporation and the China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation.
> 
> _(This article __originally appeared__ at War is Boring in 2017.)_
> 
> But there could be another. “The Chinese company deepest involved in cooperation with us is named Poly Technologies,” an engineer working for the Iranian Electronic Industries told War Is Boring.
> 
> Unlikely to ring many bells in the public, Poly Technologies is renown among air-defense specialists for maintaining much closer ties to the top ranks of the People’s Liberation Army of China than any other company does.
> 
> This state-owned firm is a subsidiary – but also the backbone – of the China Poly Group Corporation, and has established business relations with hundreds of enterprises around the world. One of its better-known foreign trader partners is the Italian car-designer Ferrari.
> 
> Indeed, much of trade involving Poly Technologies is for civilian applications. However, another of its primary duties is the acquisition and import of equipment and technology to China for military use.
> 
> Curiously, for its export business in the air-defense sector, Poly Technologies partners with the 14th Institute of China Electronic Technology Group Corporation.
> 
> The 14th Institute is the founding company in China’s radar industry. Established in the 1950s with Soviet help, it employs around 9,000 people. In working with Poly Technologies, the Iranians gain access to the best of the Chinese air-defense industry.
> 
> Not that that’s obvious. “The Chinese are very open to modify their own product – and at least as skillful in giving you the illusion that all of what they do is coming from you,” the same IEI engineer said.
> 
> “Actually, many of the systems we now claim to be ours have existed in China for many years. All the necessary research and development for them was done even before we requested them. But they pay great attention to provide us with the illusion of everything being of our design, coming from us.”
> 
> This is why even most of people working for IEI don’t know that various radar systems they manufacture were at least designed in China – if not entirely manufactured there, too. On the contrary, nearly everybody interviewed in the course of research for this article is firmly convinced that everything is designed and manufactured in Iran.
> 
> The majority of “Iranian-developed” air-defense systems of Chinese origin are based on various Chinese or Russian designs. Some Chinese systems are themselves practically clones of Russian designs. For example, the missile-transport and launch-containers for the Bavar-373 system bear strong resemblances to those on the Chinese KS-1A missile system.
> 
> The origins of various other “Iranian” designs are at least as obvious. The Miraj-4 radar is a development of the Chinese JYL-1. The Iranian Bashir comes from the JY-11B. The Kashef derives from the YLC-6M. And so on.
> 
> Iran’s air-defense systems include roughly two dozen different radars. While certainly representing a maintenance nightmare, such a network is extremely hard to fight because any opponent must find a solution for facing multiple radars at once.
> 
> Although many of the radars fielded in Iran appear less flexible than their Russian or Chinese originals, the availability of multiple systems means redundancy. Should one system prove ineffective or easy to jam or even knock out in combat, there are two or more systems that can take its place.
> 
> Some of Iran’s radars possess very advanced capabilities. One example is the Qadir early-warning system. This Sino-Iranian variant of the Russian-made Rezonans is a fixed installation providing 360-degree coverage.
> 
> In 2015 the United Arab Emirates demonstrated its own variant of the same system. Developed with help of Ukrainian experts and named Rannen, the radar managed to detect and track a U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor stealth fighter while it was arriving for the Dubai Air Show – all without the U.S. plane using a transponder or any kind of radar reflector.
> 
> As far is known, this test was undertaken without U.S. consent.
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/china-and-iran-joining-forces-beat-us-stealth-fighters-62647
> 
> 
> 
> While Syria might not deploy its Pantsir or Buk systems it still has the older Kub, S-125, and S-75 systems it can forward deploy to allow for multiple missiles per target. Furthermore, a S-300 could also hit an F-16 during a dive maneuver.
> 
> Obviously the issue here is the close proximity between Israel and Damascus which allows for launches of stand off missiles but Israel before Damascus has proper time to locate and engage (ie a fighter jet striking Syria vs a Normal Israeli fighter jet patrolling through lebanon).
> 
> Nonetheless, the attacks on T-4 show israel reach into Syria and subquently the lack of Iran in being able to stop them. I do believe Iran has tried to bring in systems to protect their own assets but they are probably quickly destroyed as the only way to bring them into Syria is via easy to track massive cargo jets.
> 
> Once the Iranian port in Syria gets up and running, Iran can use closeness to Russian bases as a shield proximity to start moving in air defense systems for the strategic future.



Reminds me of the time the military “experts” tried to denounce Iranian missile and rocket achievements during the early 2000s as North Korean knock off. Or even the cruise missiles as having Chinese origin. Discrediting Iran as a barbaric and illiterate “mullah” nation has always been their main propagandist approach.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## SubWater

https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2054630
air defense training

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

General Bagheri visiting Army air defense achievements:
http://www.iribnews.ir/files/fa/news/1398/3/22/3610672_422.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## aryobarzan

Sina-1 said:


> Reminds me of the time the military “experts” tried to denounce Iranian missile and rocket achievements during the early 2000s as North Korean knock off. Or even the cruise missiles as having Chinese origin. Discrediting Iran as a barbaric and illiterate “mullah” nation has always been their main propagandist approach.


Thank you exactly my thoughts... It is a general theme in all military publications to undermine and ridicule Iran's achievements (started with grand father of them all "Janes Defense")..if you did not know any better and only read these publications you will arrive the following conclusion:
1- Iranians are a bunch dumbass copycats....the brains belong to European, Russians,Koreans China man and of course the mighty Israelis...lol...To them Arabs only sign the cheques (which is true) and Persians just copy...
2- Iranians in Syria are a bunch of morons who keep their assets (which of course they copied)..in plain view of Satellites and the smart Israelis swoop down from the heavens and destroy them every once in awhile..and because Iranians are morons the next day they re supply and force the mighty ones to destroy them again!.....It reminds me of the words of one Israeli politician... "we hate Palestinians for forcing us to kill them"...We live in funny times!.

So why do they do this ..the answer is coordinated Propaganda ...to discourage independence of nations...and to ensure Iran is not being used as a model for that....

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> General Bagheri visiting Army air defense achievements:
> http://www.iribnews.ir/files/fa/news/1398/3/22/3610672_422.mp4




A muzzle time setting for the fuse of AHEAD like munition can be seen in the video.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

aryobarzan said:


> Thank you exactly my thoughts... It is a general theme in all military publications to undermine and ridicule Iran's achievements (started with grand father of them all "Janes Defense")..if you did not know any better and only read these publications you will arrive the following conclusion:
> 1- Iranians are a bunch dumbass copycats....the brains belong to European, Russians,Koreans China man and of course the mighty Israelis...lol...To them Arabs only sign the cheques (which is true) and Persians just copy...
> 2- Iranians in Syria are a bunch of morons who keep their assets (which of course they copied)..in plain view of Satellites and the smart Israelis swoop down from the heavens and destroy them every once in awhile..and because Iranians are morons the next day they re supply and force the mighty ones to destroy them again!.....It reminds me of the words of one Israeli politician... "we hate Palestinians for forcing us to kill them"...We live in funny times!.
> 
> So why do they do this ..the answer is coordinated Propaganda ...to discourage independence of nations...and to ensure Iran is not being used as a model for that....


In long term it’s a lousy strategy to label your opponent as incompetent.

When the opponent has achievements then it serves to undermine your propaganda. The opponent gets boasted and your camp discouraged. 

The “evil” opponent is a much better approach since it’s independent of opponent achievements. Evil is always evil no matter the outcome of battle/war.

Essentially it’s their loss to have picked such a lousy strategy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> General Bagheri visiting Army air defense achievements:
> http://www.iribnews.ir/files/fa/news/1398/3/22/3610672_422.mp4








what's this guys??



PeeD said:


> A muzzle time setting for the fuse of AHEAD like munition can be seen in the video.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*
Sayyad air defense system*







2 different unit of 15th of Khordad

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar 373*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar 373*


You mean it is operational? Or it shows the future after they are installed?


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> You mean it is operational? Or it shows the future after they are installed?



it shows the future setups

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*“We currently face demonstrative threats. Nevertheless, when it comes to air defence of our country, we consider using the foreign potential in addition to our domestic capacities,” Shamkhani said when asked whether Iran might purchase Russian S-400 air defence systems in case it faces a serious threat.*
*


https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/...eign-potential-to-domestic-military-capacity/*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## vi-va

PeeD said:


> The SDB is in fact such a slow and easy target that a cheap single 100mm Sarir shot probably has something like 30-50% PK at 6km or so distance...



SDB is neither slow nor easy target. SDB has very high maneuverability and can sacrifice altitude to gain supersonic, up to 550m/s. http://www.doc88.com/p-7798267325595.html

It's small and covered by metal, not easy to destroy unless hit directly. Missile proximity fuze can be triggered with 8-20 meters, not easy to be triggered by SDB at the best distance.

Single 100mm Sarir shot has no chance to hit, you need 35mm AHEAD ammunition. Other weapon is not effective enough to counter SDB. China use China made weapon similar to Oerlikon 35 mm twin cannon.

You will be hit not by several SDB, but dozons SDB for 1 batch, and there are much more batches coming after.

China CM-506KG has maximum range of 130km. 
http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.com/2012/11/cm-506kg-small-diameter-bomb-sdb.html


US has tens of thousands of GBU-39. Get prepared, your air defense system will be facing saturation attack.

FYI, https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2462655&extra=&authorid=1056193&page=1

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

viva_zhao said:


> SDB is neither slow nor easy target. SDB has very high maneuverability and can sacrifice altitude to gain supersonic, up to 550m/s. http://www.doc88.com/p-7798267325595.html



Any maneuvering or course correction will reduce range significantly. So significantly that no random evasive maneuvering would make sense. Maybe around the last 3km at 50% range penalty.
It also won't gain back high velocity: For that again a range reduction penalty of lets say 20% is needed and it will not reach supersonic speeds by such a dive.



viva_zhao said:


> It's small and covered by metal, not easy to destroy unless hit directly. Missile proximity fuze can be triggered with 8-20 meters, not easy to be triggered by SDB at the best distance.



This is true for a dumb bomb. A SDB like PGM has fragil wings and control surfaces. It has such a low explosive power that a slight course error will make it totally useless, except maybe for softest kinds of targets.
Once its wings or control surfaces are damaged it will somehow fall short of its target.
A 250-1000kg dumb bomb on the other hand will fall @ 3-10km max. range and needs to be killed to not harm the target.
So this means, just damage a SDB and it will be a "mission kill".
Plus Irans AAA solution against SDB-like PGMs and CMs are timed fuses, no problems with proximity fuses.



viva_zhao said:


> Single 100mm Sarir shot has no chance to hit, you need 35mm AHEAD ammunition. Other weapon is not effective enough to counter SDB. China use China made weapon similar to Oerlikon 35 mm twin cannon.



A single Sarir round has a certain PK at a certain range against a certain target. Damage a SDB at 6km and it will most likely land too far away for any damage caused.
Iran has its own 35mm AHEAD munition but all its non-AHEAD munitions are effective against such targets.
China is a pioneer in the anti-CM/PGM business, AHEAD is just a potentially more cost effective solution to kill very hard targets.
Iran has a chain of such automatic AAA systems, the last net is the 23mm Mesbah series if 100mm and 35mm systems were not successful. At that stage a large burst of 23mm rounds will basically create a dense shrapnel wall trough which almost nothing can penetrate.
However for a PGM with the threat level of the SDB, the goal would be to mission-kill it cost effectively at extended range via 2-3 100mm rounds.

China has a 76mm AHEAD based system which is very large, but a real SDB-killer.



viva_zhao said:


> You will be hit not by several SDB, but dozons SDB for 1 batch, and there are much more batches coming after.



Thats true. The U.S is a country with a military that can indeed afford mass use of such PGMs.
However, effective range won't be that 100+ km in a combat scenario, that is my point. It will be still incredibly good 40-70km.
Use enough and Irans AAA counter systems can be depleted at one point.
This concept of a concentrated mass SDB attack is what has kept the U.S conventional airpower concept alive: A very cost-inefficient approach and only the U.S can even dare to think about it.



viva_zhao said:


> China CM-506KG has maximum range of 130km.



Iran has also such a system in development. I don't know if it is a good idea, it surely is useful for low-collateral damage and UAV scenarios against a low-capability enemy.



viva_zhao said:


> US has tens of thousands of GBU-39. Get prepared, your air defense system will be facing saturation attack.



True. Unfortunately the U.S wants to go for hypersonic missiles for use against high value targets. Iran has been and is handling SDB-like threats, most recently with AHEAD munitions.
The SDB threat is so well countered by Irans AAA solutions that no Pantsir or even Crotale like missile-systems are necessary against this class of low-kinematic/explosive performance PGMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## zectech

viva_zhao said:


> SDB is neither slow nor easy target. SDB has very high maneuverability and can sacrifice altitude to gain supersonic, up to 550m/s. http://www.doc88.com/p-7798267325595.html
> 
> It's small and covered by metal, not easy to destroy unless hit directly. Missile proximity fuze can be triggered with 8-20 meters, not easy to be triggered by SDB at the best distance.
> 
> Single 100mm Sarir shot has no chance to hit, you need 35mm AHEAD ammunition. Other weapon is not effective enough to counter SDB. China use China made weapon similar to Oerlikon 35 mm twin cannon.
> 
> You will be hit not by several SDB, but dozons SDB for 1 batch, and there are much more batches coming after.
> 
> China CM-506KG has maximum range of 130km.
> http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.com/2012/11/cm-506kg-small-diameter-bomb-sdb.html
> 
> 
> US has tens of thousands of GBU-39. Get prepared, your air defense system will be facing saturation attack.
> 
> FYI, https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2462655&extra=&authorid=1056193&page=1



They have to be launched from somewhere, limiting the swarms. If not from a naval attack, the nation hosting the attack will get a barrage of Surface to Surface missiles from Iran.


----------



## arashkamangir

zectech said:


> They have to be launched from somewhere, limiting the swarms. If not from a naval attack, the nation hosting the attack will get a barrage of Surface to Surface missiles from Iran.




For reference:


----------



## aryobarzan

*Iran AD doing its job..*
*Iran Downs US’ Spy Drone in Persian Gulf: Report*
By
IFP Editorial Staff
-
June 20, 2019 - 02:35




There are reports that the air defence of Iran’s IRGC Aerospace Force has shot down a US RQ-4 drone close to the Iranian province of Hormozgan in Persian Gulf shores.



The US Global Hawk (RQ-4) drone was shot down on Thursday morning in an area close to Kuhmobarak village in Iran’s Hormozgan province, near the Persian Gulf waters, Fars News Agency reported.

The drone had reportedly trespassed into the Iranian territory when it was shot down.

(The story will be updated…)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

aryobarzan said:


> *Iran AD doing its job..*
> *Iran Downs US’ Spy Drone in Persian Gulf: Report*
> By
> IFP Editorial Staff
> -
> June 20, 2019 - 02:35
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are reports that the air defence of Iran’s IRGC Aerospace Force has shot down a US RQ-4 drone close to the Iranian province of Hormozgan in Persian Gulf shores.
> 
> 
> 
> The US Global Hawk (RQ-4) drone was shot down on Thursday morning in an area close to Kuhmobarak village in Iran’s Hormozgan province, near the Persian Gulf waters, Fars News Agency reported.
> 
> The drone had reportedly trespassed into the Iranian territory when it was shot down.
> 
> (The story will be updated…)



Would have been better to hack it and try to bring it down intact. Global hawk is a good platform to learn from to expand Shahed UAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

aryobarzan said:


> *Iran AD doing its job..*
> *Iran Downs US’ Spy Drone in Persian Gulf: Report*
> By
> IFP Editorial Staff
> -
> June 20, 2019 - 02:35
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are reports that the air defence of Iran’s IRGC Aerospace Force has shot down a US RQ-4 drone close to the Iranian province of Hormozgan in Persian Gulf shores.
> 
> 
> 
> The US Global Hawk (RQ-4) drone was shot down on Thursday morning in an area close to Kuhmobarak village in Iran’s Hormozgan province, near the Persian Gulf waters, Fars News Agency reported.
> 
> The drone had reportedly trespassed into the Iranian territory when it was shot down.
> 
> (The story will be updated…)



my take on it is that i think Iran wanted to land the RQ4 and when they see they could not then they shot it down i think that's why Iranians let it come so close to Iran borders. all of this is that the story is real ofcourse.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vi-va

zectech said:


> They have to be launched from somewhere, limiting the swarms. If not from a naval attack, the nation hosting the attack will get a barrage of Surface to Surface missiles from Iran.


No offend. How about B1B with KC-10 Extender? Just curious are you going to attack Washington DC with Surface to Surface missiles? In your opinion what's Iran's plan to retaliate?



skyshadow said:


> my take on it is that i think Iran wanted to land the RQ4 and when they see they could not then they shot it down i think that's why Iranians let it come so close to Iran borders. all of this is that the story is real ofcourse.


You guys sent a clear message by shooting down RQ-4. Now the ball is on Trump's hand, talk or escalate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Not to give validation to the shoot down claim- just a claim so far, but long range high altitude SAMs in the region of Hormuzgan include Chabahar, Bandar Abbas, and the islands of Abu Musa and Lavan. Should have a mix of SA-5, HQ/SA-2, Hawk/Mersad, and Ra'ad batteries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

They said IRGC air force shut down, well in IRGC aerospace force ,air defence and aviation branch are under same division but report I read suggested it was done by aircraft... Will see latter

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> The drone had reportedly trespassed into the Iranian territory when it was shot down.


Now they are going to say the operator was sleep deprived last night and fall sleep as the result the drone went into iran territory .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

sanel1412 said:


> They said IRGC air force shut down, well in IRGC aerospace force ,air defence and aviation branch are under same division but report I read suggested it was done by aircraft... Will see latter



پس ار اعلام خبر انهدام پهپاد گلوبال هاوک آمریکا، ابتدا ارتش آمریکا این خبر را تکذیب کرد ولی پس از مدتی این خبر را تایید و نوع پهپاد منهدم شده را MQ-4C Triton یعنی گونه توسعه داده شده از پهپاد گلوبال هاوک برای عملیات شناسایی دریایی اعلام کرد. همچنین ادعا شده است که پهپاد وارد مرز ایران نشده بود.

در این گونه از پهپاد گلوبال هاوک دو تفاوت ایجاد شده است. یکی افزودن سایت الکترواپتیک به زیر دماغه و رادار سار متفاوت در زیر بدنه هست.



*IRAN has shot down a US ‘spy’ drone today over "international airspace" as tensions continue to rise in the Persian Gulf, American military officials said.*
*
The US military has challenged these claims saying the drone was gunned down in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz by an Iranian surface-to-air missile

Earlier, Navy Captain Bill Urban, of America's Central Command said: "No US aircraft were operating in Iranian airspace today."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9334596/iran-shoots-down-us-spy-drone-tensions-gulf/*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> They said IRGC air force shut down, well in IRGC aerospace force ,air defence and aviation branch are under same division but report I read suggested it was done by aircraft... Will see latter


There isn't that much IRGC airforce ,I doubt their airforce is suitable for engaging RQ-4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> There isn't that much IRGC airforce ,I doubt their airforce is suitable for engaging RQ-4


Well,they can use SU-22 ,it is high altitude tactical bomber but can be used for interception when you have drone...but maybe article was wrong or not precise translation,it has more sense to use air defense but I saw 2 articles clearly said IRGC air force ,not aerospace force,we all know IRGC has aviation branch under aerospace force together with air defense but many media outlets tag always IRGC AF as air force instead aeroapace

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

*15th Khordad*


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

It must be noted that the MQ-4C has very high ESM/ELINT capabilities: It normally knows the SAM threat situation very well.
When it is close to the borders on "spy missions", it will analyse the situation and if it is deemed possible it will fly into enemy airspace.
Hence to kill a MQ-4C on your own territory, it has to be tricked: It must have a wrong picture of situation.

In this case the MQ-4C was either somehow manipulated on its navigation or its analysis via ELINT wrongly allowed it to intrude into Irans airspace.
The Jask region is a small border region that can be surveilled quite well. The system responsible for the kill must have done it fast and without enough warning for it to return into international airspace (if it has been shot down over land).
During the later cold war the SR-71 was famous for always trying to violate Soviet airspace by returning back into international airspace once a interception was attempted.
So if photos of wreckage on Iranian soil are released, it must have been a low footprint, short-notice, high altitude system, high missile-speed system.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## PeeD

Ok after the release of the video several things are clear:
Missile used was newer Taer-2C of the 3rd Khordad
Engagement was long range, ~90km according to US version, ~85km in the Iranian version (reminder: newest BUK-M3 and HQ-16 reaches officially just 75km)

Shot down was unfortunately over water

No clear evidence of the wreck hence possible that it flew within Irans airspace.
That's not good because the "plausible deniability" concept of RoE is a problem here: Soviet Mig-31 didn't kill U.S SR-71 because by the time it would be hit by the missile, it would be already outside Russian airspace and crash on NATO soil.
The RQ-4 did its routine hence, no added provocation from its side. It may have violated Iranian airspace but Iran can't easily prove it because such violations are always very minimal for such slow assets.
So it certainly looks like it's a offensive act yet again by Iran.
Justification is surely there but this time the operations looks less subtile and elegant... 

With Trump coping Reagans mad-man doctrine, he has already done his first action according to this concept: Offer a soft response by Iran in asking whether this was just a mistake by some general.
Iran will stay cold on this and then Trump has to act in some way, otherwise the house of cards of his mad-man doctrine will collapse in front of the whole world...
I'm somewhat critical on this move.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## zectech

viva_zhao said:


> No offend. How about B1B with KC-10 Extender? Just curious are you going to attack Washington DC with Surface to Surface missiles? In your opinion what's Iran's plan to retaliate?



Iran could handle, if prepared enough, to knock out a swarm of 100-500 missiles at their ADS. That is what they have to prepare for, and for jamming and ECMs.

There aren't enough B1B bombers to do this with refueling, if Iran is prepared.

You would need a combined 2 carrier fleets with what you said to overwhelm a well prepared ADS using cruise missiles. 5 for only using JASSM.

ADS is most important because if the best, can prevent wars by there mere existence.

You have to make it super expensive and quite hard to knock out a battalion of ADS.

Radar guided ammunition will fill in the gaps when SAMs run out of missiles. The nuclear sites should have well over 100 SAMs (500 may not be enough) with additional radar guided bullets to protect the nuclear power plants. Some SAM systems have only 3-4, others have 12 SAMs.

A small operation of attacking Syria involved about 100 missiles fired at Assad's Syria. Imagine what is in store in an attack against Iran.

Iran had better prepared for more than 100, up to 500 or more to knock out the SAMs and nuclear power stations. And only do so under the cover of the best SAMs that can protect against ECMs.

Managing targets may be difficult in a 500 missile swarm attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

PeeD said:


> Ok after the release of the video several things are clear:
> Missile used was newer Taer-2C of the 3rd Khordad
> Engagement was long range, ~90km according to US version, ~85km in the Iranian version (reminder: newest BUK-M3 and HQ-16 reaches officially just 75km)
> 
> Shot down was unfortunately over water
> 
> No clear evidence of the wreck hence possible that it flew within Irans airspace.
> That's not good because the "plausible deniability" concept of RoE is a problem here: Soviet Mig-31 didn't kill U.S SR-71 because by the time it would be hit by the missile, it would be already outside Russian airspace and crash on NATO soil.
> The RQ-4 did its routine hence, no added provocation from its side. It may have violated Iranian airspace but Iran can't easily prove it because such violations are always very minimal for such slow assets.
> So it certainly looks like it's a offensive act yet again by Iran.
> Justification is surely there but this time the operations looks less subtile and elegant...
> 
> With Trump coping Reagans mad-man doctrine, he has already done his first action according to this concept: Offer a soft response by Iran in asking whether this was just a mistake by some general.
> Iran will stay cold on this and then Trump has to act in some way, otherwise the house of cards of his mad-man doctrine will collapse in front of the whole world...
> I'm somewhat critical on this move.



Could the drone have been tricked into going into the Hormuz Straits and got shot down?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> Ok after the release of the video several things are clear:
> Missile used was newer Taer-2C of the 3rd Khordad
> Engagement was long range, ~90km according to US version, ~85km in the Iranian version (reminder: newest BUK-M3 and HQ-16 reaches officially just 75km)
> 
> Shot down was unfortunately over water
> 
> No clear evidence of the wreck hence possible that it flew within Irans airspace.
> That's not good because the "plausible deniability" concept of RoE is a problem here: Soviet Mig-31 didn't kill U.S SR-71 because by the time it would be hit by the missile, it would be already outside Russian airspace and crash on NATO soil.
> The RQ-4 did its routine hence, no added provocation from its side. It may have violated Iranian airspace but Iran can't easily prove it because such violations are always very minimal for such slow assets.
> So it certainly looks like it's a offensive act yet again by Iran.
> Justification is surely there but this time the operations looks less subtile and elegant...
> 
> With Trump coping Reagans mad-man doctrine, he has already done his first action according to this concept: Offer a soft response by Iran in asking whether this was just a mistake by some general.
> Iran will stay cold on this and then Trump has to act in some way, otherwise the house of cards of his mad-man doctrine will collapse in front of the whole world...
> I'm somewhat critical on this move.


If it was shot down anywhere in the area below then it WAS in Iran's airspace unless it was on the Oman's side of the waters:






12 nautical miles translates into 22Km, US itself consider 24 nautical miles as territorial water.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramagedon

Shooting moment:


        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Yes according to Zarif, it crashed within the 12NM of Iranian airspace.

He also said that they have recovered wreckage parts.

Lets see if Iran can credibly prove that it was a legitimate shot down.

@Oldman1 

That's what it looks like: Relaxed RoE approach for some period to make drone pilots lax in this regard: Then a day before Irans Shamkhani threatens a change in RoE and hours later the unexpected shot down. If it was at Zarifs claimed coordinates the U.S pilots probably justified to their generals that "Iran never cared for 5km more or less violation in the past".

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

PeeD said:


> @Oldman1
> 
> That's what it looks like: Relaxed RoE approach for some period to make drone pilots lax in this regard: Then a day before Irans Shamkhani threatens a change in RoE and hours later the unexpected shot down. If it was at Zarifs claimed coordinates the U.S pilots probably justified to their generals that "Iran never cared for 5km more or less violation in the past".



Why didn't they force the drone deep into Iranian airspace and land it?


----------



## JohnWick

Oldman1 said:


> Why didn't they force the drone deep into Iranian airspace and land it?


I think the US will crash it instead of force landing in Iran....


----------



## Aramagedon

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Oldman1 said:


> Why didn't they force the drone deep into Iranian airspace and land it?


unlike rq-170 case, it would be risky to hack the drone. it was too close to strategic places.


----------



## Oldman1

Mithridates said:


> unlike rq-170 case, it would be risky to hack the drone. it was too close to strategic places.



Not sure how that works. If you hacked it, it wouldn't matter. If you can hack drones from Syria you can hack it from few miles away from Iran.


----------



## Arminkh

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Lol, I love this opportunistic attitude!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Infographic shows the flight path of the US spy drone before IRGC shoots down the unmanned aircraft.



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141758415812931584

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

"War of waves" first documentary about the history and evolution of Iran (IRGC) air defense systems:
نبرد امواج - برنامه سیاسی تاریخی شبکه مستند سیما - 30 خرداد 1398

has some news scenes and stories! when Chinese were begging Iran to enlighten the capabilities of their retired system which they sold to Iran (HQ-2)!

mouse pointer!














Perhaps I would translate it later.



skyshadow said:


> Infographic shows the flight path of the US spy drone before IRGC shoots down the unmanned aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141758415812931584






Take off source: UAE, Al Dhafra Air Base

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

mohsen said:


> "War of waves" first documentary about the history and evolution of Iran (IRGC) air defense systems:
> نبرد امواج - برنامه سیاسی تاریخی شبکه مستند سیما - 30 خرداد 1398
> 
> has some news scenes and stories! when Chinese were begging Iran to enlighten the capabilities of their retired system which they sold to Iran (HQ-2)!
> 
> mouse pointer!
> View attachment 566073
> 
> View attachment 566071
> 
> View attachment 566072
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I would translate it later.
> 
> 
> View attachment 566076
> Take off source: UAE, Al Dhafra Air Base



its good how we track the RQ_4 from its first take off moments

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## vi-va

zectech said:


> Iran could handle, if prepared enough, to knock out a swarm of 100-500 missiles at their ADS. That is what they have to prepare for, and for jamming and ECMs.
> 
> There aren't enough B1B bombers to do this with refueling, if Iran is prepared.
> 
> You would need a combined 2 carrier fleets with what you said to overwhelm a well prepared ADS using cruise missiles. 5 for only using JASSM.
> 
> ADS is most important because if the best, can prevent wars by there mere existence.
> 
> You have to make it super expensive and quite hard to knock out a battalion of ADS.
> 
> Radar guided ammunition will fill in the gaps when SAMs run out of missiles. The nuclear sites should have well over 100 SAMs (500 may not be enough) with additional radar guided bullets to protect the nuclear power plants. Some SAM systems have only 3-4, others have 12 SAMs.
> 
> A small operation of attacking Syria involved about 100 missiles fired at Assad's Syria. Imagine what is in store in an attack against Iran.
> 
> Iran had better prepared for more than 100, up to 500 or more to knock out the SAMs and nuclear power stations. And only do so under the cover of the best SAMs that can protect against ECMs.
> 
> Managing targets may be difficult in a 500 missile swarm attack.



Thanks. I am not familiar with Iran ADS capability. Hope you guys well prepared.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CAN_TR

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141768333513121795

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Raghfarm007

They are so sure of the missile, they only fired one.... SAMS are usually fired in doubles.....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## zectech

viva_zhao said:


> Thanks. I am not familiar with Iran ADS capability. Hope you guys well prepared.



Me neither (amateur interest enough to form an opinion), my hope is they are well prepared, they put a load of money into ADS, so I hope it is enough to prevent a full scale war.

I hear that their upgraded S-200s are a sight to behold.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Raghfarm007 said:


> They are so sure of the missile, they only fired one.... SAMS are usually fired in doubles.....



SAMs might be fired double against a fast moving agile target capable of EW and Jamming, but not against a slow moving drone with no maneuverability capabilities moving on a predictable trajectory.

And as far as I am aware Buk systems (type 3rd of Khordad are based off of) fire one missile at target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

zectech said:


> Me neither (amateur interest enough to form an opinion), my hope is they are well prepared, they put a load of money into ADS, so I hope it is enough to prevent a full scale war.
> 
> I hear that their upgraded S-200s are a sight to behold.



Absolutely and his mystery is also his new missile

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raghfarm007

TheImmortal said:


> SAMs might be fired double against a fast moving agile target capable of EW and Jamming, but not against a slow moving drone with no maneuverability capabilities moving on a predictable trajectory.
> 
> And as far as I am aware Buk systems (type 3rd of Khordad are based off of) fire one missile at target.



If you think 3rd Khordad is based on Buk... then you dont know what you are talking about..... 3rd Khordad is based on Standard missiles, thats why the lunchers have 3 missiles, rather than 4 o Buks.

Reactions: Like Like:

2


----------



## skyshadow

viva_zhao said:


> Thanks. I am not familiar with Iran ADS capability. Hope you guys well prepared.





zectech said:


> Me neither (amateur interest enough to form an opinion), my hope is they are well prepared, they put a load of money into ADS, so I hope it is enough to prevent a full scale war.
> 
> I hear that their upgraded S-200s are a sight to behold.



you guys can go to this page and see the posts there i showed Iran Air defense lines to everyone from short range to longest range but now we have 18 lines of defense now you have to add 15th of Khordad to the list too.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-168#post-11493656

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-168#post-11493659



15th of Khordad Air defense system


*combat readiness:* less than 5 minutes

*Radar:* upgraded Navid (AESA) radar with a range of 150 km it can engage 4++ generation fighter jets and bombers and drones and ballistic missiles and cruises missile and it has a 85 km detection range for 5 generation fighter jets and bombers it can track and follow 6 targets and engage the same 6 targets simultaneously.

*Missiles:* Sayyad 2 and Sayyad 3 with a ranges of 75 km and 120 km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Raghfarm007 said:


> If you think 3rd Khordad is based on Buk... then you dont know what you are talking about..... 3rd Khordad is based on Standard missiles, thats why the lunchers have 3 missiles, rather than 4 o Buks.



I said the air defense system not the interceptor Missile is based on Buk. It is clearly based on Buk and Kub system which Iran had in its inventory. And what does the number of missiles have to do with anything?

Buk has 4 missiles, but the older Kub has 3. That means nothing. So clearly you are the one that doesn’t know what he is taking about.

3rd Khordad is based on Buk/Kub, now because Iran decided to go with SM for the actual interceptor Missile is irrelevant. Clearly Iran used an air defense system in its inventory and build accordingly to it with technology it had.

I didn’t say 3rd Khordad is a CLONE of Buk/Kub.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> "War of waves" first documentary about the history and evolution of Iran (IRGC) air defense systems:
> نبرد امواج - برنامه سیاسی تاریخی شبکه مستند سیما - 30 خرداد 1398



Many interesting details: The Ghadir 2 radar was shown for the first time.
Mass S-band AESA TRM manufacture visible at SA Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## raptor22

*US Representative for Iran Claims Tehran 'Photoshops' its Achievements*




دست هرکی که اینو 
ساخت درد نکند

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## arashkamangir

raptor22 said:


> *US Representative for Iran Claims Tehran 'Photoshops' its Achievements*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> دست هرکی که اینو
> ساخت درد نکند



OMFG LOOOOOOOOL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Raghfarm007 said:


> They are so sure of the missile, they only fired one.... SAMS are usually fired in doubles.....


That depends on selected method,there are more different methods used in different sitations,there is no need for 2 missiles against slow non maneuverable target...



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Absolutely and his mystery is also his new missile
> 
> View attachment 566086


There is no mystery, it is S-200 missile ...little different but not much

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Congratulation to Iranian indigenous air defence systems. A good impression by their capabilities. Now let's see if they dare sending any F-35 or F-22 near our borders. Their stealth myth will be busted just like that poor RQ-170.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Aramagedon

Photos of downed yankee drone in Tehran:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

WinterNights said:


> Congratulation to Iranian indigenous air defence systems. A good impression by their capabilities. Now let's see if they dare sending any F-35 or F-22 near our borders. Their stealth myth will be busted just like that poor RQ-170.


Why we must attack them if they come near our border ?
Let them pass the border and then do what you like .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

As of 2013-2014 Iran had (officially) no such low footprint system able to perform a surprise attack and necessary range.

Options back then were the few modified mobile HAWK sites or early Raad/SA-6 systems with improved altitude missiles. That area was also not sufficiently covered by the few S-200 sites.

This displays what kind of game changer such all-in-one-truck systems such as the Tabas and 3rd Khordad are. This is exactly a scenario which I described when prising the 3rd Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## skyshadow

*166510 serial number 





*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

Minus 180mln $ for USA.....next time think twice before violating Iranian airspace

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

@mohsen dadash, that air defence documentary that you posted, is there a part 2 to it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*فرمانده نیروی هوافضای سپاه همچنین در جمع خبرنگاران گفت: همان لحظه‌ای که پهپاد جاسوسی رهگیری شد، هواپیمای جاسوسی دیگری با نام P-۸ نیز در نزدیکی آن در حال پرواز بود که حدود ۳۵ سرنشین داشت و می‌توانستیم آن را سرنگون کنیم، اما این کار را نکردیم.*
*
http://defapress.ir/fa/news/351112/...آمریکایی-را-همراه-با-پهپاد-جاسوسی-سرنگون-کنیم*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Pentagon release images U.S P8 aircraft of Iran shot down RQ-4A Global Hawk drone UAV

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

WinterNights said:


> @mohsen dadash, that air defence documentary that you posted, is there a part 2 to it?


I doubt, they didn't say anything.



----------------


Iran's national mapping agency also confirmed that crash location is 8 miles away from Iranian coasts so it's absolutely withing Iranian territory.

توضیحات سازمان نقشه برداری درباره پهپاد جاسوس - مشرق نیوز

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

Iran friday prayer sermon: U.S. should know we respond to any attack, Saudi Arabia air defense systems Yemen UAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

Yesterday was the day the world stood at attention at Iran shooting down a US drone with an indigenous SAM. Sevome Khordad will be burned into the Intel and Military community's psyche for years. Loving it.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## PeeD

As expected: Guiding a SARH Taer-2 to 105km is not possible against fighter-size targets with the 3rd Khordad array.
Hence the 105km Taer-2 has an active radar seeker, the first one of Iran's SAMs.
I'm personally not a fried of ARH SAMs: expensive and more prone to ECM than SARH/SAGG.
On the other hand it gives 3rd Khordads a very wide reach for a system of that size.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> As expected: Guiding a SARH Taer-2 to 105km is not possible against fighter-size targets with the 3rd Khordad array.
> Hence the 105km Taer-2 has an active radar seeker, the first one of Iran's SAMs.
> I'm personally not a fried of ARH SAMs: expensive and more prone to ECM than SARH/SAGG.
> On the other hand it gives 3rd Khordads a very wide reach for a system of that size.



@PeeD could you please break this down. How did you reach this conclusion. Was there an detail that has recently surfaced?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD could you please break this down. How did you reach this conclusion. Was there an detail that has recently surfaced?



First I knew that 105km would be too much for a robust high power illumination by 3rd Khordad.
Then today sources close to Sepah published this: 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1142075927633043462
A direct confirmation.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## WinterNights

Mass producing these SAM systems should now be on top of Iran's agenda. We now know these systems are very effective, we just need to produce them in great numbers. Let's produce SAMs like we produce ballistic missiles!



Hack-Hook said:


> Why we must attack them if they come near our border ?
> Let them pass the border and then do what you like .



I did not mean we will shoot them necessarily. Even detecting them and locking on them will send a good message.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## WinterNights

@PeeD

Is the Bashir the main radar for the 3rd of Khordad or the AESA Najm radar the main search radar? I am surprised the Najm radar was not put on that poster.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

WinterNights said:


> Mass producing these SAM systems should now be on top of Iran's agenda. We now know these systems are very effective, we just need to produce them in great numbers. Let's produce SAMs like we produce ballistic missiles!
> 
> 
> 
> I did not mean we will shoot them necessarily. Even detecting them and locking on them will send a good message.



Good news is that it is already in serial production since some time.
Bad news is that its radar array is expensive, let me describe it briefly as X-band "non-monopulse" electronically steered array.
Here the Tabas system is significantly cheaper and I firmly believe that even the 15th Khordad is still cheaper than the 3rd Khordad.
However the 3rd Khordad is a real killer...

As shown a full battalion has 36 ready to fire missiles and 16 guidance channels. At a high threat first line a battalion can credibly protect a 200km circle and create a nightmare for the opponent.

The Najm series has a different role: Bashir radar was specially developed to support the long range 3rd Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> First I knew that 105km would be too much for a robust high power illumination by 3rd Khordad.
> Then today sources close to Sepah published this:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1142075927633043462
> A direct confirmation.




Awesome thanks a lot

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aramagedon

Beautiful vid from 3rd Khordad yankee drone killer:

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sanel1412 said:


> That depends on selected method,there are more different methods used in different sitations,there is no need for 2 missiles against slow non maneuverable target...
> 
> 
> There is no mystery, it is S-200 missile ...little different but not much



it's a new, more technological missile with a new function. Sorry to tell you but it's like that ... Do you have any other information about it? And I know it's missile of S-200 HELLO!


----------



## Blue In Green

How much of an idiot do you guys think this retard feels right right now?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen2 said:


> How much of an idiot do you guys think this retard feels right right now?
> 
> View attachment 566240


You know what the beauty of this Iranian system is? The fact that it is so damn precise that it hit the intended smaller target, I.e. RQ-4, instead of the P-3 that was flying next to it and has a much larger radar signature. Something very similar to the incident happened to Russian patrol aircraft in Syria could have happened there.

And yet, it was photoshopped!

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

Arminkh said:


> You know what the beauty of this Iranian system is? The fact that it is so damn precise that it hit the intended smaller target, I.e. RQ-4, instead of the P-3 that was flying next to it and has a much larger radar signature. Something very similar to the incident happened to Russian patrol aircraft in Syria could have happened there.
> 
> And yet, it was photoshopped!



People will just have to accept that Iran is advanced in AD just like they accepted Iran is advanced in BMs. They will be reluctant but it will come to pass!!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Good news is that it is already in serial production since some time.
> Bad news is that its radar array is expensive, let me describe it briefly as X-band "non-monopulse" electronically steered array.
> Here the Tabas system is significantly cheaper and I firmly believe that even the 15th Khordad is still cheaper than the 3rd Khordad.
> However the 3rd Khordad is a real killer...
> 
> As shown a full battalion has 36 ready to fire missiles and 16 guidance channels. At a high threat first line a battalion can credibly protect a 200km circle and create a nightmare for the opponent.
> 
> The Najm series has a different role: Bashir radar was specially developed to support the long range 3rd Khordad.



Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.

Furthermore, how well do you think Iran would have fared in downing the missiles fired at it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.



Cause the 150 were F-18/F-22 Pilots?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ziggurat “TepeSialk“ said:


> Beautiful vid from 3rd Khordad yankee drone killer:


Interesting the video show the missile as hit to kill system . I thought it use proximity switch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Note that Hajizadeh said that initially that 20 people were on bord of the P-8 not 35.



TheImmortal said:


> Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.
> 
> Furthermore, how well do you think Iran would have fared in downing the missiles fired at it?



The Americans think the 3rd Khordad was from an anti ship missile base between Bandar Abbas and Jask. They probably want to claim that they wanted to attack that base and that this would have caused 150 KIA.
That base is not very hardened like other ones but still a high importance object for Iran, so it would have SAM and AAA protection.
Hence depending on how many missiles the Americans "wanted" (bluff) to use against it, a unknown number would likely had been intercepted.
But that's all speculation, I don't think for a second that Trump really considered this. Just a move in his mad-man doctrine.

@Hack-Hook 

I only see proximity fuse: The damage by a directed frag warhead is most of the times more devastating than a direct hit.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> As expected: Guiding a SARH Taer-2 to 105km is not possible against fighter-size targets with the 3rd Khordad array.


What's the limitation?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

EM wave intensity on target.
Smaller ESA systems, like the Mig-31 Zazlon are rated to provide SARH illumination to 100km+ range. So theoretically these is no real issue.
The issue is this: In 2019 ranges are measured against targets in the 0,1-1m² RCS range not a high two digit number representing a B-52.
Taking the P-8 as a example, 3rd Khordad illumination power would probably be able to support a 150km engagement if the missile would be able to.
Cost also plays a role: The higher the radar output is the more expensive it gets.

So the compromise for the 3rd Khordad is to guarantee sufficient illumination to 75km, likely against targets <0,1m² RCS. But for 105km, a ARH is available to kill such <0,1m² RCS targets.
This is a professional conservative approach.
As said: current BUK-M2 which is just about 10 years old is only rated to about 50km and has a larger array, newest -M3 is rated to 75km.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> EM wave intensity on target.
> Smaller ESA systems, like the Mig-31 Zazlon are rated to provide SARH illumination to 100km+ range. So theoretically these is no real issue.
> The issue is this: In 2019 ranges are measured against targets in the 0,1-1m² RCS range not a high two digit number representing a B-52.
> Taking the P-8 as a example, 3rd Khordad illumination power would probably be able to support a 150km engagement if the missile would be able to.
> Cost also plays a role: The higher the radar output is the more expensive it gets.
> 
> So the compromise for the 3rd Khordad is to guarantee sufficient illumination to 75km, likely against targets <0,1m² RCS. But for 105km, a ARH is available to kill such <0,1m² RCS targets.
> This is a professional conservative approach.
> As said: current BUK-M2 which is just about 10 years old is only rated to about 50km and has a larger array, newest -M3 is rated to 75km.



If what you say is true,

Then shouldn’t the logical decision for a military be to develop next gen radars that are truly sensitive and potentially extremely expensive (hundreds of millions of dollars/maybe billion of dollars per radar) but can reliably detect stealth aircraft (extremely low RCS) from much longer distances then feed that data to acquisition radars.

Clearly such a Radar would need next gen means of aircraft detection as being underground would i imagine impede traditional radar waves. Obviously we have ground penetrating radars, but the reverse I’m not sure I have heard of.

I know US/China are racing in the field of quantum radars.

Again not my area of expertise, but for example in astrophysics/astronomy slight detections of ripples in space time continuum is detected by advanced systems underground that can measure incredibly minute differences in gravity caused by merging of neutron stars or black holes which would signify ripples in space time caused by significant gravity event.

Furthermore, in other areas of astronomy other devices are embedded deep underground in specific contraptions to measure the amount of neutrinos (I believe could be wrong on the particle) that impact the Earth.

That being said, is it possible theoretically based on modern laws of science, to develop a type of next gen radar that can detect extremely low RCS aircraft while being underground let’s say in an Iranian Missile base type structure?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Raghfarm007 said:


> If you think 3rd Khordad is based on Buk... then you dont know what you are talking about..... 3rd Khordad is based on Standard missiles, thats why the lunchers have 3 missiles, rather than 4 o Buks.


There are also 2 missiles with exactlly same design as BUK-M1/M2 missiles but all 3 versions RAAD2,Tabas and 3th of khordad ,even share similar look,have very different radars...I tought also it is based on BUK-M2E till I didn't saw radars...It share many things with BUK-M2,that is truth...it has same battery design and deployment ,use as BUK and TOR Kasta 2e as search and acquisition radar but it is much more than BUK...and all 3 versions outperform BUK counterparts...So,they probably analyzed BUK M1/M2 but Tabas and 3th of Khordad radar antennas are completely different.... As I could see when comparing Iranian new radars and AD systems, they share similarities with Russia and Chinese counterparts but seems Iran don't want end up in situation where any 3th party has knowledge on their AD assets so they don't simple copy some technology, everything we saw is heavily modified and make it different than counterparts.
Should I said that medium range AD systems are main line of defense against fighter aircrafts,even long range system engage fighter aircrafts at medium ranges...so it is very important to have combat proven system. This target was not easy,MQ-4C is most advanced drone that exist... They call it flying data hub,and it has some stealth capability... But what make it even more harder to target is fact that it try to hide above air trafficking,and despite that they identity target successfully and downed it with one missile(even for slow drone one is only needed)...I saw news minute after they released it and they immediately say it is RQ-4(which is base for MQ-4).
What I saw about this MQ-4 situation, BUK wouldn't be able to reach it probably ...Russian news outlets at first said it was s-300 but latter we found out it was 3 th of khordad which was what I thought ,I was sure it is SU-22 aircraft or 3th of khordad, simple because we know what IRGC operate and those two are logical options for such high altitude... I must say,I'm surprised with efficiency of 3th of khordad and it is not because it is Iranian ,simple because it is very new and it is not simple copy of some already proved SAM...


Mr Iran Eye said:


> it's a new, more technological missile with a new function. Sorry to tell you but it's like that ... Do you have any other information about it? And I know it's missile of S-200 HELLO!


No..no info except what I already said about Iran S-200 upgrade and modifications. That is,they solved main flaw of S-200 that makes it very limited against fighter aircrafts and that is huge minimal range.Iran demonstrated S-200 shut down drone in visual range...In reality you will never use such expensive missile and strategic SAM vs drone in close range...they just wanted to demonstrate it is capable to target it,and this is not first time Iran showed modified S-200 missile
.S-200 missile is one of the fastest missiles ever built for SAM and system is pretty capable but it was designed in different time for different deployment but still even today pretty good even without any upgrade. This is not first time Iran showed domestic modified S-200 missile....any way since you have to defend many strategic static objects ,S-200 and most other static SAM are deployed around or inside these strategic objects so you defend object and SAM with same SHORAD and medium range systems...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> If what you say is true,
> 
> Then shouldn’t the logical decision for a military be to develop next gen radars that are truly sensitive and potentially extremely expensive (hundreds of millions of dollars/maybe billion of dollars per radar) but can reliably detect stealth aircraft (extremely low RCS) from much longer distances then feed that data to acquisition radars.
> 
> Clearly such a Radar would need next gen means of aircraft detection as being underground would i imagine impede traditional radar waves. Obviously we have ground penetrating radars, but the reverse I’m not sure I have heard of.
> 
> I know US/China are racing in the field of quantum radars.
> 
> Again not my area of expertise, but for example in astrophysics/astronomy slight detections of ripples in space time continuum is detected by advanced systems underground that can measure incredibly minute differences in gravity caused by merging of neutron stars or black holes which would signify ripples in space time caused by significant gravity event.
> 
> Furthermore, in other areas of astronomy other devices are embedded deep underground in specific contraptions to measure the amount of neutrinos (I believe could be wrong on the particle) that impact the Earth.
> 
> That being said, is it possible theoretically based on modern laws of science, to develop a type of next gen radar that can detect extremely low RCS aircraft while being underground let’s say in an Iranian Missile base type structure?



Its non-proportional scaling limits and LOS restrictions that makes such "super-radars" unfeasible/inefficient.
There are some, like ABM radars but the closest to such a super radar is the Russian Container OTHR.
Iran is working on such a OTHR system too.

If a breakthrough happens via quantum radars, equations may change.
However the dream about a nuclear strike hardned early warning radar (like Irans missile force), doesn't seems feasible at this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Also note that almost certainly it was Irans IRGC-ASF Ghadir 2 radar unveiled in the documentary yesterday that did the continuous radar track of the RQ-4, from take-off-->climbing to 10km altitude in UAE down to the Jask region.

No other *known* Iranian asset would be able to do such long range tracking and very few nations in the world have such a capability at all.
I also talk about precision track, not coarse OTHR quality track.
Hence the unveiling of the Ghadir 2 was a signal to the U.S: You know what we used, we see everything at such altitude (even "stealth"). Even possible the the hidden message is: We use Ghadir 2, next target is a manned F-22 or F35.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Also note that almost certainly it was Irans IRGC-ASF Ghadir 2 radar unveiled in the documentary yesterday that did the continuous radar track of the RQ-4, from take-off-->climbing to 10km altitude in UAE down to the Jask region.
> 
> No other *known* Iranian asset would be able to do such long range tracking and very few nations in the world have such a capability at all.
> I also talk about precision track, not coarse OTHR quality track.
> Hence the unveiling of the Ghadir 2 was a signal to the U.S: You know what we used, we see everything at such altitude (even "stealth"). Even possible the the hidden message is: We use Ghadir 2, next target is a manned F-22 or F35.



Ghadir 1 has that capability too and there is one more i do not remember its name with 1200 km range, but Ghadir 1 looks a lot bigger then Ghadir 2 almost twice as big, what is your thought on that?


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> Ghadir 1 has that capability too and there is one more i do not remember its name with 1200 km range, but Ghadir 1 looks a lot bigger then Ghadir 2 almost twice as big, what is your thought on that?



Ghadir 2 is a evolved Ghadir, same array size but 200-300km longer range. There is one Ghadir 2 that covers UAE and Straight of Hormuz airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Navigator

Hack-Hook said:


> Interesting the video show the missile as hit to kill system . I thought it use proximity switch.



There proximity fuze, since it better for hit such objects, such as airplanes and UAVs, which are the result of the explosion are riddled with shrapnel from missiles warhead.
If you look at the pics from video, the missile explodes near the object.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

Question now is why are American officials so adamant the obliterated RQ-4A was downed by old Soviet-era AD systems like the S-75 or S-125 Neva (which Iran never operated, at all)?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

Jane's:

The shooting down of a US Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle on 20 June appears to have confirmed that Iran has developed highly capable surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems in recent years.

https://www.janes.com/article/89422...-validates-iran-s-indigenous-sam-capabilities

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## skyshadow

*Trump admits Iran could have shot down US plane with 38 man*

“There was a plane with 38 people yesterday, did you see that? I think that's a big story. They had it in their sights and they didn't shoot it down. I think they were very wise not to do that. And we appreciate that they didn't do that. I think that was a very wise decision,” Trump told reporters Saturday.


*https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...iran-very-wise-not-to-shoot-down-manned-plane*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## scimitar19

Arminkh said:


> Jane's:
> 
> The shooting down of a US Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle on 20 June appears to have confirmed that Iran has developed highly capable surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems in recent years.
> 
> https://www.janes.com/article/89422...-validates-iran-s-indigenous-sam-capabilities



^^^^
No shit!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *Trump admits Iran could have shot down US plane with 38 man*
> 
> “There was a plane with 38 people yesterday, did you see that? I think that's a big story. They had it in their sights and they didn't shoot it down. I think they were very wise not to do that. And we appreciate that they didn't do that. I think that was a very wise decision,” Trump told reporters Saturday.
> 
> 
> *https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...iran-very-wise-not-to-shoot-down-manned-plane*


Ok, at least he is man enough to thank Iran for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> Jane's:
> 
> The shooting down of a US Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle on 20 June appears to have confirmed that Iran has developed highly capable surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems in recent years.
> 
> https://www.janes.com/article/89422...-validates-iran-s-indigenous-sam-capabilities



Lol ”appears to have”, still doubtful

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights

Sina-1 said:


> Lol ”appears to have”, still doubtful



Well it's a much better tone than they used to have. Iran is humbling them one by one

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

At 4:30 AM, as the drone doubled back to the northwest, one of the battery’s three Sayyad-2C missiles rocketed up into the night sky, causing dust to billow around the launcher as the radar-guided weapon accelerated to up to four times the speed of sound. You can see Iranian media footage of the launch here.

The RQ-4’s integrated AN/ALR-89 defensive suite includes a Radar Warning Receiver that likely alerted the drone’s operators of the incoming threat. Unable to outrun the incoming missiles, the operators likely activated the ALR-89’s radar-jamming self-defense system.


https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...n-shot-down-us-rq-4n-surveillance-drone-63717

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> At 4:30 AM, as the drone doubled back to the northwest, one of the battery’s three Sayyad-2C missiles rocketed up into the night sky, causing dust to billow around the launcher as the radar-guided weapon accelerated to up to four times the speed of sound. You can see Iranian media footage of the launch here.
> 
> The RQ-4’s integrated AN/ALR-89 defensive suite includes a Radar Warning Receiver that likely alerted the drone’s operators of the incoming threat. Unable to outrun the incoming missiles, the operators likely activated the ALR-89’s radar-jamming self-defense system.
> 
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...n-shot-down-us-rq-4n-surveillance-drone-63717


It's a very romantic version of the event! Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> Unable to outrun the incoming missiles, the operators likely activated the ALR-89’s radar-jamming self-defense system.



It appears the radar jamming suit was useless in front of our missile

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar

The shame has been proven 



Watch from 1:00

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Question now is why are American officials so adamant the obliterated RQ-4A was downed by old Soviet-era AD systems like the S-75 or S-125 Neva (which Iran never operated, at all)?



Psy·ops! You know propaganda is part of the war. 

Or since the US and Israelis air force heavily trained against the S300 in Greece and Cyprus, and the RQ-4A drone got hit, perhaps they understand the missile that hit the plane isn't S300, but at the same time don't want to give credit to the home-grown Iranian missile aka 3rd Khordad, so they opted to some other missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> At 4:30 AM, as the drone doubled back to the northwest, one of the battery’s three Sayyad-2C missiles rocketed up into the night sky, causing dust to billow around the launcher as the radar-guided weapon accelerated to up to four times the speed of sound. You can see Iranian media footage of the launch here.
> 
> The RQ-4’s integrated AN/ALR-89 defensive suite includes a Radar Warning Receiver that likely alerted the drone’s operators of the incoming threat. Unable to outrun the incoming missiles, the operators likely activated the ALR-89’s radar-jamming self-defense system.
> 
> 
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...n-shot-down-us-rq-4n-surveillance-drone-63717



_“From this lofty perch, the huge UAV soared southeast, leisurely circumnavigating the narrow Straits of Hormuz, as plotted here, it sensors scanning everything beneath it. The long-endurance drone could methodically survey up to 2.7 million square miles in twenty-four hours with its powerful multi-function radar, all the while transmitting that data back for analysis._

_Periodically, the drone’s operator may have nosed it down to lower altitudes so the sensor operator could scan a ship of interest with its infrared sensor turret, or use its electromagnetic ESM sensors to triangulate the positions of nearby radar transmitters”
_
I think there was a reason this drone was shot down and not just simple air space violation.

Remember when the tensions all originally started? Before tanker attacks?

US had “intelligence” that Iranian dhows were being loaded with missiles. I think this drone or type like it was what was able to locate them and provide the intelligence.

I think being exposed like that took Iran by surprise and they immead began wondering how that intelligence was attained.

You don’t launch a drone 100,000 feet in the air to check to make sure oil tankers and ships in the PG are “okay”. The PG is one of the most heavily patrolled areas so no pirate or criminal organization is going to be using that area in times of tension.

This drone specifically spied on Iranian assets naval and land. I think Iran figured it out and as soon as it violated airspace shot it down to send a message.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> _“From this lofty perch, the huge UAV soared southeast, leisurely circumnavigating the narrow Straits of Hormuz, as plotted here, it sensors scanning everything beneath it. The long-endurance drone could methodically survey up to 2.7 million square miles in twenty-four hours with its powerful multi-function radar, all the while transmitting that data back for analysis._
> 
> _Periodically, the drone’s operator may have nosed it down to lower altitudes so the sensor operator could scan a ship of interest with its infrared sensor turret, or use its electromagnetic ESM sensors to triangulate the positions of nearby radar transmitters”
> _
> I think there was a reason this drone was shot down and not just simple air space violation.
> 
> Remember when the tensions all originally started? Before tanker attacks?
> 
> US had “intelligence” that Iranian dhows were being loaded with missiles. I think this drone or type like it was what was able to locate them and provide the intelligence.
> 
> I think being exposed like that took Iran by surprise and they immead began wondering how that intelligence was attained.
> 
> You don’t launch a drone 100,000 feet in the air to check to make sure oil tankers and ships in the PG are “okay”. The PG is one of the most heavily patrolled areas so no pirate or criminal organization is going to be using that area in times of tension.
> 
> This drone specifically spied on Iranian assets naval and land. I think Iran figured it out and as soon as it violated airspace shot it down to send a message.



It's unbearably infuriating that America just can't say Iran has good AD systems and that they can reliably defend themselves from American air assets (at least to some credible degree). 

Hell, given all the *LIES *U.S. government tells in order to propagate that aura of 'invincibility'. One can no longer logically believe what Pentagon as well as U.S. officials say without greatly being suspicious of people who are intrinsically duplicitous. 

MY GOD THEY ACTUALLY SAID IRAN USED *S-125 NEVA!!!!! HOW CAN YOU WORK AT THE PENTAGON AND SAY SUCH ASININE WORDS!!!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> _“From this lofty perch, the huge UAV soared southeast, leisurely circumnavigating the narrow Straits of Hormuz, as plotted here, it sensors scanning everything beneath it. The long-endurance drone could methodically survey up to 2.7 million square miles in twenty-four hours with its powerful multi-function radar, all the while transmitting that data back for analysis._
> 
> _Periodically, the drone’s operator may have nosed it down to lower altitudes so the sensor operator could scan a ship of interest with its infrared sensor turret, or use its electromagnetic ESM sensors to triangulate the positions of nearby radar transmitters”
> _
> I think there was a reason this drone was shot down and not just simple air space violation.
> 
> Remember when the tensions all originally started? Before tanker attacks?
> 
> US had “intelligence” that Iranian dhows were being loaded with missiles. I think this drone or type like it was what was able to locate them and provide the intelligence.
> 
> I think being exposed like that took Iran by surprise and they immead began wondering how that intelligence was attained.
> 
> You don’t launch a drone 100,000 feet in the air to check to make sure oil tankers and ships in the PG are “okay”. The PG is one of the most heavily patrolled areas so no pirate or criminal organization is going to be using that area in times of tension.
> 
> This drone specifically spied on Iranian assets naval and land. I think Iran figured it out and as soon as it violated airspace shot it down to send a message.



agreed i think Iran was surprised as they would have not transferred those missiles in bright daylight so they were doing it in the caver night and MQ_4 was in UAE for a month now so i think you are right.




WinterNights said:


> It appears the radar jamming suit was useless in front of our missile



yes our radars are too powerful for that suit to over come them, i do not now about the radar in the missile tho



TheImmortal said:


> _“From this lofty perch, the huge UAV soared southeast, leisurely circumnavigating the narrow Straits of Hormuz, as plotted here, it sensors scanning everything beneath it. The long-endurance drone could methodically survey up to 2.7 million square miles in twenty-four hours with its powerful multi-function radar, all the while transmitting that data back for analysis._
> 
> _Periodically, the drone’s operator may have nosed it down to lower altitudes so the sensor operator could scan a ship of interest with its infrared sensor turret, or use its electromagnetic ESM sensors to triangulate the positions of nearby radar transmitters”
> _
> I think there was a reason this drone was shot down and not just simple air space violation.
> 
> Remember when the tensions all originally started? Before tanker attacks?
> 
> US had “intelligence” that Iranian dhows were being loaded with missiles. I think this drone or type like it was what was able to locate them and provide the intelligence.
> 
> I think being exposed like that took Iran by surprise and they immead began wondering how that intelligence was attained.
> 
> You don’t launch a drone 100,000 feet in the air to check to make sure oil tankers and ships in the PG are “okay”. The PG is one of the most heavily patrolled areas so no pirate or criminal organization is going to be using that area in times of tension.
> 
> This drone specifically spied on Iranian assets naval and land. I think Iran figured it out and as soon as it violated airspace shot it down to send a message.



agreed i think Iran was surprised as they would have not transferred those missiles in bright daylight so they were doing it in the caver night and MQ_4 was in UAE for a month now so i think you are right.




WinterNights said:


> It appears the radar jamming suit was useless in front of our missile



yes our radars are too powerful for that suit to over come them, i do not know about the radar in the missile tho

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Many interesting details: The Ghadir 2 radar was shown for the first time.
> Mass S-band AESA TRM manufacture visible at SA Iran.
























https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2058878

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2058878



at which minute mark I can find this scene, thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> at which minute mark I can find this scene, thanks



Ok give me a min PLZ i will get back to you as soon as i can



Draco.IMF said:


> at which minute mark I can find this scene, thanks



well you can start from 21:10 to see Gadier 2 long rage OTH ( its range is unknown but Gadier 1 OTH radar has 3000 km range so one can only say Gadier 2 is better then Gadier 1 radar ), then you will see Matlae AL Fajr radar with 500 km range, after that you will see Kawosh short range radar with 150 km range, after that you will se Meraj 4 radar ( Bavar_373 main radar ) with over 500 km range its 3D and it can track up to 200 targets.


then at 26:48 you can see Najm_802B radar.


then in 28:00 you can see them in action with Sayyad Air defense system with 4 launchers.


then in 36:36 and forward you can see 3th Khordad system missiles and Najm_802A and vostok radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Navigator

skyshadow said:


> https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2058878



"Vostok" radar from Belarusian KB Radar




https://kbradar.by/en/products/radiolokatsiya/radiolokatsionnye-stantsii/81/?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> Ok give me a min PLZ i will get back to you as soon as i can
> 
> 
> 
> well you can start from 21:10 to see Gadier 2 long rage OTH ( its range is unknown but Gadier 1 OTH radar has 3000 km range so one can only say Gadier 2 is better then Gadier 1 radar ), then you will see Matlae AL Fajr radar with 500 km range, after that you will see Kawosh short range radar with 150 km range, after that you will se Meraj 4 radar ( Bavar_373 main radar ) with over 500 km range its 3D and it can track up to 200 targets.
> 
> 
> then at 26:48 you can see Najm_802B radar.
> 
> 
> then in 28:00 you can see them in action with Sayyad Air defense system with 4 launchers.
> 
> 
> then in 36:36 and forward you can see 3th Khordad system missiles and Najm_802A and vostok radar.



awesome, thanks
was searching for the scene with the guy talking in this big anechoic chamber, very impressive!
I hope Iran will be next decade right behind russia with its AD capabilities

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Navigator said:


> "Vostok" radar from Belarusian KB Radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://kbradar.by/en/products/radiolokatsiya/radiolokatsionnye-stantsii/81/?


yes we had that from well before 2010



Draco.IMF said:


> awesome, thanks
> was searching for the scene with the guy talking in this big anechoic chamber, very impressive!
> I hope Iran will be next decade right behind russia with its AD capabilities


your welcome bro, yes that was at 26:48. well in the case of Russia we need to wait for Bavar_373 that system will tell us how far behind we are from Russians.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WinterNights



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar

Sayyad_1 system

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> Sayyad_1 system


hello @yavar

can you please write few things what he is talking about, failed S-300 deal back then?
many thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Iran IRGC air defense officer Captain Mohamad who shot down U.S. RQ-4A Global Hawk drone UAV with Third of Khordad air defense system

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

Draco.IMF said:


> hello @yavar
> 
> can you please write few things what he is talking about, failed S-300 deal back then?
> many thanks



He is talking about back in the 80's when Iran tried to buy 7 radars from them. They said due to sanctions, we can't deliver them to you directly, so we'd have to go through a middleman nation, despite Iran agreeing, they kept changing their requirements again and again until in the end, the systems were never delivered. 

These historical facts should remind everyone, Iran can never rely on anyone else for it's military.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> hello @yavar
> 
> can you please write few things what he is talking about, failed S-300 deal back then?
> many thanks



Not this was not S300

no this was another contract which we start negotiating in year 2001 with Russia for radars which then the IRGC Gen hajizadeh wnet and signed contract in 2005 and paid the money which up to now they have not give the money back

our pesion today is the contract is cancelled and we want our money back
in 2001 after U.S invasion Afghanistan we need latest tech radars

Mxxx Fxxxx Putin



skyshadow said:


>



for Iranian members to understand better and the level of professionalism

watch from 18:00

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> for Iranian members to understand better and the professionalism
> 
> watch from 18:00



anti ballistic missile/anti stealth capability

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Anechoic chamber is a must for development a phase array with digital multi-beam forming, variable waveforming, agile beam testing, data-link communication beams, LPI modes, maximum gain testing, forming of sub arrays and more. (To use these fancy western PR wordings)
The original Najm 802 AESA introduced these capabilities to Iran and now this can be up and down scaled.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2058878


Full HD version of episode one:
https://www.aparat.com/v/iu6xN

hopefully they will publish episode 2 here too.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> Anechoic chamber is a must for development a phase array with digital multi-beam forming, variable waveforming, agile beam testing, data-link communication beams, LPI modes, maximum gain testing, forming of sub arrays and more. (To use these fancy western PR wordings)
> The original Najm 802 AESA introduced these capabilities to Iran and now this can be up and down scaled.


Dadash, how do you know all this stuff  You're like a PhD holder in missile and radar technology? 

Some questions
What do you think of the Russian s-350 system? How do our medium range systems compare to it?

Also, regarding Bavar 373, the TEL they showed only has two launchers per truck. What do you think of these lower number of missiles/launchers in systems like Bavar and 3rd of khordad compared with comparable foreign systems?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GWXP

I think they will not officially unveil Bavar 373 until they mass produce it at quantities that will be enough to entirely cover not only Iranian but also Syrian airspace

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

GWXP said:


> I think they will not officially unveil Bavar 373 until they mass produce it at quantities that will be enough to entirely cover not only Iranian but also Syrian airspace



They would not take such a strategic and new system to Syria. But I agree that they will not officially reveal it until it has been in service for a year or two. I bet it has already been in service for at least a year. We will probably see it unveiled it this year.

Given how badass these others air defences we have are, I can't wait to see bavar-373. Given the size of it's launch canisters, I think the range of its missile will be 250-300km? They're huge! @PeeD

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

WinterNights said:


> Dadash, how do you know all this stuff  You're like a PhD holder in missile and radar technology?
> 
> Some questions
> What do you think of the Russian s-350 system? How do our medium range systems compare to it?
> 
> Also, regarding Bavar 373, the TEL they showed only has two launchers per truck. What do you think of these lower number of missiles/launchers in systems like Bavar and 3rd of khordad compared with comparable foreign systems?



Study, analyse and deduce open source information and google earth for long enough, plus some industry-academic background and such conclusions are simple.

The S-350 is good and in line with Russian doctrine. For Iranian doctrine it has a little to big footprint. Its missile maneuverability and ABM capability is impressive and ECM robustness too.

Bavar-373 has no footprint limitation, its full missile load is *at least* 4.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Myself

WinterNights said:


> He is talking about back in the 80's when Iran tried to buy 7 radars from them. They said due to sanctions, we can't deliver them to you directly, so we'd have to go through a middleman nation, despite Iran agreeing, they kept changing their requirements again and again until in the end, the systems were never delivered.
> 
> These historical facts should remind everyone, Iran can never rely on anyone else for it's military.


So, how does Iran possess all kinds of the State-of-the-Art Russian, Chinese, and Belarusian radars in its AD inventory if nobody sells them to Iran? In all honesty, no one should ever overlook and underrate the help and support Iran has received from its strategic allies in the last 4 decades. The same way members of this forum ridicule Weastern propaganda in underrating Iranian military achievements, they should condemn the lies Iranian officials tell to people through state media. Getting help from others is not a shame, and is understandable for normal people. What is wrong with it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Bavar-373 prototypes have been deployed for a while now. (+— 2 yrs)

Iran is likely testing the prototypes in active deployment to make fine tune changes in preparation for a mass production model. 

I would expect Iran to announce beginning of mass production by 2022 or as early as next year.



Myself said:


> So, how does Iran possess all kinds of the State-of-the-Art Russian, Chinese, and Belarusian radars in its AD inventory if nobody sells them to Iran? In all honesty, no one should ever overlook and underrate the help and support Iran has received from its strategic allies in the last 4 decades. The same way members of this forum ridicule Weastern propaganda in underrating Iranian military achievements, they should condemn the lies Iranian officials tell to people through state media. Getting help from others is not a shame, and is understandable for normal people. What is wrong with it?



Same way NK went from a decade of failed Topedong 2 missiles and failure after failure of long range missile launches to 2 different versions of ICBMs in less than a few years.

Somebody somewhere supplies the needed “push” in technology.

The NK jump is the most shocking jump I have ever seen by a nation in Missile engine technology in the modern era. Strangely the MSM doesn’t bring this up at all, which is baffling.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Navigator

Interesting, if Ghadir radars looks like as some variant of Russian Rezonanas-N, this radar looks like same variant of Russian Rezonanas-N that was in last years installed in Russian Arctica etc.
Iran





Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## WinterNights

> In all honesty, no one should ever overlook and underrate the help and support Iran has received from its strategic allies in the last 4 decades. The same way members of this forum ridicule Weastern propaganda in underrating Iranian military achievements, they should condemn the lies Iranian officials tell to people through state media. Getting help from others is not a shame, and is understandable for normal people. What is wrong with it?



To think these Iranian achievements in air defence is due to outside help shows little understanding in my opinion. Iran has an extremely capable electronic engineering brain base, give these guys the opportunity and they will produce whatever you want. It is Iranian ingenuity that has led to these achievements, just like in our ballistic missile program. To think that these outsiders, that would not even live up to their contractual obligation (e.g s-300) would be actively helping Iran in attaining such strategic system is frankly silly. Why would they? Maybe there was some collaboration here and there but don't get carried away.



Navigator said:


> Interesting, if Ghadir radars looks like as some variant of Russian Rezonanas-N, this radar looks like same variant of Russian Rezonanas-N that was in last years installed in Russian Arctica etc.
> Iran
> View attachment 566542
> 
> Russia
> View attachment 566544



They definitely have a highly similar antenna layout. Whatever technology these radars use, they must be quite potent given even Russia is fielding them.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Navigator said:


> Interesting, if Ghadir radars looks like as some variant of Russian Rezonanas-N, this radar looks like same variant of Russian Rezonanas-N that was in last years installed in Russian Arctica etc.
> Iran
> View attachment 566542
> 
> Russia
> View attachment 566544



That's the Ghadir (probably Ghadir-2), the beast that tracked the RQ-4 and made its RAM/RAS and shaping useless.
This is a photo of explicitly that site which did the long range tracking of the RQ-4.
The first time Iran showed it and 1-2 days after the kill.
It is a main asset against B2-F-22-F-35.

One of the strategic radar assets among others like Nazir, Keyhan, Sepehr and OTHR projects of IRGC and IRIADF.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## WinterNights

Hopefully, in next few years we will see many mobile HF, VHF, UHF radars by Iran. We have a few types of these mobile systems already, but we need more. In case of a conflict, these static radars will be one of the first targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Navigator

WinterNights said:


> They definitely have a highly similar antenna layout. Whatever technology these radars use, they must be quite potent given even Russia is fielding them.



It's very high frequency counter-stealth early warning phased-array radar that acc to official Russian info designed to effectively detect a wide range targets, including low-observable cruise and ballistic missiles, hypersonic aerial vehicles, as well as stealthy ones, in severe electronic countermeasures (ECM) and clutter environment on very big distance.
There couple years ago a representative of the Russian manufacturer of these systems mentioned in one interveiw that their Rezonans radars successfully operated by Russia, Iran and Algeria. I originally thought that there was a specially for Iran was made export variant that known as Ghadir. However it seems that Iran now also have same variant that Russia itself. Looks like there was a full tech transfer from Russia to Iran in last decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Myself

WinterNights said:


> What "state of the art" Chinese and Belarusian (lol what?) radars are you talking about? At least post evidence and sources if you want to have a proper discussion.
> Only Chinese radar Iran has was some old radar it got decades ago.
> They definitely have a highly similar antenna layout. Whatever technology these radars use, they must be quite potent given even Russia is fielding them.



How amazing is your reply even after what Navigator has posted! So, all these Nebo, Kasta, Vostok, Resonans, YJ-11, etc. we see on media are supplied from other planets!
As I mentioned earlier, getting technical help from other countries is not a shame, and is of course logical and understandable for normal people and experts.
Again, I don’t understand what is wrong with it? A foundation built upon lies will collapse sooner, or later! So, it is better to stay honest and logical by appreciating the help and support Iran has received from external sources; while praising its resulted domestic achievements and advancements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Myself said:


> How amazing is your reply even after what Navigator has posted! So, all these Nebo, Kasta, Vostok, Resonans, YJ-11, etc. we see on media are supplied from other planets!



What's amazing about my reply? I never denied that Iran imported some Russian radars and technology in the past. That's not a secret! Bro, we had to start from somewhere!



> As I mentioned earlier, getting technical help from other countries is not a shame, and is of course logical and understandable for normal people and experts.
> Again, I don’t understand what is wrong with it? A foundation built upon lies will collapse sooner, or later! So, it is better to stay honest and logical by appreciating the help and support Iran has received from external sources; while praising its resulted domestic achievements and advancements.



I am not saying it is a problem! What I am saying is, lets not fall into these traps to think all these great achievements we're seeing is purely because of outside help! I am mean look at all these AESA radars we're seeing. Did Iran start from 0 by itself? of course not. But these systems today are being made inside by the likes of SAIRAN. We have learned enough to move by ourself now. Of course if Russians can give us a boost in technology, I am more than happy with that! we'll be fools to reject it. But what's important is our own indigenous industry goes ahead without waiting around for TOT etc. I am sure we're both in agreement here anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

Myself said:


> So, how does Iran possess all kinds of the State-of-the-Art Russian, Chinese, and Belarusian radars in its AD inventory if nobody sells them to Iran? In all honesty, no one should ever overlook and underrate the help and support Iran has received from its strategic allies in the last 4 decades. The same way members of this forum ridicule Weastern propaganda in underrating Iranian military achievements, they should condemn the lies Iranian officials tell to people through state media. Getting help from others is not a shame, and is understandable for normal people. What is wrong with it?


You make a good point. Respect for that. I/we have suspected or/and known Iran was probably receiving military technology from RUssia and China, but the problem with why people dont say much or "admit it "like you ask is that : 1) Good accurate information on it is hard to find and 2) THe nature and consistency of the help is unknown.

I do think and suspect has been getting some help, but i would guess more from the Chinese than Russians. With Iran's recent big AD asset deployments and unveilings, i think we can say Iran has probably gotten help to produce/create those. RUssia or/and China, whoever is helping Iran, also doesnt want to be seen as doing it because it might complicate things for them. You cant underestimate Iran's decisiveness in getting to this point though...you're ALMOST toeing the line of "Iran isnt in that bad a situation, this isnt a big deal" kinda argument.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

925boy said:


> You make a good point. Respect for that. I/we have suspected or/and known Iran was probably receiving military technology from RUssia and China, but the problem with why people dont say much or "admit it "like you ask is that : 1) Good accurate information on it is hard to find and 2) THe nature and consistency of the help is unknown.
> 
> I do think and suspect has been getting some help, but i would guess more from the Chinese than Russians. With Iran's recent big AD asset deployments and unveilings, i think we can say Iran has probably gotten help to produce/create those. RUssia or/and China, whoever is helping Iran, also doesnt want to be seen as doing it because it might complicate things for them. You cant underestimate Iran's decisiveness in getting to this point though...you're ALMOST toeing the line of "Iran isnt in that bad a situation, this isnt a big deal" kinda argument.



Without any disrespect to China, their air defence technology and radars tech etc is not advanced enough for us to be assuming they are giving Iran this level of help. Another fact to remember, is that they pulled out of so many deals in the past, such as c-802. This is not about them not saying anything so they're not seen to be doing it, if they're helping, the US etc would know. Just like they know these Chinese are helping the saudis with their missile program.


If anyone offered help, I'd say it's the Russians (they're also advanced enough). But Iran's advances in air defence is simply too much to assume it's due to anyone's help. These advances are due to the high level of priority air defence has in Iran, plus Iran's highly capable electronic industry base in places like SAIRAN. Check this out:






We don't question Iran's ballistic missile advances due to the fact we know how much attention Iran gives that sector, the same is true of it's air defence.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Russia does business. When they agreed to the TOR-M1 deal they also agreed on the Kasta-2, Nebo-SVU, Gamma-D and (early) Resonanz. The main reason for selling this collection seems to have been their cancellation of the S-300 deal. Today the Kasta copy Kavosh is Irans main gapfiller.

But tech transfer that would explain 3rd Khordads Buk-M2 like radar, the Hafez's Gamma-S like array or this Ghadir-2 which looks like the lastest Resonanz variant (non-export, Russian standard) are not likely. 
Russians are leading in many radar sectors hence Iran sometimes emulates their concept with those systems and may add to it in some cases. Means: _Russia upgrades Resonanz with new add-on phased arrays? We do the same based on our (early) Resonanz copy we got from them._

So Russia does rather business, nothing more. Selling a "strategic" asset like the Resonanz was a good gesture from them. However even the UAE has a Resonanz based radar today, so not that exclusive anymore.

China does effectively also just business, no real ToT, although it might exist to a low degree. China might have been a great help on setting up the "dual-use" manufacturing industry of SA Iran, I don't know.
Irans biggest jump was from a unexpected source and building on that it lead to Irans S-band AESAs.

Belarus was probably a larger source of help than Russia and China.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

@PeeD 

Have we seen any indication of gallium nitrate modules being made in Iran for AESA?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Irans biggest jump was from a unexpected source and building on that it lead to Irans S-band AESAs.



technology came allegedly from Armenia, not a secret anymore, so lets not make a big deal about it 

*Iran’s Najm-802 phase-array antenna came from Armenia*

https://alert5.com/2017/11/01/irans-najm-802-phase-array-antenna-came-from-armenia/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Belarus was probably a larger source of help than Russia and China.


Although few page earlier on this topic you said you wouldn’t, I am glad you finally mentioned the name of that country which has unbelievably provided Iran with detailed technical support in many aspects of the weaponary systems. So, responsibility for this correct claim stays with you !
I wish we could get some more information about technical aspects of the U.S. drone mission on that date: why did it fly at midnight? What was its mission? Should an MQ-4 always be accompanied by another manned spy/surveillance plane such as P-8? Etc.?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

Draco.IMF said:


> technology came allegedly from Armenia, not a secret anymore, so lets not make a big deal about it
> 
> *Iran’s Najm-802 phase-array antenna came from Armenia*
> 
> https://alert5.com/2017/11/01/irans-najm-802-phase-array-antenna-came-from-armenia/



These Americans go through some serious mental gymnastic to avoid giving Iran's defence industry its credit. They obviously don't want other nations to follow Irans path in indigenous development and instead want them to rely on importing American systems. No wonder they come up with more ridiculous claims by the day. One day it was Armenia, in the future they will claim Bavar-373 came from sri lanka.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

it almost gave me a heart attack but im to young to die  



https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20190623.aspx

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

zectech said:


> They were phishing for data on radar and ADS. And the bait was the spy drone. They wanted to analyze the Iranian ADS attack on a object and find any weakness for ECMs. So the ADS used is compromised. It probably needs to be altered and/or updated/upgraded. If the Iranians know of any weaknesses.
> 
> They probably won't attack Iran until a weakness is found


Appreciating your thought, one can slightly alter your post and conclude Iran was phishing for data on U.S. most expensive and cutting edge drone technology to test its new ADS against such a valuable target. Iran wanted to analyze MQ-4C ECM system to find any weakness for it. So, since the Global Hawk was targeted successfully, AN/ALR-90 is now compromised, and it probably needs to be altered and/or updated/upgraded. If the Americans know of any weakness!
How was that?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> it almost gave me a heart attack but im to young to die
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20190623.aspx



One has to wonder if these people actually believe the pile of trash they're writing. I hope for their sake that their military does not believe such nonsense otherwise they're in a world of hurt, much worse than this RQ-4 incident if the situation arrises.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

The other factor people aren’t considering are retired/rogue scientists.

Many of these scientists can be bought ($$$) to assist development a technology in which they are “experts” in the field.

You don’t need the “nation” to help you if you can secure some of its scientists. Did US need post Nazi germany to make its military leap? No they offered amnesty to top Nazi scientists which led to huge leaps in aerospace, space program, and military in general.

There are post Soviet and Chinese scientists/engineer that Iran could attempt to recruit to help in certain areas.

The other way is “back door dealings”. Iran wants something, Russia doesn’t want to do it directly so they use a third country/middleman to hide the transaction. Gives Russia deniability.

Lastly is the arms black market where blueprints, arms, technology are sold to highest bidders.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1142165544214433792

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

https://ria.ru/20190618/1555540651.html



> - What will be the C-500, what can we tell about it now?
> 
> - This is a fundamentally new generation system. The basis of the location means of this system are locators built on the basis of active phased arrays in which there is no transmitting device - the signal is formed by the antenna itself. In its composition there are relatively small power amplifiers, which are phased in a special way. Instead of electrovacuum devices with voltages of 30-40 kV, devices with a voltage of not more than 27 V are used. This design simplifies the task significantly. This has a positive effect on reliability as well as on operational safety. Active phased arrays also allow to obtain more significant characteristics of the radiated power and the width of the spectrum of the signals used. Significantly higher and antenna performance.
> Today, the technology of manufacturing AFAR (active phased antenna array - ed.) At the enterprises of the concern has been fully mastered. Locators have been created and are being tested as part of testing a new system.



This is from a interview on the S-500 from a few days ago.
Bavar-373 uses the same approach: AESA engagement radar instead of a PESA such as the S-400. Power output is lower but it achieves same or better results.

Bavar-373 and S-500 somehow manage to create a significantly higher gain compared to PESA S-400. The S-400 makes up for it by a relatively larger array and higher element output.
Interesting is the statement this this new approach is "simpler", yet better.

I have the feeling that there is more to this technology than just a switch to an AESA array like the new Patriot engagement radar. The new Patriot radar will use expensive GaN TRMs to achieve the necessary performance.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## T-72B

PeeD said:


> https://ria.ru/20190618/1555540651.html
> 
> 
> 
> This is from a interview on the S-500 from a few days ago.
> Bavar-373 uses the same approach: AESA engagement radar instead of a PESA such as the S-400. Power output is lower but it achieves same or better results.
> 
> Bavar-373 and S-500 somehow manage to create a significantly higher gain compared to PESA S-400. The S-400 makes up for it by a relatively larger array and higher element output.
> Interesting is the statement this this new approach is "simpler", yet better.
> 
> I have the feeling that there is more to this technology than just a switch to an AESA array like the new Patriot engagement radar. The new Patriot radar will use expensive GaN TRMs to achieve the necessary performance.


Is this credible?


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*finally they are realizing our power and advancement in air defenses*

Once the dust cleared, it turned out that one of the enduring lessons from the past week occurred at *about 22,000 feet.*


"They work," said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and North Africa editor at Jane's Defence Weekly, of Iran's air defenses. The incident "highlights that when the Iranians really make investment, it can really count," he told CNN.
"*We knew that with ballistic missiles, but it appears the case with air defenses too.*"


https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/25/middleeast/iran-drone-shooting-capabilities-npw-intl/index.html



PeeD said:


> Russia does business. When they agreed to the TOR-M1 deal they also agreed on the Kasta-2, Nebo-SVU, Gamma-D and (early) Resonanz. The main reason for selling this collection seems to have been their cancellation of the S-300 deal. Today the Kasta copy Kavosh is Irans main gapfiller.
> 
> But tech transfer that would explain 3rd Khordads Buk-M2 like radar, the Hafez's Gamma-S like array or this Ghadir-2 which looks like the lastest Resonanz variant (non-export, Russian standard) are not likely.
> Russians are leading in many radar sectors hence Iran sometimes emulates their concept with those systems and may add to it in some cases. Means: _Russia upgrades Resonanz with new add-on phased arrays? We do the same based on our (early) Resonanz copy we got from them._
> 
> So Russia does rather business, nothing more. Selling a "strategic" asset like the Resonanz was a good gesture from them. However even the UAE has a Resonanz based radar today, so not that exclusive anymore.
> 
> China does effectively also just business, no real ToT, although it might exist to a low degree. China might have been a great help on setting up the "dual-use" manufacturing industry of SA Iran, I don't know.
> Irans biggest jump was from a unexpected source and building on that it lead to Irans S-band AESAs.
> 
> Belarus was probably a larger source of help than Russia and China.




annnnnnd that's the beauty of having and building your own systems and radars


* "We do not really understand how these guidance systems are working," he said.*

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *finally they are realizing our power and advancement in air defenses*
> 
> Once the dust cleared, it turned out that one of the enduring lessons from the past week occurred at *about 22,000 feet.*
> 
> 
> "They work," said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and North Africa editor at Jane's Defence Weekly, of Iran's air defenses. The incident "highlights that when the Iranians really make investment, it can really count," he told CNN.
> "*We knew that with ballistic missiles, but it appears the case with air defenses too.*"
> 
> 
> https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/25/middleeast/iran-drone-shooting-capabilities-npw-intl/index.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> annnnnnd that's the beauty of having and building your own systems and radars
> 
> 
> * "We do not really understand how these guidance systems are working," he said.*


Can't wait for Iran to direct this "Narrow Focus" on Q-313!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Can't wait for Iran to direct this "Narrow Focus" on Q-313!


you just read my heart

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

Arminkh said:


> Can't wait for Iran to direct this "Narrow Focus" on Q-313!



Don't worry, in the future, they'll be writing articles asking people to take Iran's jet fighter programs seriously, just like they did with our missiles and doing now with our air defence. Remember that famous saying:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Myself

Why didn’t the system relocate itself after launching the missile? I thought that was the whole idea of making 3rd Khordad mobile! It could become an easy target for the enemy in the later stages of a real war!


----------



## Arminkh

Myself said:


> Why didn’t the system relocate itself after launching the missile? I thought that was the whole idea of making 3rd Khordad mobile! It could become an easy target for the enemy in the later stages of a real war!


We are not at war yet. Why should it relocate?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Nice statement by Russia:

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-iran-us-israel-drone-ally-1445802

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran has at least 4 long range early warning radars against stealth.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1143161530835451904

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has at least 4 long range early warning radars against stealth.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1143161530835451904


Any reason we have no coverage over Oman Sea?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Here is my post from a few days when this site was not publicly known:



PeeD said:


> That's the Ghadir (probably Ghadir-2), the beast that tracked the RQ-4 and made its RAM/RAS and shaping useless.
> This is a photo of explicitly that site which did the long range tracking of the RQ-4.
> The first time Iran showed it and 1-2 days after the kill.
> It is a main asset against B2-F-22-F-35.
> 
> One of the strategic radar assets among others like Nazir, Keyhan, Sepehr and OTHR projects of IRGC and IRIADF.



This site covers most of the Sea of Oman: Check altitude of the site and the radar horizon for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SubWater

Arminkh said:


> Any reason we have no coverage over Oman Sea?


Wait for next years or maybe they have not found it yet.


----------



## R Wing

skyshadow said:


> *finally they are realizing our power and advancement in air defenses*
> 
> Once the dust cleared, it turned out that one of the enduring lessons from the past week occurred at *about 22,000 feet.*
> 
> 
> "They work," said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and North Africa editor at Jane's Defence Weekly, of Iran's air defenses. The incident "highlights that when the Iranians really make investment, it can really count," he told CNN.
> "*We knew that with ballistic missiles, but it appears the case with air defenses too.*"
> 
> 
> https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/25/middleeast/iran-drone-shooting-capabilities-npw-intl/index.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> annnnnnd that's the beauty of having and building your own systems and radars
> 
> 
> * "We do not really understand how these guidance systems are working," he said.*





valkyr_96 said:


> This is just declaration not the inflow. It does not benefit Pakistan anyway at least right now.





Arminkh said:


> Can't wait for Iran to direct this "Narrow Focus" on Q-313!





skyshadow said:


> you just read my heart



We are with you, brave brothers. Stand strong in the face of economic terrorism and hypocritical bullying!

If our leaders wake up, an Iran-Pakistan-China-Russia bloc, similar to NATO, could alter the region forever. 

While the Israelis and Americans are leaving no stone unturned in figuring out the S400's weaknesses and vulnerabilities, the Iranian systems have the advantage of being mostly secret. 

I hope the cyber attack by the US didn't do too much damage.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## valkyr_96

R Wing said:


> We are with you, brave brothers. Stand strong in the face of economic terrorism and hypocritical bullying!
> 
> If our leaders wake up, an Iran-Pakistan-China-Russia bloc, similar to NATO, could alter the region forever.
> 
> While the Israelis and Americans are leaving no stone unturned in figuring out the S400's weaknesses and vulnerabilities, the Iranian systems have the advantage of being mostly secret.
> 
> I hope the cyber attack by the US didn't do too much damage.


you have quoted me incorrectly here


----------



## skyshadow

R Wing said:


> We are with you, brave brothers. Stand strong in the face of economic terrorism and hypocritical bullying!
> 
> If our leaders wake up, an Iran-Pakistan-China-Russia bloc, similar to NATO, could alter the region forever.
> 
> While the Israelis and Americans are leaving no stone unturned in figuring out the S400's weaknesses and vulnerabilities, the Iranian systems have the advantage of being mostly secret.
> 
> I hope the cyber attack by the US didn't do too much damage.



hope to see Bavar_373 in Pakistan soon



PeeD said:


> Here is my post from a few days when this site was not publicly known:
> 
> 
> 
> This site covers most of the Sea of Oman: Check altitude of the site and the radar horizon for that.



Gadir 1 looks bigger then Gadir 2  







An aerial view of Iran’s Nazir long range early warning radar, a multiband array, (including low UHF?) providing 360 coverage and counter stealth capability.











*14.05.19 Iran deployed MERSAD launchers at Asaluyeh. 21.05.19 S300 on trucks spotted near Damavand Oil facilities. Imageries from 24.05.19 confirm both and an apparent Interim deployment of the S-300 battery at Asaluyeh Airport located 5 days later in Tehran.*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

I did a calculation which basically showed that for the Najm-802B and Najm-804 of the 15th Khordad to reach the same performance as the twice larger Najm-802A its elements must have 8-9 times larger power output.
Najm-802A first appeared 2012 (prototype) and Najm-802B 2016 (prototype).

The mobility of the half sized Najm-802B and -804 is of course at shoot and scoot level compared to the Najm-802A.

Furthermore at its anti-stealth engagement range of 45km the radar performance will be sufficient to detect -45dB stealth performance aircraft. -45dB is a U.S. MIC-PR-machine textbook minimal RCS for things like F-22/-35 that translates to 0,00003m²... Which means: At the stated 45km, the 15th Khordad and its IRGC pendant will be able to kill "any" known stealth asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mohsen

Global Hawk on live Iranian TV. new details:
پهپاد ام کیو قرصی‬‎ - ثریا - 05 تیر 1398

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> Global Hawk on live Iranian TV. new details:
> پهپاد ام کیو قرصی‬‎ - ثریا - 05 تیر 1398


I was just reading the transcript of the same:

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/970253/جزئیات-جدید-از-شکار-پهپاد-آمریکایی-توسط-سپاه

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> I did a calculation which basically showed that for the Najm-802B and Najm-804 of the 15th Khordad to reach the same performance as the twice larger Najm-802A its elements must have 8-9 times larger power output.
> Najm-802A first appeared 2012 (prototype) and Najm-802B 2016 (prototype).
> 
> The mobility of the half sized Najm-802B and -804 is of course at shoot and scoot level compared to the Najm-802A.
> 
> Furthermore at its anti-stealth engagement range of 45km the radar performance will be sufficient to detect -45dB stealth performance aircraft. -45dB is a U.S. MIC-PR-machine textbook minimal RCS for things like F-22/-35 that translates to 0,00003m²... Which means: At the stated 45km, the 15th Khordad and its IRGC pendant will be able to kill "any" known stealth asset.



45KM is not a whole lot of distance if the primary purpose is to defend an objective/target.

Thus it means the 3rd Khordad needs to be way Outside of established Air defense rings like Natanz or Parchin or Tehran because if it’s actually in the air defense ring then it serves no purpose against the F-22/F-35 because they begin launching their payloads from more than 45KM away.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> 45KM is not a whole lot of distance if the primary purpose is to defend an objective/target.
> 
> Thus it means the 3rd Khordad needs to be way Outside of established Air defense rings like Natanz or Parchin or Tehran because if it’s actually in the air defense ring then it serves no purpose against the F-22/F-35 because they begin launching their payloads from more than 45KM away.



In reality what I said is absolute worst case scenario numbers: At 45km not even a stealth asset with idealistic -45dB performance will be able to evade a 15th Khordad/IRGC-SD-2.
45km range will create a umbrella of 90km diameter, sufficient for any mega city.

So lets move to a realistic scenario: A stealth asset with ~-30dB X-band performance from relevant attack aspects and effective -20dB against Najm. Detection at around 130km.
15th Khordad would then link to an available Talash-2 FCS and attack with comparatively expensive Sayyad-3 at extended 120km.
Even if Talash-2 FCS is not available to a 15th Khordad, it will likely use a long-range ARH SD-3 variant (expensive). But the bread and butter of it are 45km range engagements, where it is most cost-effective AND most robust.

I already tried to do some myth busting on stand-off weapon ranges and their survivability here. Russian Buk-M2 (Chinese HQ-16 too) is a 45km range system, one would wonder why so much capable Russians would accept a 45km range SAM if they would believe that it can be easily taken out by a SDB saturation attack.
U.S airpowers destructive potential is to 90% countered in their employment by such a 45km range SAM asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> In reality what I said is absolute worst case scenario numbers: At 45km not even a stealth asset with idealistic -45dB performance will be able to evade a 15th Khordad/IRGC-SD-2.
> 45km range will create a umbrella of 90km diameter, sufficient for any mega city.
> 
> So lets move to a realistic scenario: A stealth asset with ~-30dB X-band performance from relevant attack aspects and effective -20dB against Najm. Detection at around 130km.
> 15th Khordad would then link to an available Talash-2 FCS and attack with comparatively expensive Sayyad-3 at extended 120km.
> Even if Talash-2 FCS is not available to a 15th Khordad, it will likely use a long-range ARH SD-3 variant (expensive). But the bread and butter of it are 45km range engagements, where it is most cost-effective AND most robust.
> 
> I already tried to do some myth busting on stand-off weapon ranges and their survivability here. Russian Buk-M2 (Chinese HQ-16 too) is a 45km range system, one would wonder why so much capable Russians would accept a 45km range SAM if they would believe that it can be easily taken out by a SDB saturation attack.
> U.S airpowers destructive potential is to 90% countered in their employment by such a 45km range SAM asset.


I dont think they use BUK-M2 against SDBs , they protect the SAM with TOR and Pantsyr

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> I dont think they use BUK-M2 against SDBs , they protect the SAM with TOR and Pantsyr



What I tried to say is this: TOR, Pantsir, Mesbah are systems to defend against the 10% of employed weapons that can put the system at real danger, such as HARM and Tomahawk. It is hence immune to 90% of the other weapons or = those other weapons can't be used where these SAM systems are --> "Denial of weapons" --> No surgical strikes where a 15th Khordad is protecting.
This is the baseline. Then come SEAD/DEAD operations, specialized to take out these sites. At this phase, SDB, Paveway, JDAM and JSOW which represent the mass of U.S. airpower strike weapons are not effective against a IADS like Irans. 10% of the rest of specialized, expensive weapons are then relevant.
Conclusion is: 45km range of HQ-16, Buk-M2, 15th Khordad is sufficient to avoid the use of 80% of U.S PGMs. 10% are special cases where weapons like JSOW and SDB can strike at these extended ranges and the remaining 10% are expensive long range weapons TOR, Pantsir and Mesbah are designed to deal with.

Beyond Pentagon and MIC PR, there is the layer of truth. There effective combat ranges are much lower. 
Advertised -40dB class stealth assets become effectively < -30dB in combat and -50dB is just psychological warfare.
Advertised ~120km range of SDB/JSOW becomes 70km in 20% of realistic combat situations and 40km in the remaining 80%.
etc.

Here suddenly an asset like 15th Khordad becomes more effective than thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## WinterNights

I hope Iran has started working on *Photonic radars. *I feel they will play a very important part in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

I said this in another thread,

Next time, I want one of our UAVs to shoot down an American UAV/plane.
It would be the first time a UAV kills another/plane in combat 

Please IRCG, make this come true

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Mithridates said:


> tartar fire control systems along with rim-66 standard. in last 10-15 years we maded sayyad AD and that was start of our indigenous designs.
> sayyad ADS:
> View attachment 567132
> tartar FCS:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AN/SPG-51 radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AN/SPG-60 radar
> 
> our air defences at early stages were copy of US naval ADs, then we made najm AESA radars and after that talash systems and 15th khordad and one day hopefully bavar-373.
> also Iran-china military cooperation are not really good.



The mobile AN/SPG-60-like tracking radar of the older Talash-2 is fortunately now replaced by the Najm-804 to form the Talash-3 (best known from the 15th Khordad).
In many ways with the Najm-804 of Talash-3 that system becomes a land based Aegis combat system:
pseudo-Standard (Talash-1) --> pseudo-Tartar (Talash-2) -->pseudo-Aegis (Talash-3).
The big question is if this pseudo-Aegis Talash-3 can also support 240km S-200 beside 120km SD-3 and 75km SD-2. I'm confident that this is the case at least out to 150km maybe not to the theoretical full range of 240km. However at impact probably 80% of the engagements would occur around 150km anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Another issue:
The lack of a monopulse feed assembly on the known 3rd Khordad radar photos leads me to the conclusion that it can't be a known PESA design. It looks like a AESA.

If it is an AESA it needs to be a GaA based system to be cost effective.
If it is GaA based then we know what the limits of TRM power output are.

The whole point is this: Compared to dedicated anti-stealth systems like the IRGC-SD-2 and 15th Khordad, the X-band operating 3rd Khordad has a handicap of at least -10dB in favor of the stealth asset.
So it is not the best system to hunt LO, VLO and 5th gen fighters.

The RQ-4/MQ-4 are at least LO assets with at least 0,1m² to 0,01m² (-10dB to -20dB) in X-band.

Considering the highest power output TRMs possible for GaAs, a RQ-4/MQ-4 intercepted at 22km and 17km altitude would then need to have a RCS of >0,05m² or >-13dB.

If we assume medium performance GaA TRMs, then RCS would be >0,1m² or -10dB.

As no SD-2C was used we can probably exclude an engagement without lock via ARH seeker SAM.

So my conclusion of this all is: The 3rd Khordad was operating at the edge of its capability.
I doubt the makers would be economically unwise to use anything better than GaA TRMs.
If that is true, then the stealth performance of the RQ-4/MQ-4 is at least worse than 0,1m² or -10dB.

Whats the exact story can't be deduced by this available data. But I have a feeling that LO assets with 0,1m² RCS are the maximum of what the 3rd Khordad can handle at reasonable range. It's prey are 4th and 4,5 gen fighters.

But here is the good news: Dedicated anti-stealth system such as the IRGC-ASF-Najm-SD-2 or 15th Khordad would have the same performance at 22km but against a ideal "pea-sized" VLO target of 0,00001m² or -45dB. Fanboys at F-16.net dream about the F-35 having such a pea-sized RCS but even if this dream would be true, those SD-2 systems would be able to counter it.
So if there are high performance VLO stealth assets, not the 3rd Khordad but the IRGC-ASF-Najm-SD-2 or 15th Khordad are ideal counters.
Also bear in mind that I apply the U.S side of the story with everything in their favor. If we look at he Russian side of the story, F-22 and F-35 won't perform better than 0,3m² on average against ground based SAMs. So in that case 3rd Khordad would be sufficiently effective at relevant ranges.
For me the 3rd Khordad remains my favorite Iranian air defense system anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater

2.5 year old article about 3rd khordad and it's younger brother Tabas.
https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/687143/شاهکار-مهم-دوقلوهای-ناشناخته-در-رزمایش-پدافندی-سپاه-دست-سوم

And most important part of this article I think is below sentences from Sardar Hajizadeh which make clear importance of 3rd khordad for Iran.





Hejizadeh called third khordad as biggest research project which end to successful result.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Today Mostanad channel
19:30 = War of waves (Ep2 probably)
21:30 = 360' (New footage of hunting MQ-4C)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Another issue:
> The lack of a monopulse feed assembly on the known 3rd Khordad radar photos leads me to the conclusion that it can't be a known PESA design. It looks like a AESA.
> 
> If it is an AESA it needs to be a GaA based system to be cost effective.
> If it is GaA based then we know what the limits of TRM power output are.
> 
> The whole point is this: Compared to dedicated anti-stealth systems like the IRGC-SD-2 and 15th Khordad, the X-band operating 3rd Khordad has a handicap of at least -10dB in favor of the stealth asset.
> So it is not the best system to hunt LO, VLO and 5th gen fighters.
> 
> The RQ-4/MQ-4 are at least LO assets with at least 0,1m² to 0,01m² (-10dB to -20dB) in X-band.
> 
> Considering the highest power output TRMs possible for GaAs, a RQ-4/MQ-4 intercepted at 22km and 17km altitude would then need to have a RCS of >0,05m² or >-13dB.
> 
> If we assume medium performance GaA TRMs, then RCS would be >0,1m² or -10dB.
> 
> As no SD-2C was used we can probably exclude an engagement without lock via ARH seeker SAM.
> 
> So my conclusion of this all is: The 3rd Khordad was operating at the edge of its capability.
> I doubt the makers would be economically unwise to use anything better than GaA TRMs.
> If that is true, then the stealth performance of the RQ-4/MQ-4 is at least worse than 0,1m² or -10dB.
> 
> Whats the exact story can't be deduced by this available data. But I have a feeling that LO assets with 0,1m² RCS are the maximum of what the 3rd Khordad can handle at reasonable range. It's prey are 4th and 4,5 gen fighters.
> 
> But here is the good news: Dedicated anti-stealth system such as the IRGC-ASF-Najm-SD-2 or 15th Khordad would have the same performance at 22km but against a ideal "pea-sized" VLO target of 0,00001m² or -45dB. Fanboys at F-16.net dream about the F-35 having such a pea-sized RCS but even if this dream would be true, those SD-2 systems would be able to counter it.
> So if there are high performance VLO stealth assets, not the 3rd Khordad but the IRGC-ASF-Najm-SD-2 or 15th Khordad are ideal counters.
> Also bear in mind that I apply the U.S side of the story with everything in their favor. If we look at he Russian side of the story, F-22 and F-35 won't perform better than 0,3m² on average against ground based SAMs. So in that case 3rd Khordad would be sufficiently effective at relevant ranges.
> For me the 3rd Khordad remains my favorite Iranian air defense system anyway.



You keep mentioning “cost effectiveness” but you do not provide the cost difference between your theory (GaA TRMs) and the alternative(s).

To me just going off of cost effectiveness does not always make sense when speak about a military and an asset that is ment to counter your enemies greatest air asset (5th gen fighters). 

Nazi Germany was famous for disregarding cost effectiveness in certain projects for sheer maximum capability. (Now wether that was right or wrong is beside the point).

So I would be curious to see what these cost differences you cite are so that readers can draw their own conclusions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> You keep mentioning “cost effectiveness” but you do not provide the cost difference between your theory (GaA TRMs) and the alternative(s).
> 
> To me just going off of cost effectiveness does not always make sense when speak about a military and an asset that is ment to counter your enemies greatest air asset (5th gen fighters).
> 
> Nazi Germany was famous for disregarding cost effectiveness in certain projects for sheer maximum capability. (Now wether that was right or wrong is beside the point).
> 
> So I would be curious to see what these cost differences you cite are so that readers can draw their own conclusions.



The alternatives are GaN TRMs in a country that is heavily sanctioned.
These are semiconductor chips, alone producing GaN wafers is a huge achievement for Iran and its import and cooperation restrictions.

So the situation is this:
- You have enough space for your array? Build a larger array instead of a more powerful TRM one (can't do that on a fighters nose)
- You have enough means to cool your array? Go for TRMs that have higher cooling requirements (less advanced).
- You can use L- or S-band TRMs instead of X-band? Go for it, it will be 30-50% cheaper.
- Your TRM's make 50% of whole system cost? Try to get it as low as possible.
- Finally your radar is 30% cheaper? Get 3 for every 2 ordered, 3rd Khordad TELAR.
+ all other dynamic factors.

Never fall in a technological trap where something is claimed to be absolute necessary (GaN) but your requirements are satisfied with a technology that costs lets say 1/3 of that. Iran is not dominated by a capitalist defense industry and should never be: Buy whats gets the job done not whats best in the market.

Honestly I'm confused by the 3rd Khordad radar, I have still serious doubts whether it is an AESA. PESA would be much more cost effective in this application... I just don't see a monopulse feed system...



TheImmortal said:


> an asset that is ment to counter your enemies greatest air asset (5th gen fighters).



I personally think the 3rd Khordad can do that. I outlined U.S claims about stealth, but my view is closer to the Russian side: Ground based radars will detect 5th gen stealth fighter targets at an average RCS of 0,5m² or -3dB.
Still I think that the 3rd Khordad is not the ideal choice against highest performing stealth assets, the IRGC specially developed the Najm-SD-2 system to counter those. Plus Najm series could be linked with the 3rd Khordad to give it added anti-VLO capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

PeeD said:


> The alternatives are GaN TRMs in a country that is heavily sanctioned.
> These are semiconductor chips, alone producing GaN wafers is a huge achievement for Iran and its import and cooperation restrictions.
> 
> So the situation is this:
> - You have enough space for your array? Build a larger array instead of a more powerful TRM one (can't do that on a fighters nose)
> - You have enough means to cool your array? Go for TRMs that have higher cooling requirements (less advanced).
> - You can use L- or S-band TRMs instead of X-band? Go for it, it will be 30-50% cheaper.
> - Your TRM's make 50% of whole system cost? Try to get it as low as possible.
> - Finally your radar is 30% cheaper? Get 3 for every 2 ordered, 3rd Khordad TELAR.
> + all other dynamic factors.
> 
> Never fall in a technological trap where something is claimed to be absolute necessary (GaN) but your requirements are satisfied with a technology that costs lets say 1/3 of that. Iran is not dominated by a capitalist defense industry and should never be: Buy whats gets the job done not whats best in the market.
> 
> Honestly I'm confused by the 3rd Khordad radar, I have still serious doubts whether it is an AESA. PESA would be much more cost effective in this application... I just don't see a monopulse feed system...
> 
> 
> 
> I personally think the 3rd Khordad can do that. I outlined U.S claims about stealth, but my view is closer to the Russian side: Ground based radars will detect 5th gen stealth fighter targets at an average RCS of 0,5m² or -3dB.
> Still I think that the 3rd Khordad is not the ideal choice against highest performing stealth assets, the IRGC specially developed the Najm-SD-2 system to counter those. Plus Najm series could be linked with the 3rd Khordad to give it added anti-VLO capabilities.


Sounds like the old quote:
*"Good enough is the enemy of perfect."*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1144571341045227526

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1144571341045227526



The same Dmitry Medvedev that gave the order not supplying Iran with S-300?

Iran should pass on S-400 and move to S-500. Turkey’s S-400 systems will supposedly be delivered by end of year. But the S-300 iran order is more in line with s-400 anyway.

Of course in my opinions Iran ordered too few S-300. So an S-400 can reinforce the air defense network, S-500 would be even better.

Not sure Iran has the resources for either right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> The same Dmitry Medvedev that gave the order not supplying Iran with S-300?
> 
> Iran should pass on S-400 and move to S-500. Turkey’s S-400 systems will supposedly be delivered by end of year. But the S-300 iran order is more in line with s-400 anyway.
> 
> Of course in my opinions Iran ordered too few S-300. So an S-400 can reinforce the air defense network, S-500 would be even better.
> 
> Not sure Iran has the resources for either right now.



maybe Iran can pay with Oil

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

The recent news about national projects among which air defense was one of the points should be a clear message: Additional funds will be allocated to air defense and it seems the reason is the formation of a new LR-SAM backbone via the Bavar-373.
Form what is known, Bavar-373 could outperform the S-400 in at least some fields.
Since it is a "national project" scale project, a significant number can be expected in the next few years.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1143548517170012160

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> The same Dmitry Medvedev that gave the order not supplying Iran with S-300?
> 
> Iran should pass on S-400 and move to S-500. Turkey’s S-400 systems will supposedly be delivered by end of year. But the S-300 iran order is more in line with s-400 anyway.
> 
> Of course in my opinions Iran ordered too few S-300. So an S-400 can reinforce the air defense network, S-500 would be even better.


LMAO @ you saying(rightly) that Russia via Medvedev didnt allow S300s into Iran for a while....then you go on to say IRan should get S500 instead of S400? how can you expect to get/ask for S500 when you are already insecure about getting S400? hmmm.



> Not sure Iran has the resources for either right now.


Why? Do you think Iranian govt doesnt have $2-5bn now to pay for these hypothetical S400s? 

S400 is turning into the developing world's trusted, reliable,affordable(relatively)tool to stop all regime change operations via air attacks by western powers. world has changed. If Russia turns on S400 over all of syria, Israel will stop doing flights over Syria. facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> LMAO @ you saying(rightly) that Russia via Medvedev didnt allow S300s into Iran for a while....then you go on to say IRan should get S500 instead of S400? how can you expect to get/ask for S500 when you are already insecure about getting S400? hmmm.
> 
> 
> Why? Do you think Iranian govt doesnt have $2-5bn now to pay for these hypothetical S400s?
> 
> S400 is turning into the developing world's trusted, reliable,affordable(relatively)tool to stop all regime change operations via air attacks by western powers. world has changed. If Russia turns on S400 over all of syria, Israel will stop doing flights over Syria. facts.



You must have reading comprehension problems.

First the S-300 Iran ordered is a custom variant as S-300 assembly line no longer existed when Russia began delivery to Iran. Thus Iranian s-300 shares many similarities with S-400, so why would you get something that you pretty much already have?

Also I said IF Iran is going to go for an air defense system it should go for S-500 because it incorporates ABM protection which is something that Iran could learn from.

Either way I’m not optimistic about Russia delivering S-400 or S-500 to Iran. And it’s not because either system is sugh a game changer that it would shift the entire balance of power. No, it’s because It seems Russia is trying to get some leverage on US by playing the Iran weapons card.

Lastly Iran doesn’t have 2-3 billion to just throw at a system that probably won’t be delivered till late 2020 at the earliest and possibly longer if Russia drags its feet.

Iran is currently under severe sanctions where it is losing billions a month in lost oil revenue. So no, Iran isn’t going to tap the war chest unless absolutely necessary. I don’t know if S-400/S-500 is absolutely necessary at this point in time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

IRGC air defence force Najm802A radar. this radar links with 6 missile launcher and each launcher carry 4 missiles so each battalion has 24 missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> IRGC air defence force Najm802A radar. this radar links with 6 missile launcher and each launcher carry 4 missiles so each battalion has 24 missiles.


it's great.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> The recent news about national projects among which air defense was one of the points should be a clear message: Additional funds will be allocated to air defense and it seems the reason is the formation of a new LR-SAM backbone via the Bavar-373.
> Form what is known, Bavar-373 could outperform the S-400 in at least some fields.
> Since it is a "national project" scale project, a significant number can be expected in the next few years.



In what aspects? While from your analyses you have indicated that Iranian AESAs are more advanced and efficient than their PESA counterparts, I do worry at how low-power they seem to be, which could make them vulnerable to jamming and longer range detection against stealth aircraft. I'm also surprised at how few targets some modern systems like 15 Khordad can engage (6 simultaneously), whereas the S-300's Tomb Stone radar is much more capable, capable of engaging 36 simultaneously.

EDIT: The Tomb Stone can engage 6 targets with 12 missiles. Range and simultaneously tracked targets remain important though.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Meraj_4 3D radar

range: 500+ KM

tracking targets: up to 200 targets










































Vostok 3D radar

range: 360 KM












Najm_802 A

range: unknown

engaging targets simultaneously: up to 3 target simultaneously



























*unknown Iranian air defense system ( probably 3th of Khordad )
















*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> In what aspects? While from your analyses you have indicated that Iranian AESAs are more advanced and efficient than their PESA counterparts, I do worry at how low-power they seem to be, which could make them vulnerable to jamming and longer range detection against stealth aircraft. I'm also surprised at how few targets some modern systems like 15 Khordad can engage (6 simultaneously), whereas the S-300's Tomb Stone radar is much more capable, capable of engaging 36 simultaneously.



The S-300PMU2 can engage up to 6 targets simultaneously while providing guidance for up to 12 missiles - two missiles per target ensuring target kill. 
https://www.armyrecognition.com/s-3...e_missile_system_technical_data_sheet_uk.html

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*3th of Khordad with global hawk MQ_4 kill mark *






*
3th of Khordad Command and Control Center*
*









*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> IRGC air defence force Najm802A radar. this radar links with 6 missile launcher and each launcher carry 4 missiles so each battalion has 24 missiles.



I wonder if Iran realizes that by putting an air defense system in the middle of nowhere it is easier to locate by surveillance.

Everyday recon sats overpass Iran taking pictures.

From there you can develop an image recognition machine learning alto to compare a database of different “AD structures” of various countries. The Software then quickly scans the latest pictures comparing the pictures to its database of different AD structures. From there potential sites are found and passed for human review.

The more isolated the target the easier pattern recognition can pick it up (less noise).

I don’t know just a thought I had.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Ghadir_2 OTH radar*

range: up to 3000 KM

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> The S-300PMU2 can engage up to 6 targets simultaneously while providing guidance for up to 12 missiles - two missiles per target ensuring target kill.
> https://www.armyrecognition.com/s-3...e_missile_system_technical_data_sheet_uk.html



My mistake, should have checked that more thoroughly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> I wonder if Iran realizes that by putting an air defense system in the middle of nowhere it is easier to locate by surveillance.
> 
> Everyday recon sats overpass Iran taking pictures.
> 
> From there you can develop an image recognition machine learning alto to compare a database of different “AD structures” of various countries. The Software then quickly scans the latest pictures comparing the pictures to its database of different AD structures. From there potential sites are found and passed for human review.
> 
> The more isolated the target the easier pattern recognition can pick it up (less noise).
> 
> I don’t know just a thought I had.



they very well can do that but the system is mobile which means it will not stay there for long as Americans already said we did not knew Iranians had air defense system ( 3th of kKhordad ) over there it came out of nowhere and hit the drone.

Ghadir_1 OTH radar

range: up to 3000 KM












3th of Khordad system with 3 missiles online and up to ~8 missiles ready for reload












3th of Khordad system with 3 missiles online and up to ~8 missiles ready for reload

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> My mistake, should have checked that more thoroughly.



Np dude, thanks for your great blogs  keep up the good work. 

@skyshadow thanks for the great pics man.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Teear 2 missile sicker with 50 km range

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> Teear 2 missile sicker with 50 km range



that is some sick seeker tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*difference between Iranian Mersad air defense system and Hawk air defense system*





























arashkamangir said:


> that is some sick seeker tech.



and that was more then 6 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> Meraj_4 3D radar
> 
> range: 500+ KM
> 
> tracking targets: up to 200 targets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vostok 3D radar
> 
> range: 360 KM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Najm_802 A
> 
> range: unknown
> 
> engaging targets simultaneously: up to 6 target simultaneously
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *unknown Iranian air defense system ( probably 3th of Khordad )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Why not use Farsi digits and letters instead of English?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Why not use Farsi digits and letters instead of English?



i will if some one needs a translation


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *3th of Khordad with global hawk MQ_4 kill mark *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 3th of Khordad Command and Control Center
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Did you put that mark or was it really there?



Arminkh said:


> Why not use Farsi digits and letters instead of English?


No I mean:
فارسی را پاس بداریم چی شد؟

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Today Channel Ofogh
13:29 "War of waves" part 3

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> In what aspects? While from your analyses you have indicated that Iranian AESAs are more advanced and efficient than their PESA counterparts, I do worry at how low-power they seem to be, which could make them vulnerable to jamming and longer range detection against stealth aircraft. I'm also surprised at how few targets some modern systems like 15 Khordad can engage (6 simultaneously), whereas the S-300's Tomb Stone radar is much more capable, capable of engaging 36 simultaneously.
> 
> EDIT: The Tomb Stone can engage 6 targets with 12 missiles. Range and simultaneously tracked targets remain important though.



As you see 4 targets of the 3rd Khordad is quite good compared to the 6 of the S-300.

Also it must be understood this these are statements about true simultaneous engagements. Means that a formation of 4 aircraft, 100m apart in a line can be intercepted at the same time.
In real combat a timed engagement can be performed: Attack those 4 targets and launch another 4 missiles for another target package. The other package must just be sufficiently far apart to be within missile-up-link range, allow target and missile accusation by the radar.
So in practice lets say after half of the flight time, a different strike package can be already engaged. That's well sufficient to support the battery with 6 or 9 missiles.

Jamming will always be present in some form or another, important is that there are sufficient reserves to burn trough it or avoid being effected by it.

As for PESA vs. AESA: Iran carefully selects which system offers the best cost-effect performance. If a relative low power AESA benefits in the application, it will be selected. If a PESA or phased-sub-array benefits that will be selected.

Best example is the Meraj-4 battle management radar or the 3rd Khordad battalion-level Bashir:
This radar is a AESA with phased-sub-array (basically a PESA but without scanning capability). In elevation-scan it is a AESA, in azimuth static phased array.
Due to its large Big-Bird scale array, an AESA would not be cost effective. Plus it does only volume search, not target acquisition.
While Chinese copy the PESA Big-Bird, Iran develops a cost-effective AESA equivalent, with lower update rate but probably longer range performance. The update-rate issue is then compensated by a starring long-range acquisition radar.

They use AESA where it makes sense in cost and effect. 10 years ago the Najm-802 needed to be as big as it is to be effective and robust enough, 6 years later the truck mounted Najm-802 was half the size and Najm-804 is even smaller.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

mohsen said:


> Today Channel Ofogh
> 13:29 "War of waves" part 3


Mohsen jan, please post them here if you can.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> As you see 4 targets of the 3rd Khordad is quite good compared to the 6 of the S-300.
> 
> Also it must be understood this these are statements about true simultaneous engagements. Means that a formation of 4 aircraft, 100m apart in a line can be intercepted at the same time.
> In real combat a timed engagement can be performed: Attack those 4 targets and launch another 4 missiles for another target package. The other package must just be sufficiently far apart to be within missile-up-link range, allow target and missile accusation by the radar.
> So in practice lets say after half of the flight time, a different strike package can be already engaged. That's well sufficient to support the battery with 6 or 9 missiles.
> 
> Jamming will always be present in some form or another, important is that there are sufficient reserves to burn trough it or avoid being effected by it.
> 
> As for PESA vs. AESA: Iran carefully selects which system offers the best cost-effect performance. If a relative low power AESA benefits in the application, it will be selected. If a PESA or phased-sub-array benefits that will be selected.
> 
> Best example is the Meraj-4 battle management radar or the 3rd Khordad battalion-level Bashir:
> This radar is a AESA with phased-sub-array (basically a PESA but without scanning capability). In elevation-scan it is a AESA, in azimuth static phased array.
> Due to its large Big-Bird scale array, an AESA would not be cost effective. Plus it does only volume search, not target acquisition.
> While Chinese copy the PESA Big-Bird, Iran develops a cost-effective AESA equivalent, with lower update rate but probably longer range performance. The update-rate issue is then compensated by a starring long-range acquisition radar.
> 
> They use AESA where it makes sense in cost and effect. 10 years ago the Najm-802 needed to be as big as it is to be effective and robust enough, 6 years later the truck mounted Najm-802 was half the size and Najm-804 is even smaller.


Right, so it's cost effective. But how is it more capable than the S-400?


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Did you put that mark or was it really there?
> 
> 
> No I mean:
> فارسی را پاس بداریم چی شد؟



no i did not put it there.

خب پاس میداریم من که مخالفتی ندارم ولی بلاخره انگلیسی هم زبانیه که اینجا و توی اکثر دنیا به کار میره و منم مشکلی با استفاده فارسی یا انگلیسی ندارم ولی ترجیح میدم انگلیسی بنویسم چون اینجا اکثرا انگیسی صحبت میکنن و قدرت نظامی ایران هم بهتر به بقیه معرفی میشه اگر بخواهم فارسی بنویسم مجبورم برای همه ترجمش کنم وقت این کارو هم ندارم ولی اگر کسی متوجه نشد یا به فارسی هم مشخصات یک سیستم رو خواست من براش میزارم.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kiarash

mohsen said:


> Today Channel Ofogh
> 13:29 "War of waves" part 3


there was no part 2 or 3, it was the rerun of the first one.


----------



## skyshadow

*
Sayyad_2 or Talash_2 with Najm_802 B radar that can engaging 6 targets simultaneously.*

































*Sayyad_3 system with Sayyad_3C missiles and Ofoq radar*
*





































*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

*Najm_802 B radar that can engaging 6 targets simultaneously*
*












































*

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Mithridates

so sayyad-3 weights almost one ton.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> so sayyad-3 weights almost one ton.



yes its more then one ton 1023 kg

*@PeeD can you say what are your thoughts about Arash radar? in the photo they have put it on top of a building in middle of the city.

























*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## WinterNights

It looks like an L-band long range radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Kiarash said:


> there was no part 2 or 3, it was the rerun of the first one.


Yeah, but on the EPG it was described as part three!



skyshadow said:


> *Ghadir_2 OTH radar*
> 
> range: up to 3000 KM


Where did this 3000km come from?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

mohsen said:


> Yeah, but on the EPG it was described as part three!
> 
> 
> Where did this 3000km come from?



they said 3000 km for Ghadir_1 already and if Ghadir_2 is as big as 1 then the numbers will match but if not then it will be between 1000 to 2000 km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

skyshadow said:


> they said 3000 km for Ghadir_1 already and if Ghadir_2 is as big as 1 then the numbers will match but if not then it will be between 1000 to 2000 km


No they said the range of Ghadir is 600km for aircrafts and 1100km for ballistic missiles!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

mohsen said:


> No they said the range of Ghadir is 600km for aircrafts and 1100km for ballistic missiles!



you are right it was Sepehr radar with 3000 km range 

رادار سپهر که به عنوان دوربردترین رادار کشور نیز مطرح می‌شود از نوع رادارهای ماوراء افق بوده و به گفته مسئولین دفاعی برد معمول آن 2500 کیلومتر است که قابلیت تغییر از 800 کیلومتر تا 3000 کیلومتر را نیز دارد.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/356069/40-نوع-رادار-ایرانی-چشمان-همیشه-بیدار-نیروهای-مسلح-عکس

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> no i did not put it there.
> 
> خب پاس میداریم من که مخالفتی ندارم ولی بلاخره انگلیسی هم زبانیه که اینجا و توی اکثر دنیا به کار میره و منم مشکلی با استفاده فارسی یا انگلیسی ندارم ولی ترجیح میدم انگلیسی بنویسم چون اینجا اکثرا انگیسی صحبت میکنن و قدرت نظامی ایران هم بهتر به بقیه معرفی میشه اگر بخواهم فارسی بنویسم مجبورم برای همه ترجمش کنم وقت این کارو هم ندارم ولی اگر کسی متوجه نشد یا به فارسی هم مشخصات یک سیستم رو خواست من براش میزارم.


نه منظورم سیستمهای کنترل رادار و موشکی ایرانه. همه ابزارآلات به انگلیسین

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1144929571688648704

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Right, so it's cost effective. But how is it more capable than the S-400?



You mean the Bavar-373 or just the Meraj-4? The S-400 is a brute force system, very mature and with significant ABM capabilities. Bavar-373 uses newer technology solutions such as all-AESA radars. Will it become better than the S-400 by this? Can't say for now.
If you mean Meraj-4 vs. Big bird: The job of both systems is long range 3D volume search. Here a PESA is equal to an AESA. The AESA is just more reliable and has lower noise = longer range if both power outputs are the same. So if the radar does not work 24/7 and has higher power output it is as good as the AESA in this application. These radars are not beam forming and doing special tasks like Irans S-band AESAs, just search at long range to detect early and pass information on to acquisition-level systems.
It seems that Iran reached similar range performance as the Big Bird with the Meraj-4. The statement of 200 tracked targets underlines this: This is Bavar-373 division/battalion level battle management radar and tracks more targets than the (at least export) Big Bird.



skyshadow said:


> @PeeD can you say what are your thoughts about Arash radar? in the photo they have put it on top of a building in middle of the city.



It looks like a upper L-band or lower S-band PESA. Its a IRIADF volume search EW system with large array and hence range performance. Related to the Moghareb.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Baradaran at military.ir have found a recent study which analyses radar absorbing structure very similar to that visible from the RQ-4 wreckage.

They also found a crude, undetailed shape RCS analysis on the RQ-4.

Shaping accounts for ~ 10dB in that crude analysis. We can assume a magnitude better performance if the model had higher definition shaping, hence 0 dB. Shaping is obviously not the greatest stealth technique the RQ-4 uses.

However its double layered honeycomb composite sandwich structure, RAS has a surprisingly high performance. -25dB in 3rd Khordads X-band. We can add another -5dB assuming optimized details beyond the capabilities of the study.

The results are a stealth performance of -15 to -30db.

This performances would create serious problems for the 3rd Khordad at the stated interception range of 22km. -15dB would be already the edge if we assume very good GaA TRM technology.
-30dB could not be handled even with best available GaN TRMs...

Either the RQ-4 is not the absorption black hole these studies hint to, or the 3rd Khordad is either somehow high performing or skips to brute force X-band vs. high performance RAS approach by using a different approach (like thermal camera guidance).



Another issue: It is possible that the RQ-4 was minimally violating Irans airspace regularly and was painted/locked by 3rd Khordads as a warning but never shot at. This would create a false sense of security and if no sensor detected the 3rd Khordad launch, it would become a ambush in which it would be suddenly hit by missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Baradaran at military.ir have found a recent study which analyses radar absorbing structure very similar to that visible from the RQ-4 wreckage.
> 
> They also found a crude, undetailed shape RCS analysis on the RQ-4.
> 
> Shaping accounts for ~ 10dB in that crude analysis. We can assume a magnitude better performance if the model had higher definition shaping, hence 0 dB. Shaping is obviously not the greatest stealth technique the RQ-4 uses.
> 
> However its double layered honeycomb composite sandwich structure, RAS has a surprisingly high performance. -25dB in 3rd Khordads X-band. We can add another -5dB assuming optimized details beyond the capabilities of the study.
> 
> The results are a stealth performance of -15 to -30db.
> 
> This performances would create serious problems for the 3rd Khordad at the stated interception range of 22km. -15dB would be already the edge if we assume very good GaA TRM technology.
> -30dB could not be handled even with best available GaN TRMs...
> 
> Either the RQ-4 is not the absorption black hole these studies hint to, or the 3rd Khordad is either somehow high performing or skips to brute force X-band vs. high performance RAS approach by using a different approach (like thermal camera guidance).
> 
> 
> 
> Another issue: It is possible that the RQ-4 was minimally violating Irans airspace regularly and was painted/locked by 3rd Khordads as a warning but never shot at. This would create a false sense of security and if no sensor detected the 3rd Khordad launch, it would become a ambush in which it would be suddenly hit by missile.



Many sources now say it was flying at 22,000 (even PRESS TV). Given that this basically uses a jet engine and zero effort made to hide engine exhaust/cool it then infrared system would be able to pick it up similar to RQ-170.

Furthermore, a RCS of -30dB seems way to optimistic. That puts it a tad shy of F-35 territory.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WinterNights

TheImmortal said:


> Many sources now say it was flying at 22,000 (even PRESS TV). Given that this basically uses a jet engine and zero effort made to hide engine exhaust/cool it then infrared system would be able to pick it up similar to RQ-170.
> 
> Furthermore, a RCS of -30dB seems way to optimistic. That puts it a tad shy of F-35 territory.



No, the the IRGC confirmed it was flying at above 50,000 feet. They also said it was because of this fact the UAV could turn its transponder off etc. This is true because it is illegal for a flying object like fighter jets, UAV to turn it communication systems off if it's flying within height that civilian planes fly in.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

WinterNights said:


> No, the the IRGC confirmed it was flying at above 50,000 feet. They also said it was because of this fact the UAV could turn its transponder off etc. This is true because it is illegal for a flying object like fighter jets, UAV to turn it communication systems off if it's flying within height that civilian planes fly in.



Both US military and IRGC have incentive to lie. 

Either way this drone should be able to be detected by thermals similar to how RQ-170 was tracked.


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Baradaran at military.ir have found a recent study which analyses radar absorbing structure very similar to that visible from the RQ-4 wreckage.
> 
> They also found a crude, undetailed shape RCS analysis on the RQ-4.
> 
> Shaping accounts for ~ 10dB in that crude analysis. We can assume a magnitude better performance if the model had higher definition shaping, hence 0 dB. Shaping is obviously not the greatest stealth technique the RQ-4 uses.
> 
> However its double layered honeycomb composite sandwich structure, RAS has a surprisingly high performance. -25dB in 3rd Khordads X-band. We can add another -5dB assuming optimized details beyond the capabilities of the study.
> 
> The results are a stealth performance of -15 to -30db.
> 
> This performances would create serious problems for the 3rd Khordad at the stated interception range of 22km. -15dB would be already the edge if we assume very good GaA TRM technology.
> -30dB could not be handled even with best available GaN TRMs...
> 
> Either the RQ-4 is not the absorption black hole these studies hint to, or the 3rd Khordad is either somehow high performing or skips to brute force X-band vs. high performance RAS approach by using a different approach (like thermal camera guidance).
> 
> 
> 
> Another issue: It is possible that the RQ-4 was minimally violating Irans airspace regularly and was painted/locked by 3rd Khordads as a warning but never shot at. This would create a false sense of security and if no sensor detected the 3rd Khordad launch, it would become a ambush in which it would be suddenly hit by missile.



Well they are only going based on sections of the recovered structure not the entire aircraft with sensors and all....

Iran also video taped the launch with missile pointed directly at them so clearly this was no accident... 

One of the reason why the U.S. would purposely wanna fly on the edge of Iranian Airspace so close that their rout puts them in and out of Iranian Air Space regularly would be to aggravate Iranian Air Defense and to get them to turn on various targeting equipment across the boarder so they can attempt to locate them and that's probably why they had 3 surveillance aircrafts up..... And I believe Iran would know that and so it's reaction would likely be based on that fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> Many sources now say it was flying at 22,000 (even PRESS TV). Given that this basically uses a jet engine and zero effort made to hide engine exhaust/cool it then infrared system would be able to pick it up similar to RQ-170.
> 
> Furthermore, a RCS of -30dB seems way to optimistic. That puts it a tad shy of F-35 territory.



Well maybe you should check sources directly from the IRGC because those are the guys who had a lock on it and shot it down and they say +51,000ft!!!

-30 dB is about the least of what an F-117 & F-35 put out under perfect conditions! -40 decibels for an F-22 again in the best of conditions (flying at the most optimal angle (altitude to range) towards the radar,...…) and it's never a constant dB. But with 3rd of Khordad with a early warning system backing them up at lower frequencies will give the 3rd of Khordad S-band search radar a general direction to search at various altitudes and that should be enough to give a general direction to point your targeting radar towards for a focused beam. 

So maybe by it's self -30 dB may be to low for the 3rd of Khordad to detect during its standard search but with the assistance of other systems that will change. And it's seldom that you'll get your lowest and most optimal and least dB output in combat conditions. 

But your right with sensors and all while flying at 51,000ft there is no way the dB of the RQ-4 would even go below -10db

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


> Well maybe you should check sources directly from the IRGC because those are the guys who had a lock on it and shot it down and they say +51,000ft!!!
> 
> -30 dB is about the least of what an F-117 & F-35 put out under perfect conditions! -40 decibels for an F-22 again in the best of conditions (flying at the most optimal angle (altitude to range) towards the radar,...…) and it's never a constant dB. But with 3rd of Khordad with a early warning system backing them up at lower frequencies will give the 3rd of Khordad S-band search radar a general direction to search at various altitudes and that should be enough to give a general direction to point your targeting radar towards for a focused beam.
> 
> So maybe by it's self -30 dB may be to low for the 3rd of Khordad to detect during its standard search but with the assistance of other systems that will change. And it's seldom that you'll get your lowest and most optimal and least dB output in combat conditions.
> 
> But your right with sensors and all while flying at 51,000ft there is no way the dB of the RQ-4 would even go below -10db


Based on what you say, then the 3rd Khordad system would not be very effective against stealth fighters when the telecommunications have been jammed. I mean if it can't get the coordinates from the central search radar then it is left with its own search capacity which may not be enough. 

Seems like 15th Khordad is a better design for Iran's mosaic doctrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

What @VEVAK describes may be applied to the Bavar-373 and the reason why it can remain effective while lacking brute force power of the S-400.

The concept is basically that your battery has a starring S-band (or lower) asset such as the known Bavar-373 acquisition radar. Then the X-band engagement radar just illuminates/paints the target coordinates provided by the acquisition radar. The reflected RF energy or even scattered RF energy by stealth shaping is then received by the SARH seeker creating effectively a bi-static system.

Benefits are clear:
- About +20dB worse stealth performance against the starring S-band acquisition radar due to lower band and reduced RAM/RAS performance.
- No lock with receive signal required for the X-band engagement radar to perform the engagement.
- B-static endgame homing potentially receiving stealth scatters RF energy reflected away from the X-band engagement radar.

I agree to @TheImmortal point that -30dB for the RQ-4 are unrealistic in practice. However if this is the case, coupling a 3rd Khordad battery or rather battalion to a Najm-802B could let it work like a mini-Bavar-373 against stealth targets.
I also want to make clear that the 3rd Khordad is a pioneering system: Same as the IRGC Najm allowed IRIADF 15th Khordad, the 3rd Khordad is the first X-band phased array ESA and likely is the basis for the Bavar-373 X-Band engagement radar.
The important point is that the RQ-4 takes the role of the Tacit Blue (JSTARS) in many ways: It is very expensive and important for the war fighting capability of the U.S. Making it survivable at the edge of contested airspace should be very important to it. Its stealth performance may well be higher than people want to believe, in turn meaning its kill is a much bigger issue than people think.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980410000244

IRGC Commander: Iran Ranks 12th in World in Radar Production







TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh underlined Iran's high capabilities in production of defensive products, adding that the country ranks 12th in the world in manufacturing radars.
"Iran at presents stands on the 12th position among the 20 countries which build radars and this success has been gained in 13 years," General Hajizadeh said on Sunday.

He added that one of the main goals of the development of radars is detecting stealth planes, adding that Iran has built radars for low cross-section flying objects which could detect and intercept Israeli Hermes drone among thousands of airplanes passing over the Iranian sky.

General Hajizadeh referred to the past and recent downing of a US spy drones over the Iranian airspace, and said, "Today Iran is in possession of the largest collection of US drones."

"Although the Americans' presence in the region is harmful, it makes us test our air defense and radar systems and this is a cost that the Americans should pay for their presence in the region," he added.

The IRGC shot down a US Navy MQ-4C Triton drone that had entered Iranian airspace in the Persian Gulf region to gather intelligence on June 20, using Sevom Khordad indigenous surface-to-air missile system.

The United States had confirmed that one of its reconnaissance planes was shot down by Iranian air defenses, but denied that it intruded into Tehran’s airspace at the time.

General Hajizadeh said that his forces could have shot down a US P8 aircraft with 35 on board which was violating Iran’s airspace, but decided to shoot down the drone to only send a message to Washington.

“We intended to send a message to American terrorists in the region,” Brigadier General Hajizadeh said, adding that his forces had also traced a military P8 aircraft violating the airspace of Iran.

“Along with the American drone was an American P8 aircraft with 35 on board, and it was also violating our airspace and we could have downed it too,” he said, adding, “But we did not do (shoot down) it, because our aim was to warn the terrorist forces of the US.”

General Hajizadeh also stressed on Saturday that Iran was not after war but was fully ready to defend itself, adding that the fate of the downed US spy drone was waiting for any intruding flying object.

“Our response to anything trespassing Iranian territory is like this, and if such acts of aggression are repeated, our response will also be the same," General Hajizadeh said.

“We don’t embrace war but we are ready to fully defend the country,” he said.

"We possess a collection of US drones which is a proof that US has violated Iran’s airspace and shows that they don’t want to respect the international law,” General Hajizadeh said.

“If such an aggression is repeated, we will add other US (military) products to complete this collection,” he noted.

“The US measure was in violation of international law and we acted according to our legitimate responsibility,” General Hajizadeh said, adding, “It is possible that a US general or some operators were behind this American aggression, we don’t know that. But that measure (intruding into Iranian airspace) is a violation of international aviation rules by a spy drone which then received our natural response."

Some hours after the incident, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that his country had retrieved parts of the US drone that was shot down from the country's territorial waters, rejecting Washington's claim that the aircraft was targeted in international waters.

"(The) US drone took off from UAE in stealth mode and violated Iranian airspace," Zarif wrote on Twitter, adding that the drone "was targeted near... Kouh-e Mobarak" region in the Central district of Jask in Hormuzgan province after the aircraft violated Iran's airspace.

Zarif even provided the coordinates where the US aircraft was intercepted, and added, "We've retrieved sections of the US military drone in OUR territorial waters where it was shot down."

In an earlier tweet, Zarif stated that Iran "will take this US new aggression to (the) UN and show that the US is lying about international waters".

The Iranian foreign minister noted that Tehran does not want war, "but will zealously defend our skies, land and waters".

Meantime, IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami stressed that the move should alert Washington officials to stay away.

The incident sent "a clear message" to the US and other enemies that Iran will show a firm and crushing response to any aggression, he stated.

"Borders are our red lines and any enemy which violates them will not go back home and will be annihilated. The only way for enemies is to respect Iran's territorial integrity and national interests," the major general noted.


1. U.S.A
2. Russia
3. China
4. France
5. Israel
6. UK
7. Sweden
8. Japan
9. Netherlands
10. Italy
11. Germany
*12. Iran
...*
India, Belarus, Taiwan, Ukraine, Turkey, South Korea, North Korea, Czech, Poland,

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Arsalan 345

I think pakistan should also try Irani Sam systems.what is the best and latest Sam system that Iran possess?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980410000244
> 
> 
> 
> "Iran at presents stands on the 12th position among the 20 countries which build radars and this success has been *gained in 13 years,*"



12th is not that impressive by itself, but what is very impressive is the highlighted part. Iran gained this position in a relatively short period. If Iran carries on with this pace of development in radar technology, we can be in top 5 without a doubt.



Arsalan 345 said:


> I think pakistan should also try Irani Sam systems.what is the best and latest Sam system that Iran possess?



Iran has many advanced SAM systems. If I were Pakistan, I would try and get the Iranian 3rd of khordad system. That is the system that Iran used to down the Triton. It's a very mobile air defence with mid-long range, low footpring, AESA radars etc. It would be a nightmare for Pakistan's enemies.

Whether Iran will sell it or not is a different issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Arsalan 345 said:


> I think pakistan should also try Irani Sam systems.what is the best and latest Sam system that Iran possess?


And unlike USA there will be no Pre-condition for buying Iranian Arms ,

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

WinterNights said:


> 12th is not that impressive by itself, but what is very impressive is the highlighted part. Iran gained this position in a relatively short period. If Iran carries on with this pace of development in radar technology, we can be in top 5 without a doubt.



The 13 years is one point. Another is Irans restricted access to cooperation, tool, technology and even access to COTS hardware.
With the current pace, a rank among the top 7 is well possible in the next years.
UK, Sweden, Japan, Netherlands, Italy, Germany also rely very much on European-wide or US support.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980410000244
> 
> IRGC Commander: Iran Ranks 12th in World in Radar Production
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh underlined Iran's high capabilities in production of defensive products, adding that the country ranks 12th in the world in manufacturing radars.
> "Iran at presents stands on the 12th position among the 20 countries which build radars and this success has been gained in 13 years," General Hajizadeh said on Sunday.
> 
> He added that one of the main goals of the development of radars is detecting stealth planes, adding that Iran has built radars for low cross-section flying objects which could detect and intercept Israeli Hermes drone among thousands of airplanes passing over the Iranian sky.
> 
> General Hajizadeh referred to the past and recent downing of a US spy drones over the Iranian airspace, and said, "Today Iran is in possession of the largest collection of US drones."
> 
> "Although the Americans' presence in the region is harmful, it makes us test our air defense and radar systems and this is a cost that the Americans should pay for their presence in the region," he added.
> 
> The IRGC shot down a US Navy MQ-4C Triton drone that had entered Iranian airspace in the Persian Gulf region to gather intelligence on June 20, using Sevom Khordad indigenous surface-to-air missile system.
> 
> The United States had confirmed that one of its reconnaissance planes was shot down by Iranian air defenses, but denied that it intruded into Tehran’s airspace at the time.
> 
> General Hajizadeh said that his forces could have shot down a US P8 aircraft with 35 on board which was violating Iran’s airspace, but decided to shoot down the drone to only send a message to Washington.
> 
> “We intended to send a message to American terrorists in the region,” Brigadier General Hajizadeh said, adding that his forces had also traced a military P8 aircraft violating the airspace of Iran.
> 
> “Along with the American drone was an American P8 aircraft with 35 on board, and it was also violating our airspace and we could have downed it too,” he said, adding, “But we did not do (shoot down) it, because our aim was to warn the terrorist forces of the US.”
> 
> General Hajizadeh also stressed on Saturday that Iran was not after war but was fully ready to defend itself, adding that the fate of the downed US spy drone was waiting for any intruding flying object.
> 
> “Our response to anything trespassing Iranian territory is like this, and if such acts of aggression are repeated, our response will also be the same," General Hajizadeh said.
> 
> “We don’t embrace war but we are ready to fully defend the country,” he said.
> 
> "We possess a collection of US drones which is a proof that US has violated Iran’s airspace and shows that they don’t want to respect the international law,” General Hajizadeh said.
> 
> “If such an aggression is repeated, we will add other US (military) products to complete this collection,” he noted.
> 
> “The US measure was in violation of international law and we acted according to our legitimate responsibility,” General Hajizadeh said, adding, “It is possible that a US general or some operators were behind this American aggression, we don’t know that. But that measure (intruding into Iranian airspace) is a violation of international aviation rules by a spy drone which then received our natural response."
> 
> Some hours after the incident, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that his country had retrieved parts of the US drone that was shot down from the country's territorial waters, rejecting Washington's claim that the aircraft was targeted in international waters.
> 
> "(The) US drone took off from UAE in stealth mode and violated Iranian airspace," Zarif wrote on Twitter, adding that the drone "was targeted near... Kouh-e Mobarak" region in the Central district of Jask in Hormuzgan province after the aircraft violated Iran's airspace.
> 
> Zarif even provided the coordinates where the US aircraft was intercepted, and added, "We've retrieved sections of the US military drone in OUR territorial waters where it was shot down."
> 
> In an earlier tweet, Zarif stated that Iran "will take this US new aggression to (the) UN and show that the US is lying about international waters".
> 
> The Iranian foreign minister noted that Tehran does not want war, "but will zealously defend our skies, land and waters".
> 
> Meantime, IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami stressed that the move should alert Washington officials to stay away.
> 
> The incident sent "a clear message" to the US and other enemies that Iran will show a firm and crushing response to any aggression, he stated.
> 
> "Borders are our red lines and any enemy which violates them will not go back home and will be annihilated. The only way for enemies is to respect Iran's territorial integrity and national interests," the major general noted.
> 
> 
> 1. U.S.A
> 2. Russia
> 3. China
> 4. France
> 5. Israel
> 6. UK
> 7. Sweden
> 8. Japan
> 9. Netherlands
> 10. Italy
> 11. Germany
> *12. Iran
> ...*
> India, Belarus, Taiwan, Ukraine, Turkey, South Korea, North Korea, Czech, Poland,


What is the ranking based on? Quantity of production or technology ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Arsalan 345 said:


> I think pakistan should also try Irani Sam systems.what is the best and latest Sam system that Iran possess?



well our absolut best are 

1. *Bavar_373 *long range SAM ( 200 km missile range maybe more ) better then *S300 PMU 2*
















2. *15th of Khordad *mid*_*lang range SAM ( 75 KM and 120 km missile range )
*









*




3. *Talash 3 *long range SAM ( 120 km missile range )

















4. *Talash 2* mid range SAM ( 75 km missile range )















5. 3th of Khordad mid_long range extremely mobile SAM ( 75 KM and 105 km missile range )

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

PeeD said:


> The 13 years is one point. Another is Irans restricted access to cooperation, tool, technology and even access to COTS hardware.
> With the current pace, a rank among the top 7 is well possible in the next years.
> UK, Sweden, Japan, Netherlands, Italy, Germany also rely very much on European-wide or US support.



My apologies ahead of time for even asking the following but this story of the supposed Israeli F-35 'Adir' incursion into Iranian airspace subsequently circling around multiple different Iranian cities whilst never even being seen, comes around every so often and I usually dismiss it as low-ball propaganda. But I wondered if maybe you can give us a more detailed explanation as to why such a scenario is just not feasible (at least this is what I think to be case). 

Link to article:https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...5-stealth-fighters-had-violated-iran-airspace

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

BlueInGreen2 said:


> My apologies ahead of time for even asking the following but this story of the supposed Israeli F-35 'Adir' incursion into Iranian airspace subsequently circling around multiple different Iranian cities whilst never even being seen, comes around every so often and I usually dismiss it as low-ball propaganda. But I wondered if maybe you can give us a more detailed explanation as to why such a scenario is just not feasible (at least this is what I think to be case).
> Link to article:https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...5-stealth-fighters-had-violated-iran-airspace




It's impossible, since F-35 physically unable to fly over such distances. 
This is max combat range of Israeli F-35 only with AA weapon in internal bays from official info of Lockheed Martin. As we can see, in reality, F-35 from Israel able to reach only the most western regions of Iran. F-35 cannot even fly direct to Tehran if he wants to return. Therefore, the route announced in such articles through Tehran-Isfahan-Shiraz-Bender-Abbas it's a non-scientific fiction.
http://www.fisher.org.il/2016/Adir Powepoint/GaryNorth.pdf#page=7

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WinterNights

BlueInGreen2 said:


> My apologies ahead of time for even asking the following but this story of the supposed Israeli F-35 'Adir' incursion into Iranian airspace subsequently circling around multiple different Iranian cities whilst never even being seen, comes around every so often and I usually dismiss it as low-ball propaganda. But I wondered if maybe you can give us a more detailed explanation as to why such a scenario is just not feasible (at least this is what I think to be case).
> 
> Link to article:https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...5-stealth-fighters-had-violated-iran-airspace



This fantasy story was debunked already many times. It was a fake story made by some Kuwaitis.

For one, Esmaili was not fired, he was promoted for god sakes  He is now the assistant commander of Iran Army! 

It seems the Khameni is very impressed with him and they're preparing him for something big.

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/134524/Brig-Gen-Esmaili-named-assistant-commander-of-Iran-Army

As for technical discussion, this plane cannot even reach Iran nevermind the fact Iran would detect it *easily *if it was anywhere near its airspace. "stealth" just means a plane would have to be relatively closer to the radar to be detected compared to lets say a 4th gen planes , once they get close enough, their "stealth" is gone. Having said that, Iran can detect such planes 100's of miles outside its airspace using it's long wavelength radars. People need to realise *detecting* such planes is easy. Targeting/locking on to them is more difficult but still very doable.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Based on what you say, then the 3rd Khordad system would not be very effective against stealth fighters when the telecommunications have been jammed. I mean if it can't get the coordinates from the central search radar then it is left with its own search capacity which may not be enough.
> 
> Seems like 15th Khordad is a better design for Iran's mosaic doctrine.



It depends on how far your target is, the terrain, how many systems you have, how well hidden they can remain & how fast they can go operational and how well trained your crews are... 
But yes 3rd of Khordad by it's self would have trouble against stealth aircraft for example even flying at an attitude 3000ft as close as ~60km away due to the curvature of the earth a fighter with an RCS as small as a golf ball would be beyond the capabilities of the 3rd of khordad even if you knew exactly where to search and that number only worsens depending on the terrain and weather conditions. And if your out there searching rather than laying in wait for an ambush the American will have the capability to hit you long before you can find and hit them.

This doesn't mean the system isn't effective, it is but as long as you know how to properly use it & it's proper use is with other systems and I'm pretty sure Iran knows that the main way you use a system like that is to lay in wait in hiding until the enemy gets close enough where with the assistance of other systems you can go radar on, get a lock, fire & hit your target in under a min then pack up and move back into hiding. Short of that American fighter jets wouldn't be coming into our territory to be used as target practice they are coming for war & they have well trained pilots equipped with far more advanced sensors and equipment than we do. Which also mean due to Iran's lack of proper Air Power such systems would have to be deployed in mass due to our terrain & we have to be prepared to take on heavy losses.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

Has Iran actually received 4 battalions of S-300PMU 2? Apparently the actual delivered numbers is less than it, even if we include the first unit delivered before sanctions, which was most probably PMU1 version. I suspect the units in Syria are actually Iranian orders.


----------



## PeeD

BlueInGreen2 said:


> My apologies ahead of time for even asking the following but this story of the supposed Israeli F-35 'Adir' incursion into Iranian airspace subsequently circling around multiple different Iranian cities whilst never even being seen, comes around every so often and I usually dismiss it as low-ball propaganda. But I wondered if maybe you can give us a more detailed explanation as to why such a scenario is just not feasible (at least this is what I think to be case).
> 
> Link to article:https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...5-stealth-fighters-had-violated-iran-airspace



The good thing about fighter jets are their vast tactical uses, more so in non high-intensity was scenarios.
Israeli F-15 used U.S IIF codes to be mistaken as USAF F-15s and attacked from a totally unexpected vector.
Israeli special mission drones operated form Azerbaijan.

So the biggest issue, the range limitation, of the F-35 could have been solved via a disguised in flight refueling or cooperation from Irans enemies (USAF tanker, Saudi tanker, Bahrain or Azerbaijan airbases, airliner IIF codes)


That's the tactical toolbox they can play with.

From Irans side there are also limitations: If the IADS is not in alarm state of an incoming conflict, many of its assets will not be active. Emission control (to keep system signature, capability and position secret) and MTBF issues with especially gap fillers will keep them off, in situations like today's tension level.
Hence the IADS operates at around 25% of its nominal capability.

Knowing this another tool is created for the Israelis: If they know which systems are off and carefully study the terrain, they can use masking and radar horizon effects to plan a flight profile that avoids Irans IADS assets to its best and allows higher level flight, where possible, to increase range performance.

Ok, so this is the situation. Such a situation lead a small prop aircraft to intrude into highly dense Soviet airspace and land in Moscow at the end of the cold war. Back then Soviet IADS was at an impressively high state, their terrain was almost flat (almost no terrain masking possible), and the prop aircraft had no intel on best possible flight path. They eventually detected it and has issues with justifying a shot down of a civilian aircraft but the PR damage to their capability was done.

So this is the situation.
If I'm asked, I would say yes it is possible if the Israelis did their best use of all those tactics.
Would it be possible above Tehran, Shiraz and Esfahan? A clear no.
Would it have any added value which space based assets would not provide? Doubtful.
Would it be a representative display of Irans war-sate IADS capability? Absolutely not.
Would it create a psychological effect on IADS professionals? No. On amateurs? Likely.
Would it be possible if Irans next generation OTHR assets become available? Almost impossible.

Do I think Israelis are confident and brave enough to risk such a operation? I doubt that: Many Iranian IADS capabilities are unknown, sudden appearance of a mobile system somewhere or non-Radar IR assets, all could lead to a catastrophic end.
Clean F-35 stealth performance is simply not good enough, neither its range/speed performance to make such a mission justifiably robust. But maybe they had excellent planning´, excellent intel, support from Irans enemies, very brave/PR-blinded pilots and ready to risk it.
So I don't exclude it on regions around Irans periphery.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> The good thing about fighter jets are their vast tactical uses, more so in non high-intensity was scenarios.
> Israeli F-15 used U.S IIF codes to be mistaken as USAF F-15s and attacked from a totally unexpected vector.
> Israeli special mission drones operated form Azerbaijan.
> 
> So the biggest issue, the range limitation, of the F-35 could have been solved via a disguised in flight refueling or cooperation from Irans enemies (USAF tanker, Saudi tanker, Bahrain or Azerbaijan airbases, airliner IIF codes)
> 
> 
> That's the tactical toolbox they can play with.
> 
> From Irans side there are also limitations: If the IADS is not in alarm state of an incoming conflict, many of its assets will not be active. Emission control (to keep system signature, capability and position secret) and MTBF issues with especially gap fillers will keep them off, in situations like today's tension level.
> Hence the IADS operates at around 25% of its nominal capability.
> 
> Knowing this another tool is created for the Israelis: If they know which systems are off and carefully study the terrain, they can use masking and radar horizon effects to plan a flight profile that avoids Irans IADS assets to its best and allows higher level flight, where possible, to increase range performance.
> 
> Ok, so this is the situation. Such a situation lead a small prop aircraft to intrude into highly dense Soviet airspace and land in Moscow at the end of the cold war. Back then Soviet IADS was at an impressively high state, their terrain was almost flat (almost no terrain masking possible), and the prop aircraft had no intel on best possible flight path. They eventually detected it and has issues with justifying a shot down of a civilian aircraft but the PR damage to their capability was done.
> 
> So this is the situation.
> If I'm asked, I would say yes it is possible if the Israelis did their best use of all those tactics.
> Would it be possible above Tehran, Shiraz and Esfahan? A clear no.
> Would it have any added value which space based assets would not provide? Doubtful.
> Would it be a representative display of Irans war-sate IADS capability? Absolutely not.
> Would it create a psychological effect on IADS professionals? No. On amateurs? Likely.
> Would it be possible if Irans next generation OTHR assets become available? Almost impossible.
> 
> Do I think Israelis are confident and brave enough to risk such a operation? I doubt that: Many Iranian IADS capabilities are unknown, sudden appearance of a mobile system somewhere or non-Radar IR assets, all could lead to a catastrophic end.
> Clean F-35 stealth performance is simply not good enough, neither its range/speed performance to make such a mission justifiably robust. But maybe they had excellent planning´, excellent intel, support from Irans enemies, very brave/PR-blinded pilots and ready to risk it.
> So I don't exclude it on regions around Irans periphery.


I think the question is what would they gain from such a great risk? Yes if they have destroyed a valuable target, then yes it would BA great PR and a big adverse psychological effect on Iran military.

But all this risk of giving away the latest and greatest western technology to Iran to just show it can be done? I would say they are not that stupid. What if Iran would just by chance detect it and shoot it down? First, it would be an act of war and Iran had every right to fire its missiles. Just remember that even now in Syria, Israel doesn't risk entering Syrian airspace. Second, Iran, Russia and China could learn a lot from the remains of F35.

This just doesn't make sense. I don't believe it even if it is physically possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*building the Basir surveillance radar




























*

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Ich

WinterNights said:


> For one, Esmaili was not fired, he was promoted for god sakes  He is now the assistant commander of Iran Army!
> 
> It seems the Khameni is very impressed with him and they're preparing him for something big.
> 
> https://en.mehrnews.com/news/134524/Brig-Gen-Esmaili-named-assistant-commander-of-Iran-Army



Me would not wonder if he is also involved in new radars and behind horizon rockets for future fighterjets

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


>


Interesting ,didn't knew Mithaq-2 can do frontal attack ,that can turn it an intresting choice for for developing into a system like Pantsir

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Interesting ,didn't knew Mithaq-2 can do frontal attack ,that can turn it an intresting choice for for developing into a system like Pantsir



yes it was pretty cool it had the potential for Pantsir like system missile calculated target road for the frontal attack

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


>


Very interesting. Do you know what was the target?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1146047391604170752

Similar effect is being reported in Tehran. Might be IRGC testing out new equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Very interesting. Do you know what was the target?



no they did not say but it looks like a cruise missile or AA missile maybe as it had solid fuel

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OldTwilight

The best defence is offence ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Surenas

Has anyone read this 4-paged article on Iran's air defence capabilities by Tom Cooper, a renowned writer of Iran's military who previously wrote books about IRIAF's F-14 performance in the Iran-Iraq War and other aerial performances?

He claims most of Iran's recent improvements in AD capabilities have been accomplished mostly through significant Chinese assistance, although he mentions the Chinese were surprised with the Iranians having high knowledge in the AD field.

Anyway, quite an interesting read:

https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Surenas said:


> Has anyone read this 4-paged article on Iran's air defence capabilities by Tom Cooper, a renowned writer of Iran's military who previously wrote books about IRIAF's F-14 performance in the Iran-Iraq War and other aerial performances?
> 
> He claims most of Iran's recent improvements in AD capabilities have been accomplished mostly through significant Chinese assistance, although he mentions the Chinese were surprised with the Iranians having high knowledge in the AD field.
> 
> Anyway, quite an interesting read:
> 
> https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft/


Seems like laughing stage is over and now the denial phase has started.

I remember the same BS about Iran's drones and missiles too. If all Iran's AD achievements are from Chinese origin and it is so obvious as this a....hole claims, then how come US has not tried to stop it? They were pretty good at stopping S-300 delivery for a good period of time. Why can't they do it with China? 

The problem with people like this guy is they think knowledge is a limited commodity that cannot be created and just flows from one location to the other.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## PeeD

The whole 15th Khordad and IRGC Najm-SD-2 technology approach has created a door toward many important capabilities.

One such capability is countering fighters and weapons that try to achieve their goals via low altitude terrain masking, with the most important representative being the Tomahawk CM.

This issue was countered by point-defense systems on mainly AAA basis. But areal protection was not possible. If desired, an relative expensive solution like the S-350's 9M96 series was required.
Accomplishing the counter via a SAM that is much cheaper like the Sayyad-2 was not possible to ranges such as 45km.

This situation is about to change via very clever Iranian solutions, unique and sufficiently cost effective to make sense.

Just to illustrate how important such a capability is: 2 such systems with sufficient SAMs could protect Tehran-Karaj and surroundings. 2 whole South Pars gas facilities, 1 whole Persian gulf star refinery, 2 whole Esfahan military and industrial region.
These are the main reasons why even Saudi Arabia has some deterrence against Iran today: A CM saturation attack can't be sufficiently robust countered with point-defense assets.

Given the low cost of the SD-2, and this new system that is about to come, the situation will change significantly. Areal extreme low level layer protection will become a robust capability.
I won't explain the system in detail, any amateur analyst with sufficient understanding and amateur capabilities like Google earth can find out.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Sineva

Arminkh said:


> Seems like laughing stage is over and now the denial phase has started.
> 
> I remember the same BS about Iran's drones and missiles too. If all Iran's AD achievements are from Chinese origin and it is so obvious as this a....hole claims, then how come US has not tried to stop it? They were pretty good at stopping S-300 delivery for a good period of time. Why can't they do it with China?
> 
> The problem with people like this guy is they think knowledge is a limited commodity that cannot be created and just flows from one location to the other.


Yes,its a rather "inaccurate" article to put it mildly,which is all the more surprising as tom cooper was considered to be one of the most knowledgeable westerners when it came to the iriaf and its performance during the iran iraq war.
Iran has acquired some chinese radars and at least one,the ylc-6,was likely built under license as the kashef,tho the iranians have pretty heavily reengineered it.
Heres the original:





And heres the latest iranian version the kashef 2:




One of the most obvious bits of iranian reengineering is the antenna which can now fold flat:




And heres a video of the kashef 2.
https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/v...514365_n.mp4?_nc_ht=scontent.cdninstagram.com

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> I won't explain the system in detail, any amateur analyst with sufficient understanding and amateur capabilities like Google earth can find out.



so you can easily explain it too all of us, we are eager to read it, thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Many years back (more than 20)..I met an Iranian engineer who was educated in a western country doing his PHD in the field of Radar...he was a very modest and unassuming fellow but his knowledge of Radar and related topics blew my mind off....he was a religious man and was on his way back to Iran... I recall thinking that with guys like him it will not take long for Iran to have some level of indigenous radar products... well Mr Tom Cooper that guy and many others like him are the ones who brought down your most advanced stealth drone at 51000 feet with a mobile AD...so Fu..ck off and start recalculating!.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

Arminkh said:


> Seems like laughing stage is over and now the denial phase has started.
> 
> I remember the same BS about Iran's drones and missiles too. If all Iran's AD achievements are from Chinese origin and it is so obvious as this a....hole claims, then how come US has not tried to stop it? They were pretty good at stopping S-300 delivery for a good period of time. Why can't they do it with China?
> 
> The problem with people like this guy is they think knowledge is a limited commodity that cannot be created and just flows from one location to the other.


Russia transferred physical equipment, China is transferring intellectual equipment. US cant stop every secret action between 2 states. You think US is God?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TruthHurtz

The reasonable conclusion is that much of the recent advances in Iranian radars and AD systems is due to a combination of reverse engineering, espionage, back-door deals with Russia/China/etc as well as indigenous Iranian efforts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hassan Al-Somal

Myself said:


> As stated before by Peed and me, Iran’s big jump in AD system wouldn’t be feasible without detailed technical support of Belarus. Of course China and Russia supported Iranian attempts, by selling various types of radars and transferring some know-how, but what Belarus did has been unique considering the “size (not physical size)” of the country. It is very interesting that in the recent documentary entitled as “War of the Waves or Battle of Radars (whichever reads better)” the only country name which is instinctively and all of a sudden mentioned by the Iranian Radar Scientist is Belarus, when he wanted to compare Radar coverage for Iran with other States!
> On the other hand, absorption of such know-how and mass production of these transferred technologies wouldn’t be possible unless Iran had the brains and required talents within its defence industry and research centers.



Guys, seriously, why do Iranians release so much information about their systems and partner countries in their efforts? Even in the recent oil embargo against Iranian oil, I was astonished to hear an Iranian official claiming they're selling oil through unofficial channels, some of it through third-party countries. This was basically giving hints to their opponents. *Iran is in critical stage at this point*, and Iranians inside and outside the country may need to be tightlipped on their systems and partner countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Hassan Al-Somal said:


> Guys, seriously, why do Iranians release so much information about their systems and partner countries in their efforts? Even in the recent oil embargo against Iranian oil, I was astonished to hear an Iranian official claiming they're selling oil through unofficial channels, some of it through third-party countries. This was basically giving hints to their opponents. *Iran is in critical stage at this point*, and Iranians inside and outside the country may need to be tightlipped on their systems and partner countries.



Because intelligence agencies already know through various means. Thus anything they say they feel is not top secert or their enemy likely already knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Hopefully repeat of part 2:
Channel Mostanad 19:00

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Just found a very interesting comparison pic between the mechanically scanned radar versions of the buk and 3rd khordad sams.




Not exactly twins.....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Just found a very interesting comparison pic between the mechanically scanned radar versions of the buk and 3rd khordad sams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not exactly twins.....



cool bro, but that's Tabbas SAM not 3th Khordad SAM

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Sineva said:


> Just found a very interesting comparison pic between the mechanically scanned radar versions of the buk and 3rd khordad sams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not exactly twins.....


No you got it wrong. The vehicle is Russian. The know how is partly Chinese and partly Indian. The components are American. Everything is then integrated using Israeli double spies. Molla iranians served ab goosht.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar

Sineva said:


> Just found a very interesting comparison pic between the mechanically scanned radar versions of the buk and 3rd khordad sams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not exactly twins.....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> cool bro, but that's Tabbas SAM not 3th Khordad SAM


My bad,I can never seem to keep up with the name changes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

کدوم پیشرفته تره؟


----------



## SOHEIL

Surenas said:


> Has anyone read this 4-paged article on Iran's air defence capabilities by Tom Cooper, a renowned writer of Iran's military who previously wrote books about IRIAF's F-14 performance in the Iran-Iraq War and other aerial performances?
> 
> He claims most of Iran's recent improvements in AD capabilities have been accomplished mostly through significant Chinese assistance, although he mentions the Chinese were surprised with the Iranians having high knowledge in the AD field.
> 
> Anyway, quite an interesting read:
> 
> https://warisboring.com/iran-is-building-air-defenses-against-stealth-aircraft/



Tom Cooper proved to be a lier ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Raghfarm007

I always wondered about Tom Cooper..... we are to believe that Iran opened up its military secrets to an Austrian blogger?!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

.


Sineva said:


> My bad,I can never seem to keep up with the name changes.


 no worries yes we are crazy when it comes to names.



Raghfarm007 said:


> کدوم پیشرفته تره؟


طبس و بعدشم سوم خرداد که از هر دوتاشون پیشرفته تره

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Raghfarm007 said:


> I always wondered about Tom Cooper..... we are to believe that Iran opened up its military secrets to an Austrian blogger?!!!



He squeezed stories out of anus !

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

Satellite imagery of an IRGC air defense site located west Tehran consisting of HQ-2 and 3 Tabas TELAR










The main mission of this 23 mm air defensive gun is for the protection of strategic, political, economical centers and military fortifications against threats such as; cruise missiles, helicopters, unmanned aircrafts, and air to surface missiles at short ranges and low altitudes.

This low altitude air defensive system includes 8 sets of mechanized twin - barrel 23 mm guns , one set of optical passive fire control , a power supply for making thrust and one set of 3D search-radar system.

This radar system is able to identify air targets up to a distance of 20 km, 20 targets at one time and choose the most dangerous one and directing the data to fire control system.

Fire control of this defensive system at first step tracks down targets at the distance of 10 km then by collecting the entire data about its distance and surrounding conditions, will calculate the coordination of that target and become ready to fire once the target is placed at a distance of 1500 to 2500 meters.

PIC: 
000250

















This 8-barrel system is an integration of “chassis & electric system of one 35mm gun” and a number of “4 pieces of twin-barrel 23 mm guns” that is equipped with “one 3D seeker radar”, “one smart fire control unit” and “one set of power supply” for supplying the required energy.

This system utilizing advanced photography sensors and processing the acquired data is able to identify all air targets up to the height of 20 km regardless of being day or night then by conducting complicated calculations, predicts the target’s trajectory and shoot towards that target in the end by estimation of its next position.

By connecting to units of fire control (FCU), electro-optic and Sky Guard while having high agility and an acceptable fire volume this has increased the accuracy of the system in firing through reduction of shots diffusion.

PIC: 
000251

















This twin barrel defensive system is an automatic version that identifies and tracks down all air targets at low and medium altitudes by use of Sky Guard radar.

Then by applying the acquired data, fire control unit calculates shooting angular coordinates and make the system ready to automatically hit down the intended target by salvo fire of 1100 shots per minute.

This system has been designed for protection of strategic, political, economical and military centres against air raids by i.e cruise missiles, helicopters, unmanned aircrafts, fighters and air to surface missiles up to 3000 meters altitude.

PIC: 
000252

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

*House approves measure to block Trump from launching military strike against Iran*

*https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...support-saudi-arabia-war-in-yemen/1708612001/*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *House approves measure to block Trump from launching military strike against Iran*
> 
> *https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...support-saudi-arabia-war-in-yemen/1708612001/*


I think they should have tried adding Bolton's name to the bill too. I never believed Trump was looking for a war with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> I think they should have tried adding Bolton's name to the bill too. I never believed Trump was looking for a war with Iran.



and Mike Pompeo they are heavily influenced by Israel

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

Lebanon's Seyed Hassan Nasrallah hints his country could be in possession of anti-aircraft systems.







*دبیرکل حزب الله لبنان یادآور شد: چه کسی می گوید ما دارای موشک پدافند هوایی هستیم و چه کسی می گوید ما آنها را داریم؟ ما در این زمینه اطلاعات را آشکار نمی کنیم.*
*
https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/432026...رش-نامه-ترامپ-از-سوی-رهبر-ایران-غرورآفرین-بود*








so what do you guys think, do they have them or not? what kind of SAM do you think they have?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> Lebanon's Seyed Hassan Nasrallah hints his country could be in possession of anti-aircraft systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *دبیرکل حزب الله لبنان یادآور شد: چه کسی می گوید ما دارای موشک پدافند هوایی هستیم و چه کسی می گوید ما آنها را داریم؟ ما در این زمینه اطلاعات را آشکار نمی کنیم.
> 
> https://fa.alalamtv.net/news/4320266/امکان-بازگشت-اسرائیل-به-عصر-حجر-با-موشک-های-مقاومت-مخالفت-ایران-با-معامله-قرن-یعنی-ناکامی-آن-جنگ-با-ایران-پرهزینه-است-عدم-پذیرش-نامه-ترامپ-از-سوی-رهبر-ایران-غرورآفرین-بود*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so what do you guys think, do they have them or not? what kind of SAM do you think they have?


passive guidance ones i guess. ya zahra, raad IN-RED version and maybe some of raad/3rd khordad ones. static systems do not make sense for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Short ranges and mountains involved make an effective airdefense system for Hezbollah difficult. Plus ECM capabilities of the Israelis further complicates things...

I would recommend this: Seraj passive TI "radar" plus the active radar seeker variant of the SD-2 launched from a single launch container van.
- No emission
- lowest possible footprint
- high engagement altitude
- can use Syrian IADS information

The problem with this is, that self-defense ECM and decoys are effecive against ARH SAM... hence it is mainly useful for sudden ambushes.

All other systems have emissions or can be countered by higher altitude.

I'm quite sure the Hezbollah has this capability.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Short ranges and mountains involved make an effective airdefense system for Hezbollah difficult. Plus ECM capabilities of the Israelis further complicates things...
> 
> I would recommend this: Seraj passive TI "radar" plus the active radar seeker variant of the SD-2 launched from a single launch container van.
> - No emission
> - lowest possible footprint
> - high engagement altitude
> - can use Syrian IADS information
> 
> The problem with this is, that self-defense ECM and decoys are effecive against ARH SAM... hence it is mainly useful for sudden ambushes.
> 
> All other systems have emissions or can be countered by higher altitude.
> 
> I'm quite sure the Hezbollah has this capability.





Mithridates said:


> passive guidance ones i guess. ya zahra, raad IN-RED version and maybe some of raad/3rd khordad ones. static systems do not make sense for them.




i will say its from Tabbas or 3 of Khordad family they want an shot and forget type of system that can work independent like all in one systems and the main radar can stay in place for missile to hit its target for the missile to not get distracted by decoys and i think Sayyad family has been proven that they are effective against self-defense ECM capabilities of enemy target in some extent, and then it can disappear as fast as it can. but as you said those system were not built for mountain regions in mind. or Iran has built a new system just for them it make sense for Iran to put the money and time to it


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


>



Back in 1950’s/1960’s you would had to have manned high altitude supersonic recon planes fly over to take such pictures.

Now some armchair general can sit in front of us computer and order satellite shots or use public source channels.

How far technology has come.



skyshadow said:


> i will say its from Tabbas or 3 of Khordad family they want an shot and forget type of system that can work independent like all in one systems and the main radar can stay in place for missile to hit its target for the missile to not get distracted by decoys and i think Sayyad family has been proven that they are effective against self-defense ECM capabilities of enemy target in some extent, and then it can disappear as fast as it can. but as you said those system were not built for mountain regions in mind. or Iran has built a new system just for them it make sense for Iran to put the money and time to it



They were built for mountain regions, there is a picture of a 3rd Khordad system sitting on top of a mountain!

The issue is not the system, but the opponent! Israel will use the mountain valleys to protect their plane because radar can’t go through mountains! So the system is effectively blind till the opponent “pop” ups again.

However, what HZ will do is use manpads/shoulder fired missiles and once a fighter dips into the valley the manpads will fire and then the jet if lucky will escape (if not it will get hit and go down due to low reaction time). 

If it is able to escape it will attempt to scramble higher while deploying flares/ECM, in which case it is now exposed and will then be met with a SAM.

Two pronged attack ambush.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Malik Alashter

skyshadow said:


>


Whats the name of this system


----------



## zectech

Malik Alashter said:


> Whats the name of this system



Looks like the Khordad 3 to me, but more experts from Iran will know for certain.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Malik Alashter said:


> Whats the name of this system


3rd of Khordad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Malik Alashter said:


> Whats the name of this system


3th of Khordad ( May 24 ) extremely mobile long range SAM system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Malik Alashter

this suppose to be the latest? how about 15 of khordad? which is the best?


----------



## Mithridates

Malik Alashter said:


> this suppose to be the latest? how about 15 of khordad? which is the best?


the best system gonna be bavar-373 which gonna has 300 km range and ABM capability.




sayyad-4 missile (250-300 km):

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Malik Alashter said:


> this suppose to be the latest? how about 15 of khordad? which is the best?



no its not the best but its the fastest you tell 3th of Khordad that you found a target and 5 mints later 3th of Khordad will be there lucked on the target fires a missile at the target and leaves the area, its that fast, no one will ever know where the system came in from nor will they know where did it go. 15th of Khordad is more advance but it will not be that mobile.


Bavar_373 will be our best its more powerful then S300 PMU 2

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> no its not the best but its the fastest you tell 3th of Khordad that you found a target and 5 mints later 3th of Khordad will be there lucked on the target fires a missile at the target and leaves the area, its that fast, no one will ever know where the system came in from nor will they know where did it go. 15th of Khordad is more advance but it will not be that mobile.
> 
> 
> Bavar_373 will be our best its more powerful then S300 PMU 2


when you look at the specification both 3rd Khordad and 15 khordad have the same prepration time 
but honnestly as the aircraft fly a lot faster than cars , you can't use the scenario you mentioned , you either have airdefence in the area or you don't have. the benefit of faster prepration is that after engaging enemy fighter you can change your position faster and increase the survivability of the system

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> when you look at the specification both 3rd Khordad and 15 khordad have the same prepration time
> but honnestly as the aircraft fly a lot faster than cars , you can't use the scenario you mentioned , you either have airdefence in the area or you don't have. the benefit of faster prepration is that after engaging enemy fighter you can change your position faster and increase the survivability of the system




agreed yes what i mean is that you hide your system near the borders and radars in that scenario it will work well. but 15th of Khordad is much bigger it can not work as all in one system it will bring its fire control and radars with it for that its not as mobile as 3rd Khordad.

*Iran IRGC Navy Gets pollution reduction, protection chemical, biological & radiological weapons*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*well well what do we have here*


Two weeks after U.S. Cyber Command hit Iran's command and control structure in the aftermath of the downing of a U.S. surveillance drone, *came its warning that an Iranian-led hack was targeting the millions of unpatched Microsoft Outlook systems.*
*

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdof...anger-is-keeping-us-up-at-night/#50eab8271061*

*U.S. Military Warns Outlook Users To Update Immediately Over Hack Linked To Iran*


https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdof...f-malicious-hack-linked-to-iran/#29eea31626fd

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran Installed 420 Km range TMA radar for airliners safety flying, Qom*

*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


>


What's this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

Arminkh said:


> What's this?


This is pencil-e nok tis! 

Depending on your age, you may remember what I said. Time really flies!

This can be the Big Bird early warning radar for S-300/400.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> What's this?


Its our s300 radar

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Iranian Rezonans-N OTH radar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Navigator

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1155893866194538497

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Sineva

Navigator said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1155893866194538497


Excellent post,the link to the kowsart site had a plethora of very interesting equipment on it,a great find and thank you for posting it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Very likely an iranian Nebo SVU or RLM-M equivalent,possibly reversed/reengineered based on irans Nebos.
http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1192/L-ASR4

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Performance and array size is between Irans Nebo-SVU and Nebo-M's RLM-M.

8 minutes deployment time approach shoot and scoot performance of S-300PM series of 5 minutes. Nebo-M system needs twice as much time and Nebo-SVU 20-30 minutes.

It would make a great asset with the Meraj-4 for the Bavar-373 with ABM search radar performance beyond that of a standard S-400 battalion.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Very likely an iranian Nebo SVU or RLM-M equivalent,possibly reversed/reengineered based on irans Nebos.
> http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1192/L-ASR4




1200 KM range is alot for a system in that size its name maybe is *"Long Range Air Surveillance Radar-4"*

*SL- ASR- III radar*












*


all of the Persian gulf is covered*







inside Mraje_4 radar station

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

The real surprise of of the site is something different which is related to Iranian-Pantsir, Bavar-373 and probably also 3rd Khordad. I have been talking about it since long and now its there.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

P.S.
That website is fake, so don't take it too seriously.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> P.S.
> That website is fake, so don't take it too seriously.


----------



## skyshadow

*CENTCOM: Iran Never Warned RQ-4 Drone Before Shootdown*

*https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/30/centcom-iran-never-warned-rq-4-drone-shootdown.html*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> *CENTCOM: Iran Never Warned RQ-4 Drone Before Shootdown*
> 
> *https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/30/centcom-iran-never-warned-rq-4-drone-shootdown.html*


It seems USA is urgently need upgrading the radio on its airplanes and drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

Hack-Hook said:


> It seems USA is urgently need upgrading the radio on its airplanes and drones.


Absolutely. The US is behind Iran in every field of technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> It seems USA is urgently need upgrading the radio on its airplanes and drones.





gambit said:


> Absolutely. The US is behind Iran in every field of technology.




well that's what happens when you go radio silent mid air

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

Hack-Hook said:


> It seems USA is urgently need upgrading the radio on its airplanes and drones.



Nope, they just need to upgrade their propaganda machine that no longer works out...it worked for Vietnam and iraq back in then so far as i can remember..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> Absolutely. The US is behind Iran in every field of technology.


well ,its what you guys will receive when centcom try to post failed propaganda

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Time to talk about some basic details of the IEI products:

The Meraj-4 (Bavar-373) has a higher volume search performance than the S-400's 91N6 Big Bird.

It is also a hybrid ESA (similar to Ibris-E) --> a linear AESA (which Ibris-E is not) in transmit mode and a single element-per-element AESA in receive mode, whereas the 91N6 is a pure PESA.

It is much more compact than the 91N6.

The field in which the Big Bird is superior are ABM modes and its integrated sector scan mode.
Here the Bavar architecture splits this task to the dedicated Bavar-373 acquisition radar (taking the place of the 92N6 Chease board in S-400). The S-400 on the other hand uses the 91N6 by giving it a twice higher update rate than the Meraj-4 (two janus arrays) and allow for a sector search mode while performing volume search

Here Bavar-373 design philosophy goes another way and one statement is fact: Comparing both systems, the Meraj-4 has a somewhat longer detection range than the Big Bird. If upper echelon IADS information warns the S-400, it can track the target earlier by using the Big Bird in sector search mode.
However also the Meraj-4 could concentrate its energy (BT mode) on a specific sector if the target is given to it by IADS.

So the result is that in terms of hardware power, the Meraj-4 is higher performing than the 91N6, which is a huge achievement. Chinese even copied the Big Bird, while Iran develops its own solution. That solution is nothing highly expensive like a full element janus faced AESA but a very cost effective hybrid array solution. 
Chinese (meanwhile) and Russian are masters in radar technology but Iran is catching up in a innovative way.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
13


----------



## mohsen

Rouhani says we will have important unveilings in aviation and air defense sector in coming weeks.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hack-Hook

I think the only thing that's still yet to unveil in Air defense is sayad-4 and Bavar 373.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Time to talk about some basic details of the IEI products:
> 
> The Meraj-4 (Bavar-373) has a higher volume search performance than the S-400's 91N6 Big Bird.
> 
> It is also a hybrid ESA (similar to Ibris-E) --> a linear AESA (which Ibris-E is not) in transmit mode and a single element-per-element AESA in receive mode, whereas the 91N6 is a pure PESA.
> 
> It is much more compact than the 91N6.
> 
> The field in which the Big Bird is superior are ABM modes and its integrated sector scan mode.
> Here the Bavar architecture splits this task to the dedicated Bavar-373 acquisition radar (taking the place of the 92N6 Chease board in S-400). The S-400 on the other hand uses the 91N6 by giving it a twice higher update rate than the Meraj-4 (two janus arrays) and allow for a sector search mode while performing volume search
> 
> Here Bavar-373 design philosophy goes another way and one statement is fact: Comparing both systems, the Meraj-4 has a somewhat longer detection range than the Big Bird. If upper echelon IADS information warns the S-400, it can track the target earlier by using the Big Bird in sector search mode.
> However also the Meraj-4 could concentrate its energy (BT mode) on a specific sector if the target is given to it by IADS.
> 
> So the result is that in terms of hardware power, the Meraj-4 is higher performing than the 91N6, which is a huge achievement. Chinese even copied the Big Bird, while Iran develops its own solution. That solution is nothing highly expensive like a full element janus faced AESA but a very cost effective hybrid array solution.
> Chinese (meanwhile) and Russian are masters in radar technology but Iran is catching up in a innovative way.




well Iran just said they going to unveil a big air defense system??? next week soooo *Bavar-373 *here we come.


*رئیس‌جمهور: پروژه‌های بزرگی در پدافند هوایی افتتاح می‌کنیم*

*https://www.isna.ir/news/98051005152/رئیس-جمهور-پروژه-های-بزرگی-در-پدافند-هوایی-افتتاح-می-کنیم-دشمن*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater

few days ago, I asked myself why they fired medium range Ballistic missile with that strange path from south to north not otherwise, and I had remembered about Rouhani promise few yrs ago about testing Bavar on missile.

It seems my guess was true and test was successful, so Rouhani couldn't control his happiness and reveled what happened with that test.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Shams313

SubWater said:


> few days ago, I asked myself why they fired medium range Ballistic missile with that strange path from south to north not otherwise, and I had remembered about Rouhani promise few yrs ago about testing Bavar on missile.
> 
> It seems my guess was true and test was successful, so Rouhani couldn't control his happiness and reveled what happened with that test.



Most probable ,bro..
I havebeen waiting for bavar 373 since 2011...
I hope insallah I'm gonna see that very soon..

But the question is all about the unveiling of aviation section...
What is that..?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater

Shams313 said:


> Most probable ,bro..
> I havebeen waiting for bavar 373 since 2011...
> I hope insallah I'm gonna see that very soon..


Rouhani himself few yrs ago said the Bavar-373 should hit Ballistic missile, at that time I remember many said Rouhani with that word want to prepare minds of Iranian for Moshaki Barjam, and saying Ballistic missiles are useless, but now wit failure of Barjam; nobody has fear.

I'm very happy now, can't wait till defense day in three weeks a head.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Must be Bavar-373, the only other public project of great significance would be a OTH-B radar that would be worth the "especially this year" note Rohani made.

So after 9 years as Bavar-373 seems to be close, I again go to one of the IEI products:
The Iranian Nebo with its shoot and scoot rate deployment time:

The original Nebo-SVU Iran got from Russia was approximated with the Matla ol Fajr-2, the most widespread used mobile radar of Iran. With it the detection performance of the Nebo-SVU was reached at much lower cost but also with lower capabilities.

Now the Iranian Nebo has 30% higher detection performance than the Nebo-SVU which is a significant number for radars. With this added performance a VLO platform that has -20dB RCS due to RAM/RAS (negated by VHF-band) + -25dB due to shape for a total of -45dB. The value of -45dB translates into a metal ball smaller than 1cm in diameter or the famous Lockheed Martin PR department pea comparison for the F-35.
Even worse to to ground-to-air aspect a ideal head-on -45dB RCS would become a 35-40 one realistically...

So what would be the range against such a <1cm metal ball ideal VLO stealth platform? 320km, which is a long range detection value for radars.
This performance level is certainly what you would like to have in a Bavar-373 battalion, with the Meraj-4 doing the battle management task.
Matla ol Fajr-2 and Nebo-SVU still do ~180km range in detecting that ideal -45dB target which would make them medium range radars against such VLO targets.

It also adds a significant ABM capability which may be the best reason to built it into the Bavar-373: It is a starring sector protection radar with digital beamforming for high altitude tracking at high update rate. It is even potent enough to be used a ASAT sensor against LEO objects.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
10


----------



## Shams313

SubWater said:


> Rouhani himself few yrs ago said the Bavar-373 should hit Ballistic missile, at that time I remember many said Rouhani with that word want to prepare minds of Iranian for Moshaki Barjam, and saying Ballistic missiles are useless, but now wit failure of Barjam; nobody has fear.
> 
> I'm very happy now, can't wait till defense day in three weeks a head.


Defence day means , the day president visits defence ministry and industry and a lot of stuffs being presented???
I saw several ceremony happened last few years and a lot of pics of systems and projects were shown..
In that case

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Do not forget the Iranian pantsir

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Since the site is still up, I feel confident to speak about some detail products:

The product X-MR is basically all you need in terms of radar for a Iranian Pantsir.
It is also what you need for the most critical component of the Bavar-373 system: the engagement radar.
The most powerful thermal camera on the site represents a breakthrough in countering ECM, stealth and decoys.

These 3 things are probably more important than anything else on the site, including inflatable RV decoy and the Iranian Nebo variant.

The X-MR would be the ideal complete radar package solution for a Iranian Pantsir.
X-band AESAs are traditionally expensive but compared to the Pantsir-S1 and even -S2, you can skip having two PESA or a PESA and a planar array.
You safe the cost for a second radar and make the system significantly more compact by having a single, somewhat expensive AESA radar.
The system would probably have a single Phalanx-like radome smaller than any of the two Pantsir radars and perform the same task.
It may look like a luxury engineering solution to simply use a AESA to get a Pantsir-like system, something a country of lower skill would do at the cost of a much more expensive system doing the same task.
But I'm confident that Iran has gone that way because their research allowed to mass-produce a X-band T/R module that is cost effective enough.
Achieving that was a major goal for Iran because its Bavar-373 engagement radar needs more than 10.000 such X-band TRM modules for each radar.
A mass-production true factory scale production is needed to allow for this. Rohani talked about air-defense to get founds on national-scale level.
So now with the first appearance of a Iranian X-band AESA, I think the major thing here is that mass-production factory for X-band TRMs.

Only such a mass-production level output could push the price per TRM low enough to create a "AESA-Pantsir or AESA Tor-M1". A key requirement would be to develop a X-band TRM that has an useful power-level at the lowest possible price. The main hurdle is that this would be a semi-conductor factory with probably 1000+ employees. Iran has no strong previous capabilities in semi-conductor/waver mass-production.

Not only a compact multi engagement Iranian Pansir and Bavar-373 engagement radar become possible with the X-MR. It also makes it likely that the 3rd Khordad uses a X-band AESA and allows for a CIWS that also uses Pantsir like missiles in addition to 30mm AK-630 variant, etc.

Added to this comes a thermal camera that can detect head-on fighter at extended 150km.
Equipping all those systems, from Bavar-373 to Iranian-Pantsir to a missile CIWS with such a high performing camera for tracking AND search, opens up a whole new dimension of a passive sensor. Sensor fusion of TI, optical channel and radar (in case of Bavar-373 multi-band) would make these systems significantly more deadly. 150km is extended range and if engine exhaust is visible then the range increases to 300km.
- Passive long range detection and engagement becomes possible
- Determining true target, if enemy successfully employs ECM, becomes possible
- Chaff and towed decoys can be effectively rejected via sensor fusion
- Identification andIFF can be done early + decoys like MALD can be determined as well as targets representing a lower threat.
- Like multi-band radar networks can distinguish LO/VLO/stealth targets from conventional ones, long range passive detection can also be used for determining this two cases.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
11


----------



## mohsen

Defense minister: U.S drone was downed using 3rd Khordad system and Samen radar.

Fath-2 and Samen radars:
https://www.aparat.com/v/l0MdN

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Malik Alashter

PeeD said:


> Since the site is still up, I feel confident to speak about some detail products:
> 
> The product X-MR is basically all you need in terms of radar for a Iranian Pantsir.
> It is also what you need for the most critical component of the Bavar-373 system: the engagement radar.
> The most powerful thermal camera on the site represents a breakthrough in countering ECM, stealth and decoys.
> 
> These 3 things are probably more important than anything else on the site, including inflatable RV decoy and the Iranian Nebo variant.
> 
> The X-MR would be the ideal complete radar package solution for a Iranian Pantsir.
> X-band AESAs are traditionally expensive but compared to the Pantsir-S1 and even -S2, you can skip having two PESA or a PESA and a planar array.
> You safe the cost for a second radar and make the system significantly more compact by having a single, somewhat expensive AESA radar.
> The system would probably have a single Phalanx-like radome smaller than any of the two Pantsir radars and perform the same task.
> It may look like a luxury engineering solution to simply use a AESA to get a Pantsir-like system, something a country of lower skill would do at the cost of a much more expensive system doing the same task.
> But I'm confident that Iran has gone that way because their research allowed to mass-produce a X-band T/R module that is cost effective enough.
> Achieving that was a major goal for Iran because its Bavar-373 engagement radar needs more than 10.000 such X-band TRM modules for each radar.
> A mass-production true factory scale production is needed to allow for this. Rohani talked about air-defense to get founds on national-scale level.
> So now with the first appearance of a Iranian X-band AESA, I think the major thing here is that mass-production factory for X-band TRMs.
> 
> Only such a mass-production level output could push the price per TRM low enough to create a "AESA-Pantsir or AESA Tor-M1". A key requirement would be to develop a X-band TRM that has an useful power-level at the lowest possible price. The main hurdle is that this would be a semi-conductor factory with probably 1000+ employees. Iran has no strong previous capabilities in semi-conductor/waver mass-production.
> 
> Not only a compact multi engagement Iranian Pansir and Bavar-373 engagement radar become possible with the X-MR. It also makes it likely that the 3rd Khordad uses a X-band AESA and allows for a CIWS that also uses Pantsir like missiles in addition to 30mm AK-630 variant, etc.
> 
> Added to this comes a thermal camera that can detect head-on fighter at extended 150km.
> Equipping all those systems, from Bavar-373 to Iranian-Pantsir to a missile CIWS with such a high performing camera for tracking AND search, opens up a whole new dimension of a passive sensor. Sensor fusion of TI, optical channel and radar (in case of Bavar-373 multi-band) would make these systems significantly more deadly. 150km is extended range and if engine exhaust is visible then the range increases to 300km.
> - Passive long range detection and engagement becomes possible
> - Determining true target, if enemy successfully employs ECM, becomes possible
> - Chaff and towed decoys can be effectively rejected via sensor fusion
> - Identification andIFF can be done early + decoys like MALD can be determined as well as targets representing a lower threat.
> - Like multi-band radar networks can distinguish LO/VLO/stealth targets from conventional ones, long range passive detection can also be used for determining this two cases.


Excuse me don't you think the Korean has a better and cheaper solution to produce the k-30 it uses one research radar and optical system for guidance or I am wrong thanks


----------



## yavar

mohsen said:


> Defense minister: U.S drone was downed using 3rd Khordad system and Samen radar.
> 
> Fath-2 and Samen radars:
> https://www.aparat.com/v/l0MdN


old video of mine 
* Dec 29, 2014*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TruthHurtz

yavar said:


> old video of mine
> * Dec 29, 2014*



fatheh DOUGH va samen DOUGH


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Time to talk about some basic details of the IEI products:
> 
> The Meraj-4 (Bavar-373) has a higher volume search performance than the S-400's 91N6 Big Bird.
> 
> It is also a hybrid ESA (similar to Ibris-E) --> a linear AESA (which Ibris-E is not) in transmit mode and a single element-per-element AESA in receive mode, whereas the 91N6 is a pure PESA.
> 
> It is much more compact than the 91N6.
> 
> The field in which the Big Bird is superior are ABM modes and its integrated sector scan mode.
> Here the Bavar architecture splits this task to the dedicated Bavar-373 acquisition radar (taking the place of the 92N6 Chease board in S-400). The S-400 on the other hand uses the 91N6 by giving it a twice higher update rate than the Meraj-4 (two janus arrays) and allow for a sector search mode while performing volume search
> 
> Here Bavar-373 design philosophy goes another way and one statement is fact: Comparing both systems, the Meraj-4 has a somewhat longer detection range than the Big Bird. If upper echelon IADS information warns the S-400, it can track the target earlier by using the Big Bird in sector search mode.
> However also the Meraj-4 could concentrate its energy (BT mode) on a specific sector if the target is given to it by IADS.
> 
> So the result is that in terms of hardware power, the Meraj-4 is higher performing than the 91N6, which is a huge achievement. Chinese even copied the Big Bird, while Iran develops its own solution. That solution is nothing highly expensive like a full element janus faced AESA but a very cost effective hybrid array solution.
> Chinese (meanwhile) and Russian are masters in radar technology but Iran is catching up in a innovative way.



Good analysis, but you’ve forgot the fact that the early warning radar can only detect the target, not shoot it down. That’s the function of the illuminating/fire control radar to guide the missile towards the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

رئیس جمهور
طی هفته آینده افتتاح های بسیار مهمی در صنعت و پدافند هوایی خواهیم داشت



this is going to be Bavar 373 long range air defense system equivalent of Russia S400 i mean look like with tube and cold launch
up to now 80% decision been made ( NOT Ruhani decision) for it to be unveiled
the system been operational 2013 /14

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

yavar said:


> رئیس جمهور
> طی هفته آینده افتتاح های بسیار مهمی در صنعت و پدافند هوایی خواهیم داشت
> 
> 
> 
> this is going to be Bavar 373 long range air defense system equivalent of Russia S400 i mean look like with tube and cold launch
> up to now 80% decision been made ( NOT Ruhani decision) for it to be unveiled
> the system been operational 2013 /14
> http://www.president.ir/fa/110613


It was not operational at those times.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Hack-Hook said:


> It was not operational at those times.


2010
watch from 1:50






watch from 1:26

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Malik Alashter said:


> Excuse me don't you think the Korean has a better and cheaper solution to produce the k-30 it uses one research radar and optical system for guidance or I am wrong thanks



K-30 is another class of systems, Iran has systems like the Mesbah-2 for that role. Pantsir class systems are for defense against supersonic weapons at extended ranges --> via missiles.
But I agree: TRM cost must be pushed to lowest possible for such an AESA Pantsir to become economical. Otherwise a Mesbah-2 with Seraj optical/TI search system is a really great and very potent solution.



Myself said:


> Good analysis, but you’ve forgot the fact that the early warning radar can only detect the target, not shoot it down. That’s the function of the illuminating/fire control radar to guide the missile towards the target.



Its about fine tracking, signature pattern identification and high update rates for ABM and SAM mid-course functions. Here the Big Bird does it in a special way as each S-400 battery lacks a starring acquisition radar.
That solution is a legacy from 40 year old S-300P series design decisions. The Big Bird will still experience a 50% blind spot in which no continuous track is possible, even with its janus faced array. The Bavar-373 on the other hand will have continuous track.
Fine track for SAM terminal phase is then provided by the engagement/illumination radar which is avoided to be used in order to avoid warning until the last seconds.


----------



## yavar

yavar said:


> رئیس جمهور
> طی هفته آینده افتتاح های بسیار مهمی در صنعت و پدافند هوایی خواهیم داشت


Iran President Hojjatoleslam Hassan Rouhani: We'll have very important industry and air defense unveiling next week

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

How about he provides update on Qaher. Just say if the project has been shelved or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

yavar said:


> 2010
> watch from 1:50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watch from 1:26


Not all component were ready then.
And come on in 2010 the system could not even launch a mortar . it was just some drum put on the truck . it was when Russia refused to send the s-300 and some body taught its funny to made that.


----------



## Myself

Hack-Hook said:


> Not all component were ready then.
> And come on in 2010 the system could not even launch a mortar . it was just some drum put on the truck . it was when Russia refused to send the s-300 and some body taught its funny to made that.


 Those were the older versions of S-300 missiles (PMU-1 or older) Iran had already acquired unofficially in order to counteract low RCS aerial targets. Very interestingly, in the same army parade one could identify all the required components of a S-300 battery in order to detect and engage low RCS targets:
1- Nebu Radar for initial detection & data acquisition
2– Tomb Stone (or advanced versions of the older Flip Lid) engagement & fire control radar
3- Missiles/Launchers





Back then, some reliable sources such as Jane’s Defence had reported the presence of S-300 systems in Iran. Even El-Manar news agency had released a footage related to Iranian military capabilities, in which one of the components of a S-300 battery with Sepah emblem was depicted.
Iran apparently had changed their operational arrangement from mobile/semi-mobile batteries to immobilized batteries, with underground launchers, most probably around its nuclear facilities, to protect these valuable AD systems from the first round of SEAD missions, and of course for secrecy. It is unlikely, but even maybe the purchased system were already supplied to Iran in an immobilized version. For that reason (being already immobilized and under-grounded) we could see them only once back then during the peak of nuclear crises, when Israel used to frequently threaten and warn Iran for air strike. Also, those equipment had been loaded on Babr-400 military trucks, rather than standard Belarusian MAZ trucks, which was another clear sign of the system being stationary. So, once Russia stopped supplying the newer versions of the potent S-300 to Iran, Iranian authorities ordered the military section to demonstrate the presence of S-300 to foreign media.
The type and source of those initial batches of S-300 systems have been always a confusion and mystery. As I mentioned earlier, the demonstrated engagement radar was either the Tomb Stone or an advanced (unusual literally) version of the older Flip Lid, neither of which were a part of the legacy S-300PT systems, which were claimed to be obtained by Iran then.
Now, after officially owning advanced mobile S-300 batteries (PMU 2+), whether or not Iran wants to still keep the older versions as fixed batteries, or put them back to mobile systems is not known.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Myself said:


> Those were the older versions of S-300 missiles (PMU-1 or older) Iran had already acquired unofficially in order to counteract low RCS aerial targets.


Those were only barrels put on a truck . the truck even didn't have a jack to rise those barrels .


----------



## Myself

Hack-Hook said:


> Those were only barrels put on a truck . the truck even didn't have a jack to rise those barrels .


Did you read my post? Please read it one more time.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Myself said:


> Did you read my post? Please read it one more time.


You said those were first version of S-300 I said no they were not . and the component of Bavar just unveiled several month ago.
Also the S300 we bought from Belarus were not complete and functional.



Myself said:


> Iranian authorities ordered the military section to demonstrate the presence of S-300 to foreign media.


If by that you mean the first video as I said those were mockups .
Its the trucks from another angle 





Honestly do you call it s-300


----------



## Myself

Hack-Hook said:


> You said those were first version of S-300 I said no they were not . and the component of Bavar just unveiled several month ago.
> Also the S300 we bought from Belarus were not complete and functional.
> 
> 
> If by that you mean the first video as I said those were mockups .
> Its the trucks from another angle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly do you call it s-300


I suggested you to read my post one more time, but apparently either you did not, or you are a troll.



Hack-Hook said:


> the S300 we bought from Belarus were not complete and functional.


So, you say Iran spent money to buy something strategic but incomplete and none functional? Why? Because you think so?
All the required, not optional, components to use one S-300 system were shown in that parade, for the sake of political reasons I mentioned: Nebu + Flap-Lid + Missile.















Hack-Hook said:


> If by that you mean the first video as I said those were mockups .


Did I say anything otherwise? Again, have you read my post? I put it back here, so that you read it, if you can of course:

“_Also, those equipment had been loaded on Babr-400 military trucks, rather than standard Belarusian MAZ trucks, which was another clear sign of the system being stationary_”

The canisters were not mock up, but they tried to simulate and show off for the parade a mobile S-300 launcher by loading the real canisters on Babr-400 trucks, since the purchased system most likely were positioned fixed by under- grounded launchers, which in turn - unfortunately - is a sign of the old and obsolete PT versions.










Hack-Hook said:


> Honestly do you call it s-300



I did not know loading Missile canisters on trucks is a mission impossible. Honestly do call the following images Hawk, S-200, and S-300?







Hack-Hook said:


> the component of Bavar just unveiled several month ago.


Are you trolling? Neither they called the system Bavar then during the parade, nor I mentioned anything about Bavar in my post.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Myself said:


> I suggested you to read my post one more time, but apparently either you did not, or you are a troll.
> 
> 
> So, you say Iran spent money to buy something strategic but incomplete and none functional? Why? Because you think so?
> All the required, not optional, components required to use one S-300 system were shown in that parade, for the sake of political reasons I mentioned: Nebu + Flip-Lid + Missile:
> 
> 
> Iran parade:


Yes , but the question is do you have any evidence iran received any S-300 from blarus .please not Jane article which is based on an article in fqrs news which is denied by Belarus and Russia



Myself said:


> I did not know loading Missile canisters on trucks is mission impossible. Honestly do call the following images Hawk, S-200, and S-300?


Are these called working system. And the first video was not loading canister it was supposed to be launcher



Myself said:


> Are you trolling? Neither they called the system Bavar then during the parade, nor I mentioned anything about Bavar in my post.


Me and yavar were talking about Bavar and then you come and talked about Belarusian S-300
And claimed a video that were discussed extensively at the time it first surfaced was early version of s300 which it was but it was some drum on a truck


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran offers air defense system to Lebanon to protect airspace from Israel: media*


Iran is ready to deliver their air defense systems to Lebanon *for free*, the Russian publication Aria.Pro reported on Saturday.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...ebanon-to-protect-airspace-from-israel-media/

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Myself

Hack-Hook said:


> Yes , but the question is do you have any evidence iran received any S-300 from blarus .please not Jane article which is based on an article in fqrs news which is denied by Belarus and Russia
> 
> 
> Are these called working system. And the first video was not loading canister it was supposed to be launcher
> 
> 
> Me and yavar were talking about Bavar and then you come and talked about Belarusian S-300
> And claimed a video that were discussed extensively at the time it first surfaced was early version of s300 which it was but it was some drum on a truck


Again you are trolling as not only I did not mention anything about Belarus (MAZ trucks are manufactured in Belarus though), but also I emphasized the source of the systems is unknown and a mystery!!
Back then, different media suggested different sources for the Iranian older version of S-300, including Belarus, Croatia, and even Russia. As I mentioned, the most puzzling part is the engagement radar which is the advanced versions of the Flap-Lid (Tomb Stone) that does not belong to obsolete PT version. According to internet resources, earlier versions of S-300PT complexes are not even cold launch, and this may be, only maybe, the reason Iran did not choose cold launch technology when the Bavar project was kicked-off.
I am not here to convince you or anyone else, but when something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it is a duck! When:
- I saw in 2010 by my own eyes Iran showed S-300 system components in a parade, and
- El-Manar news agency showed a component of a S-300 battery with Sepah emblem, and
- Rouhani said he recommended to buy S-300 around 20 years ago, and
- Fars News said then Iran possesses S-300, and
- Congressman Kowsary said then Iran possesses S-300, and
- Jame’s Defence said then Iran possesses S-300, and
- Ex-Defence minister said Iran was already producing S-300 class missiles,
- Ex-commander of chief of ADF said Iran possesses a large number of S-300 systems rather than the new batch (PMU-2) commissioned in front of him, and ...

I can conclude Iran had S-300 systems around that time.
But, again which version and from which source I don’t know. I assume the system purchased from Georgia was the Buk-M1 and not S-300, as I have not found any reliable source - except Wikipedia - indicating the presence of S-300 in Georgia after USSR collapse.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Janes knows about Irans S-300 because one of their experts (SOC) found them via satellite imagery.
But it is a secret system of strategic value for Iran, such as Tehran ABM against Jericho and DF-3, hence it was and still is not disclosed.

As for cold launch: Chinese have switched back from cold launch HQ-9 to hot launch HQ-22.
It's about efficiency and doctrine.
Bavar-373 is hot launch because it has different requirements than the S-300 series which had a cold launch requirement in the 60's when their development began. Iran always had the TOR-M1 to copy a cold launch system if they would think it is worth it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran Air Defence System 2019 (All Weapons)*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

At a recent speech Sorena Sattari made a claim that should sound absurd to many:
The RQ-4 would not have been possible to shot down with the S-300 system.






I did some calculations to see at what range a S-300 engagement radar (S-400 Gravestone taken as reference) could detect what RCS level target.
As we know the engagement range of the RQ-4 shot down of something between 40 and 70km I could sufficiently constrain the calculation.

The result is, that at around 40km (closest range) a *-25dB* target can be detected by the S-300/400's huge brute force array.
We know that the RQ-4 would at least benefit -20dB just from its RAS/RAM coating. So just with -5dB total RCS due to shaping, it would become impossible to kill a RQ-4 at 40+km range with a S-400/-300.

So the sanity check seems to be complete with Sattaris claim: RQ-4 is large but should easily achieve -15 to -20dB reduction due to VLO shaping. So the budget looks like this: 14dB nominal low-side aspect RCS without shaping or RAS/RAM --> -20dB reduction do to optimized VLO shaping --> -20dB average due to RAS/RAM --> resulting in -26dB total RCS.

Now how did the 3rd Khordad achieve it? It has a at least 4 time smaller array + also operating in the VLO techniques severely affected X-band + much lower power output alone cause the lower RF energy compared to the space/lens feed brute force Gravestone.

I know about two methods which I don't want to describe here. But the basic solution is: Detect with assets that operates in a band that is not affected by U.S. stealth techniques and kill with methods that are either totally different or again something stealth techniques are less effective against.

For Iran the S-300 is primarily a ABM asset and long range engagements of non-stealth targets.

From what I know it may actually be true what Sattari said.
I should also say that a rather modification of the S-300 by Iran, could allow a successful engagement as the system has all necessary basic capabilities.
Plus with the already present S-300/-400 hardware there could be a special mode available in which the Big Bird battalion level radar is used to allow such a engagement. It may be that this mode is not available to export grade systems, hence Sattaris comment.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

PeeD said:


> For Iran the S-300 is primarily a ABM asset and long range engagements of non-stealth targets.


Interesting post and thoughts about role of S-300 vs other systems in Iran.

Where would Bavar-373 (announced soon hopefully) fit into this role-based view of Iran's ADS? 

Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

It fills Irans requirement for high altitude long range SAM. It also has the basic parameters to be its first (offcial) potent Iranian ABM system.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

PeeD said:


> It fills Irans requirement for high altitude long range SAM. It also has the basic parameters to be its first (offcial) potent Iranian ABM system.


What gaps does that leave in the future that Iran's ADF will have to fill (i.e. current needs/shortcomings)? Thanks


----------



## yavar

yavar said:


> رئیس جمهور
> طی هفته آینده افتتاح های بسیار مهمی در صنعت و پدافند هوایی خواهیم داشت
> 
> 
> 
> this is going to be Bavar 373 long range air defense system equivalent of Russia S400 i mean look like with tube and cold launch
> up to now 80% decision been made ( NOT Ruhani decision) for it to be unveiled
> the system been operational 2013 /14


As we told you



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1158995460817915904
again this would be the equivalent of Russia S400 the one which Russian army uses not the export version
but better then the export version S400 ( Turkey )
Truck bit smaller but with round Tuble and cold launch system

NOT the Sayyad 5 which Ruhani and Gen. Deghan took pictuers with

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

*The Bavar 373 Air defense System will be unveiled on August 22th*


*سامانه موشکی باور۳۷۳ روز ۳۱ مرداد رونمایی می‌شود*

*https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/05/16/2070786/اختصاصی-تسنیم-سامانه-موشکی-باور373-روز-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود*



yavar said:


> As we told you
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1158995460817915904
> again this would be the equivalent of Russia S400 the one which Russian army uses not the export version
> but better then the export version S400 ( Turkey )
> Truck bit smaller but with round Tuble and cold launch system
> 
> NOT the Sayyad 5 which Ruhani and Gen. Deghan took pictuers with



what????? 

*"Truck bit smaller but with round Tuble and cold launch system

NOT the Sayyad 5 which Ruhani and Gen. Deghan took pictuers with"* ??????

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *The Bavar 373 Air defense System will be unveiled on August 22th*
> 
> 
> *سامانه موشکی باور۳۷۳ روز ۳۱ مرداد رونمایی می‌شود*
> 
> *https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/05/16/2070786/اختصاصی-تسنیم-سامانه-موشکی-باور373-روز-31-مرداد-رونمایی-می-شود*


Ye....ye...ye
To all iranian dudes, manage some sweets,
Some people really need to replace their bitterness with sweetie sensation.....
And that's gonna be a hell of party....



yavar said:


> As we told you
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1158995460817915904
> again this would be the equivalent of Russia S400 the one which Russian army uses not the export version
> but better then the export version S400 ( Turkey )
> Truck bit smaller but with round Tuble and cold launch system
> 
> NOT the Sayyad 4 which Ruhani and Gen. Deghan took pictuers with


 So bro, that sayyad 5 missile won't be the most long range missile for b373 and there's is also another missile with more then 350+ range..if it's true then i say....
Impressive...!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SubWater

SubWater said:


> few days ago, I asked myself why they fired medium range Ballistic missile with that strange path from south to north not otherwise, and I had remembered about Rouhani promise few yrs ago about testing Bavar on missile.
> 
> It seems my guess was true and test was successful, so Rouhani couldn't control his happiness and reveled what happened with that test.


can't wait more.
It seems we would see the film of above test om mordad 31st.
building indigenous Anti Ballistic missile will shock all.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

8+ meter long launch containers on a 10x10 TEL instead of a 8 x 8 as required by a Sayyad-4 size missile would hint positively to baradar Yavars claim.
The other explanation would need to be a 2 x 3, 6 tube Sayyad-4 TEL.
It would also support the ABM nature of the Bavar-373: S-500 and S-300V series has such large twin tube TELs to support their long range ABM component.

It would but the Bavar-373 beyond the S-400 in those fields: The S-400 also has a 350km range long range missile but it is a sophisticated solution against air breathing targets while large missiles like on the S-500 and S-300V have, or offer growth potential for exo-atmospheric interceptors.

So it seems like the "Shahab-3" claimed by the U.S to have been tested was really a legacy Shahab-3 to test Bavar-373 performance against a mach 10-12 target.

9 years of waiting...

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
17


----------



## Ich

If it works, then i would buy 10 batteries of this AD for my country (if i could). We need such things to become peaceful independent.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> what?????
> 
> *"Truck bit smaller but with round Tuble and cold launch system*



like this one the Truck, the shorter truck







this is longer Truck but which Turkey and new Russian forces use









skyshadow said:


> *cold launch system
> 
> NOT the Sayyad 5 which Ruhani and Gen. Deghan took pictuers with"* ??????


yes with round tubes and cold launch exactly like Russian S400


this is Sayyad 5








Shams313 said:


> So bro, that sayyad 5 missile won't be the most long range missile
> Impressive...!


No neither Sayyad 5 or Bavar 373 is longest range missile in service



Shams313 said:


> h more then 350+ range..if it's true then i say....
> Impressive...!


Bavar and Sayyad 5 both 350++ KM system

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## PeeD

Zafar truck was always a candidate for the Bavar-373 for me. Only the Zoljanah and its low width (stability) created doubts that it is only for the radar components of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

yavar said:


> Bavar and Sayyad 5 both 350++ KM system



Ops i supposed to say sayyad 4, i mistakenly did sayyad 5.
I can't remember , but i heard sayyad 4 approximately 200+ km... I'm not sure..
Is sayyad 4 is a part of b373 ?
The second question is about sayyad 5 u mentioned earlier and u said it 350++ km..
So far i know the the military parade where first missile for b373 was shown, was that sayyad 4??

If so then any reference related to sayyad 5, any photo ?? I'm getting a little bit confused..

The last one related to their cansister and launch technique.
So far information revealed both will enjoy VLS , but the question arises with cold launch..
And their respective cansister, as u see there are square shaped cansister and u said there's also circular shaped cansister like used in s300/400..
If only sayyad 5 has cold launch then it's possible to use circular cansister.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

yavar said:


> Truck bit smaller but with *round *Tuble and cold launch system

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

I'm very sceptical if they gonna unveil the Bavar at 22nd of August


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> like this one the Truck, the shorter truck
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is longer Truck but which Turkey and new Russian forces use



1) any reason the iranian truck is shorter than turkey/russian S-400 truck?
2) you say the B-373 is as potent as the russian S-400?
3) is B-373 the most potent AD system Iran currently has or is there something in development which surpass it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> 1) any reason the iranian truck is shorter than turkey/russian S-400 truck?
> 2) you say the B-373 is as potent as the russian S-400?
> 3) is B-373 the most potent AD system Iran currently has or is there something in development which surpass it


Maybe because Russia uses cold launch and iran uses hot launch


----------



## Draco.IMF

Hack-Hook said:


> Maybe because Russia uses cold launch and iran uses hot launch



B-373 will use allegedly also cold launch

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> 1) any reason the iranian truck is shorter than turkey/russian S-400 truck?
> 2) you say the B-373 is as potent as the russian S-400?
> 3) is B-373 the most potent AD system Iran currently has or is there something in development which surpass it


let me answer these after unvailing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> I'm very sceptical if they gonna unveil the Bavar at 22nd of August




*Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami said the domestically-made long-range air defense missile system “Bavar-373” will be unveiled later this month.*


*Iran to Unveil Advanced Homegrown Missile System This Month: Minister*

*https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...-homegrown-missile-system-this-month-minister*




Shams313 said:


> Ops i supposed to say sayyad 4, i mistakenly did sayyad 5.
> I can't remember , but i heard sayyad 4 approximately 200+ km... I'm not sure..
> Is sayyad 4 is a part of b373 ?
> The second question is about sayyad 5 u mentioned earlier and u said it 350++ km..
> So far i know the the military parade where first missile for b373 was shown, was that sayyad 4??
> 
> If so then any reference related to sayyad 5, any photo ?? I'm getting a little bit confused..
> 
> The last one related to their cansister and launch technique.
> So far information revealed both will enjoy VLS , but the question arises with cold launch..
> And their respective cansister, as u see there are square shaped cansister and u said there's also circular shaped cansister like used in s300/400..
> If only sayyad 5 has cold launch then it's possible to use circular cansister.




what you saw was Sayyad 4, i exactly have your questions too, we did not we any Sayyad 5.



yavar said:


> like this one the Truck, the shorter truck
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is longer Truck but which Turkey and new Russian forces use
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes with round tubes and cold launch exactly like Russian S400
> 
> 
> this is Sayyad 5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No neither Sayyad 5 or Bavar 373 is longest range missile in service
> 
> 
> Bavar and Sayyad 5 both 350++ KM system




داداش من متوجه منظورت نمیشم چطور میتونه کوچیک تر باشه وقتی سوار ذوالجناح و اینکه قضیه صیاد 5 چیه و چرا دایره ای شده سیستم باور لانچ گرم رو نشون میده نه لانچ سرد رو سیستم لانچرش اینی که تو میگی با تمام عکسایی که ما دیدیم مخالفت میکنه اگه اینی که تو میگی درست باشه پس این چیه؟؟؟







*


این کشنده مشخصا ذوالجناحه که میبینی حداقل 5 محوره هست*









PeeD said:


> Zafar truck was always a candidate for the Bavar-373 for me. Only the Zoljanah and its low width (stability) created doubts that it is only for the radar components of it.




but Zafar is too small where do they going to place the cooling systems it must be Zoljanah look at it in below pic that's Zoljanah.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> داداش من متوجه منظورت نمیشم چطور میتونه کوچیک تر باشه وقتی سوار ذوالجناح و اینکه قضیه صیاد 5 چیه و چرا دایره ای شده سیستم باور لانچ گرم رو نشون میده نه لانچ سرد رو سیستم لانچرش اینی که تو میگی با تمام عکسایی که ما دیدیم مخالفت میکنه اگه اینی که تو میگی درست باشه پس این چیه؟؟؟


برادر من این عکس روحانی و سردار دهقان با سامانه پدافند هوایی صیاد ۵هست نه باور به اشتباه و برای رد گم کردن روس ها و امریکا این عکس را نشون دادند تا بتونند...........

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> but Zafar is too small where do they going to place the cooling systems it must be Zoljanah look at it in below pic that's Zoljanah



There is no need for cooling except for the driver. A 2019 system will have an automatic data-link system similar to that on the Bashir radar. The rest would be miniaturezed into a small cabin and the 7,5m containers would fit.
Compared to Iran's S-300 TEL such a 4-missile 8x8 system without tractor would then be fully off-road capable.

A larger calibre Sayyad-5 with longer lenght could then fit on the Zoljanah 10x10 Tel, likely 3 missiles.

One point is that cold launch has following benefits:
1. Instant directional orientation for lowest reaction time and ABM.
2. Easier application in silos.
3. Avoidance of forrest fire and less fire signature if used in urban areas.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

yavar said:


> برادر من این عکس روحانی و سردار دهقان با سامانه پدافند هوایی صیاد ۵هست نه باور به اشتباه و برای رد گم کردن روس ها و امریکا این عکس را نشون دادند تا بتونند...........


تاکتیک خیلی عجیبیه اره شبیه سامانه های صیاد هست خیلی. خب پس یعنی میگی باور شبیه به این سیستمه که توی پوستر نشون داده شده؟










yavar said:


> برادر من این عکس روحانی و سردار دهقان با سامانه پدافند هوایی صیاد ۵هست نه باور به اشتباه و برای رد گم کردن روس ها و امریکا این عکس را نشون دادند تا بتونند...........



اره متوجه شدم چی شد الان

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> تاکتیک خیلی عجیبیه اره شبیه سامانه های صیاد هست خیلی. خب پس یعنی میگی باور شبیه به این سیستمه که توی پوستر نشون داده شده؟


بقیه سوال ها برای بعد از رونمایی هنوز تصمیم نهایی گرفته نشده که کدوم ورژن نشون داده میشه ولی بخاطر اینکه روس ها دارن سعی مکنند از امریکا و اسراییل دوباره امتیاز بگیرن سر داستان دروغ فروش اس-۴۰۰ به ایران / که همه بلند پایه های نظامی سیاسی روس و شبکه های جهانی روسیه دارن این دروغ را القاع میکنند ایران ممکن ورژن اس-۴۰۰ ایرانی را نشون بده
و بخاطر
تحویل اس ۴۰۰ به ترکیه و استقرار در شرق ترکیه

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Blue In Green

Man, I can barely contain my excitement as it is for this unveiling!!!! Nine years and counting for the system damn near everyone said Iran doesn't have the capability to produce (mocking Iran and Iranians every step of the way), yet here we are talking about it knowing it will showed to the world in full!!! 

Unlike previous indigenous military achievements, this one feels different but I can't exactly explain why. I assume it's due to the quite advanced nature of the project plus its scope. If Bavar-373 truly does deliver on everything it promises then Iran's AD is, *without question*, amongst the top in the world or at the very least on the path to becoming amongst the top in the world. Nothing Trump, Polish Nazi (Netanyahu), MBS, Fat Pig (Pompeo), Bolton or any other naysayer can do to dispel it. They will concede to Iran's determination sooner or later!!

So in short, thank you to any and all Iranian engineers and possible helpers from outside of Iran for putting time, effort, blood and sweat into defending the Iranian homeland!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## PeeD

The S-300PT story from Janes/SOC is a whole different dimension to Irans SAM capability.
It's not a public program like the Sayyad series.
The 2010 mock-ups of a S-300 like system is one side of the story, the other is S-300P like system appearing in North Korea. Even beyond that, they hinted to a even longer ranges S-300-like SAM.

The S-300PT-Iran link came via western sources but North Korea had no known access to the S-300. Beyond a possible S-125 copy, North Koreans also had no prior extensive heavy SAM program like Irans SA-2 --> Hawk --> Sayyad-2 history.
Like with their solid fuel BM's North Koreans suddenly jumped low to S-300P level without any known access and step by step work.

So a question remains what the IRGC SSJ did with that S-300PT technology.
Develop it independently and try to copy it in a shared joint program with the North Koreans? Was the IRGC SSJ not satisfied with the S-300P level capability while North Koreans were? Did they join hands with the DIO to develop a system, way beyond S-300P series level (late S-300PMU-2 level input)?
If yes then one aspect of the Bavar-373 would be Sayyad series based and the other IRGC-S-300 based.
It then would be likely that the IRGC part of the Bavar-373 would remain a secret program likely for ABM role, while the IRIADF would get the public Bavar-373 likely with a Sayyad-5 that can take the extended range role of the S-200 and able to support a exo-atmospheric kill vehicle kinematically in the future.
Maybe that Sayyad-5 exo-atmospheric ABM capability is/will be (when ready) just for the IRGC-ASF with their ABM mission and the IRIADF will just get the anti-air-breathing variant of it.

I say this all because of this fact: The S-300P series missile is sufficient for the endo-atmospheric ABM role which won't go beyond 40km anyway (target speed issue). With a S-300P missile copy donated from the IRGC program, IRIADF Bavar-373 would get Arrow-2/Patriot PAC-3 like ABM capability and cover/replace S-200 extended range capability with a heavy Sayyad-5 missile (likely extending it to 300+km).
IRGC program would in turn get the "masterpiece" Bavar-373 engagement radar from the joint DIO/IEI program plus the Sayyad-5 platform for an exo-atmospheric THAAD/Arrow-3/S-500 like component of its classified ABM program.
The Bavar project is so large industrially that the IRGC must benefit from it too.

The Buk-M3 system of Russia, now has got a second missile component added to it, namely the smaller missile component of the S-300V (primarily for ABM purpose). We should expect such a component for the 3rd Khordad in future too, maybe based on the twin launchers of Fateh and Zolfaghar BM's.

We may also only see a very public/insensitive display with Sayyad-3 and Sayyad-4 as Bavar-373 missile components that bring it on pair with the S-400, probably with lower ABM capability (lack of visible TVC so far).
I'm optimistic that Rohanis "test against Shahab-3" claim will lead to something great to be shown.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> B-373 will use allegedly also cold launch


As far as I'm aware it uses hot launch.and we never produced a missile system that uses cold launch.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

Hehe an analysis of the structure of the IRIADF after they will start to receive the Bavar-373 in two weeks.

Today the SAM system force looks like this:

HAWK --> Mersad-1 level --> Mersad 2 Shalamcheh level --> "Mersad 3" (Kamin?) level.
Transforming it to a fully mobile, multi-target capable, ECM hardned, low-RCS capable SAM system with the last "Mersad 3" level.
This is the backbone, highest number of systems

S-200 --> Talash-1 Sayyad-2 level --> Talash 2 level --> Talash 3 Sayyad-3 level
Transforming it to a multi target, mobile-radar, with two added missile layers, ECM hardened, low-RCS capable SAM system.
Only the well known 5 systems received back in the 90's

S-300PMU-2, 4 known systems

If the Bavar-373 enters service, it can replace HAWKs used for protection of the nuclear sites. It can start to be deployed close to borders and contested regions like the straight of Hormuz.
If numbers increase, it can start to form a chain around sensitive and ultimately all border regions.

So as Bavar-373 enters service, redundant multi-layer HAWK sites become free, HAWK protected regions get covered by the Bavar-373.
If tasks are efficiently shared with the IRGC-ASF, the IRIADF can cease its massive presence in Tehran and Esfahan. The numbers of HAWK/Mersad-3 sites freed by such a structural reform could be used to create protection for smaller cities currently unprotected or just by the far envelope of Talash-3/S-300PMU-2.
Major missile bases near larger cities could also be protected by the IRGC Sayyad-2.

Slowly the somewhat desperate tactic to use multi-layerd HAWK sites to protect critical sites, can be changed and assets freed. At Mersad-3 level each of those sites will become much more survivable + effective against LO targets + multi-target capable.
In that way currently less important larger cities such as Ardebil, Yazd, Kerman, Zahedan would get a Mersad-3 site, freed by the reforms (initiated by the Bavar-373) from its current duty.

Similarly Bushehr and Bandar Abbas S-200/Talash-3 sites could be moved to less protected eastern parts of Iran when replaced by highly survivable Bavar-373 batteries.

Added to all of this is a complete other dimension: The IRGC-ASF: It needs to protect Tehran, its offensive missile bases and its offensive ground forces.

The key issue with such defensive fortification concepts is that the enemy will concentrate its offensive forces to one point in order to break the wall at one of its weak points. Here is where assets such as interceptors would come to counter the enemy's concentrated attack. If there is really a long range Sayyad-5 missile in the Bavar-373 structure, such a 300km+ missile could also be used to cover and support a sector that is exposed to a massive concentrated attack.
So a key goal is to have strong enough defenses to defend until some sort of support arrives. Alternatively another goal is to defend sufficiently long until all offensive missile assets are spent on the enemy.

The 10x10 Zoljanah hints to a very large and heavy missile, the container seems to be 9 meters long and able to support a 600-700mm diameter missile. Such a Fateh sized SAM would offer sufficient kinematic performance for future exo-atmospheric ABM tasks and a would also be sufficient for an ARH seeker equipped LR-SAM. This capability comes at a higher cost per SAM, to be used in "emergency" or "confirmed-high-value" situations.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## aryobarzan

PeeD said:


> Hehe an analysis of the structure of the IRIADF after they will start to receive the Bavar-373 in two weeks.
> 
> Today the SAM system force looks like this:
> 
> HAWK --> Mersad-1 level --> Mersad 2 Shalamcheh level --> "Mersad 3" (Kamin?) level.
> Transforming it to a fully mobile, multi-target capable, ECM hardned, low-RCS capable SAM system with the last "Mersad 3" level.
> This is the backbone, highest number of systems
> 
> S-200 --> Talash-1 Sayyad-2 level --> Talash 2 level --> Talash 3 Sayyad-3 level
> Transforming it to a multi target, mobile-radar, with two added missile layers, ECM hardened, low-RCS capable SAM system.
> Only the well known 5 systems received back in the 90's
> 
> S-300PMU-2, 4 known systems
> 
> If the Bavar-373 enters service, it can replace HAWKs used for protection of the nuclear sites. It can start to be deployed close to borders and contested regions like the straight of Hormuz.
> If numbers increase, it can start to form a chain around sensitive and ultimately all border regions.
> 
> So as Bavar-373 enters service, redundant multi-layer HAWK sites become free, HAWK protected regions get covered by the Bavar-373.
> If tasks are efficiently shared with the IRGC-ASF, the IRIADF can cease its massive presence in Tehran and Esfahan. The numbers of HAWK/Mersad-3 sites freed by such a structural reform could be used to create protection for smaller cities currently unprotected or just by the far envelope of Talash-3/S-300PMU-2.
> Major missile bases near larger cities could also be protected by the IRGC Sayyad-2.
> 
> Slowly the somewhat desperate tactic to use multi-layerd HAWK sites to protect critical sites, can be changed and assets freed. At Mersad-3 level each of those sites will become much more survivable + effective against LO targets + multi-target capable.
> In that way currently less important larger cities such as Ardebil, Yazd, Kerman, Zahedan would get a Mersad-3 site, freed by the reforms (initiated by the Bavar-373) from its current duty.
> 
> Similarly Bushehr and Bandar Abbas S-200/Talash-3 sites could be moved to less protected eastern parts of Iran when replaced by highly survivable Bavar-373 batteries.
> 
> Added to all of this is a complete other dimension: The IRGC-ASF: It needs to protect Tehran, its offensive missile bases and its offensive ground forces.
> 
> The key issue with such defensive fortification concepts is that the enemy will concentrate its offensive forces to one point in order to break the wall at one of its weak points. Here is where assets such as interceptors would come to counter the enemy's concentrated attack. If there is really a long range Sayyad-5 missile in the Bavar-373 structure, such a 300km+ missile could also be used to cover and support a sector that is exposed to a massive concentrated attack.
> So a key goal is to have strong enough defenses to defend until some sort of support arrives. Alternatively another goal is to defend sufficiently long until all offensive missile assets are spent on the enemy.
> 
> The 10x10 Zoljanah hints to a very large and heavy missile, the container seems to be 9 meters long and able to support a 600-700mm diameter missile. Such a Fateh sized SAM would offer sufficient kinematic performance for future exo-atmospheric ABM tasks and a would also be sufficient for an ARH seeker equipped LR-SAM. This capability comes at a higher cost per SAM, to be used in "emergency" or "confirmed-high-value" situations.


How do these sites communicate with each other to pass the data. surly they can not rely on civilian networks to exchange data. I also assume any networking will be fiber based for added security ..a smart enemy will try to destroy/degrade this command and control network rather that tackling each individual site..just my thoughts..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ich

aryobarzan said:


> How do these sites communicate with each other to pass the data. surly they can not rely on civilian networks to exchange data. I also assume any networking will be fiber based for added security ..a smart enemy will try to destroy/degrade this command and control network rather that tackling each individual site..just my thoughts..



Maybe with this one. 

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iran...s-and-equipment.367996/page-103#post-11601936

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

it seems that Bavar 373 is going to surprise us by its radar components, I can not wait to see. Another rumor is that the Kowsar fighter would have a link with Bavar 373. Is this possible? False rumor? Maybe Kowsar could be the direct defender of the system but maybe it's not true? I do not know ?? Wacky rumor?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

aryobarzan said:


> How do these sites communicate with each other to pass the data. surly they can not rely on civilian networks to exchange data. I also assume any networking will be fiber based for added security ..a smart enemy will try to destroy/degrade this command and control network rather that tackling each individual site..just my thoughts..



Primary secure long range communication would be via Irans mobile troposcatter systems. Data-rate, range, jamming-proofness and security are high enough. Novel concepts like the recent IRGC HF band system could provide a additional layer in future.
Part of C3 system is either hardened inside mountains or mobile on trucks.
So mobile assets like the Bavar-373 will primarily use troposcatter communication fixed objects will use fiber optics to connect to communication assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Hehe an analysis of the structure of the IRIADF after they will start to receive the Bavar-373 in two weeks.
> 
> Today the SAM system force looks like this:
> 
> HAWK --> Mersad-1 level --> Mersad 2 Shalamcheh level --> "Mersad 3" (Kamin?) level.
> Transforming it to a fully mobile, multi-target capable, ECM hardned, low-RCS capable SAM system with the last "Mersad 3" level.
> This is the backbone, highest number of systems
> 
> S-200 --> Talash-1 Sayyad-2 level --> Talash 2 level --> Talash 3 Sayyad-3 level
> Transforming it to a multi target, mobile-radar, with two added missile layers, ECM hardened, low-RCS capable SAM system.
> Only the well known 5 systems received back in the 90's
> 
> S-300PMU-2, 4 known systems
> 
> If the Bavar-373 enters service, it can replace HAWKs used for protection of the nuclear sites. It can start to be deployed close to borders and contested regions like the straight of Hormuz.
> If numbers increase, it can start to form a chain around sensitive and ultimately all border regions.
> 
> So as Bavar-373 enters service, redundant multi-layer HAWK sites become free, HAWK protected regions get covered by the Bavar-373.
> If tasks are efficiently shared with the IRGC-ASF, the IRIADF can cease its massive presence in Tehran and Esfahan. The numbers of HAWK/Mersad-3 sites freed by such a structural reform could be used to create protection for smaller cities currently unprotected or just by the far envelope of Talash-3/S-300PMU-2.
> Major missile bases near larger cities could also be protected by the IRGC Sayyad-2.
> 
> Slowly the somewhat desperate tactic to use multi-layerd HAWK sites to protect critical sites, can be changed and assets freed. At Mersad-3 level each of those sites will become much more survivable + effective against LO targets + multi-target capable.
> In that way currently less important larger cities such as Ardebil, Yazd, Kerman, Zahedan would get a Mersad-3 site, freed by the reforms (initiated by the Bavar-373) from its current duty.
> 
> Similarly Bushehr and Bandar Abbas S-200/Talash-3 sites could be moved to less protected eastern parts of Iran when replaced by highly survivable Bavar-373 batteries.
> 
> Added to all of this is a complete other dimension: The IRGC-ASF: It needs to protect Tehran, its offensive missile bases and its offensive ground forces.
> 
> The key issue with such defensive fortification concepts is that the enemy will concentrate its offensive forces to one point in order to break the wall at one of its weak points. Here is where assets such as interceptors would come to counter the enemy's concentrated attack. If there is really a long range Sayyad-5 missile in the Bavar-373 structure, such a 300km+ missile could also be used to cover and support a sector that is exposed to a massive concentrated attack.
> So a key goal is to have strong enough defenses to defend until some sort of support arrives. Alternatively another goal is to defend sufficiently long until all offensive missile assets are spent on the enemy.
> 
> The 10x10 Zoljanah hints to a very large and heavy missile, the container seems to be 9 meters long and able to support a 600-700mm diameter missile. Such a Fateh sized SAM would offer sufficient kinematic performance for future exo-atmospheric ABM tasks and a would also be sufficient for an ARH seeker equipped LR-SAM. This capability comes at a higher cost per SAM, to be used in "emergency" or "confirmed-high-value" situations.


hi brother, i have Q: can you tell me why these 2 Meraj-4 radars are different and what is the significance of that difference, it seems like they are 2 different version of Meraj-4 radar maybe an upgrade or second generation or maybe a IRGC-ASF and IRIADF difference???

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> hi brother, i have Q: can you tell me why these 2 Meraj-4 radars are different and what is the significance of that difference, it seems like they are 2 different version of Meraj-4 radar maybe an upgrade or second generation or maybe a IRGC-ASF and IRIADF difference???
> 
> View attachment 573203
> View attachment 573204



One is the pre-production Meraj-4, the other the optimized, more compact production variant.
On the first photo the SLC = side lobe cancellation antenna is visible to reduce ECM interference.
On the second photo, one aspect of the convection cooling system is visible.
Both have both just not visible on those photos.
SLC is a feature of more advanced radars, similar generation/style Chinese radars lacked SLC. It is a good sign that Iran pays attention to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Myself

skyshadow said:


> hi brother, i have Q: can you tell me why these 2 Meraj-4 radars are different and what is the significance of that difference, it seems like they are 2 different version of Meraj-4 radar maybe an upgrade or second generation or maybe a IRGC-ASF and IRIADF difference???
> 
> View attachment 573203
> View attachment 573204


Are you sure the second one is not Ghamar? The second one looks smaller considering the size of the towed trailer/transporter. I am just asking as I do not know how to differentiate these two, unless they are different versions of the same radar.

Ghamar 3D Radar during the inauguration:


----------



## skyshadow

Myself said:


> Are you sure the second one is not Ghamar? The second one looks smaller considering the size of the towed trailer/transporter. I am just asking as I do not know how to differentiate these two, unless they are different versions of the same radar.


they both are Meraj-4 radars the second one is optimized, more compact production variant as @PeeD said the first one is the old one i really do not know what is going on with the second one it looks smaller too and lighter than the first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

To me it looks like two different radar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> To me it looks like two different radar


It's definitely 2 different radars


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Both have both just not visible on those photos.



Finally, PeeD made one right comment in this forum (just joking, of course ).
One can see both features at a time in Meraaj-4:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Some different radar that somehow look similar
Boshra




Hafez





Qamar





Meraj-4

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

One has its waveguides mounted one not, that's why they look different.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

Army air defense force unveiled _Falaq_ radar, it's a domestically overhauled and updated version of the _Gamma_ radar with 400km range.

due to Russian's inability (read refusal), this radar was inoperational for years. Iranian engineers spent 2300 man-hours on this project.

فیلم/ رونمایی از سامانه راداری فلق

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## SubWater

> به گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی امنیتی دفاع‌پرس، سامانه راداری «فلق» صبح امروز با حضور امیر سرتیپ «علیرضا صباحی‌فرد» فرمانده نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شد.
> 
> این سامانه که پیش از این، «گاما» نامیده می‌شد، پس از بازآماد و به‌روزسازی با عنوان فلق آماده تحویل به یگان‌های پدافند هوایی شد.
> 
> امیر صباحی فرد در آیین رونمایی از سامانه فلق در خصوص قابلیت‌های عملیاتی آن گفت: این رادار قادر است انواع موشک‌های کروز، هواپیما‌های پنهان‌کار، سامانه‌های پهپادی و همچنین موشک‌های بالستیک را در شعاع ۴۰۰ کیومتری کشف و شناسایی کند.
> 
> بنا بر این گزارش، بیش از ۲ هزار و ۳۰۰ نفر ساعت کار بر روی این سامانه راداری صورت گرفته است.


falagh or previously Gama radar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Iran seems to got a few Gamma-DE with Nebo-SVU as good gesture deal/compensation from the Russians after they stopped the S-300 deal.
Iran never went to copy it because the Iranian route was for S-band AESAs.
After more than 10 years since Iran got them, mainly the T/R modules will start to fail in such AESAs.
One problem is that Russia has not taken those radars into service and Iran is the only known export consumer.

It looks either like some internal subsystem failed and was repaired (unlikely), or that Iran built a copy of its S-band T/R moule. However 2300 man-hours seems to be too low for the latter.
Maybe a contract was given to IEI to create a L-band TRM with the technology they have via their S-band production and it was easily possible.
It's also possible that Irans S-band AESA family development started with the Gamma-DE after Iran got it around 2008. It was the first AESA radar together with the Nebo-SVU, a good basis to develop a modern S-band AESA (Najm series etc.).

Actually I imagine the story to be like this:
Russians: We can't give you the S-300 your ordered, but we give you free access to buy any radar in our export catalog you want, without limitation.
Iran: That's a good start to solve the issue, we take Nebo, Gamma and Resonanz (and pay this broken contract back by reverse engineering their technology: Gamma-Najm, Resonaz-Ghadir, Nebo-IranianNebo).

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## yavar

Iran Advanced phased array radar system " Falag " wirh 400 KM range
Iran Army air defense chief Gen. Sabahi-Fard: due to Russian's inability (read refusal), this radar was inoperational for years. Iranian engineers spent 2300 man-hours on this project.
ttps://tn.ai/2072495

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

*https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CA1OD*

*Saudi Arabia agrees to buy Russian S-400 air defense system: Arabiya TV*

(Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has agreed to buy Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems, Saudi-owned al-Arabiya television reported on Thursday.

The report came during a visit by Saudi King Salman to Moscow.

The countries also signed a memorandum of understanding to help the kingdom in its efforts to develop its own military industries, a statement from state-owned Saudi Arabian Military Industries said.

ADVERTISEMENT
SAMI said the MoU with Russian state-owned arms exporter Rosoboronexport came in the context of contracts signed to procure the S-400, the Kornet-EM system, the TOS-1A, the AGS-30 and the Kalashnikov AK-103.

It not specify the number of each system or the value of the procurement deal.

It said the procurement was "based on the assurance of the Russian party to transfer the technology and localize the manufacturing and sustainment of these armament systems in the Kingdom", but provided no timeframe.

A number of deals have been signed during this week's trip by King Salman to Russia, the first by a Saudi monarch

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> *https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CA1OD*
> 
> *Saudi Arabia agrees to buy Russian S-400 air defense system: Arabiya TV*
> 
> (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has agreed to buy Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems, Saudi-owned al-Arabiya television reported on Thursday.
> 
> The report came during a visit by Saudi King Salman to Moscow.
> 
> The countries also signed a memorandum of understanding to help the kingdom in its efforts to develop its own military industries, a statement from state-owned Saudi Arabian Military Industries said.
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> SAMI said the MoU with Russian state-owned arms exporter Rosoboronexport came in the context of contracts signed to procure the S-400, the Kornet-EM system, the TOS-1A, the AGS-30 and the Kalashnikov AK-103.
> 
> It not specify the number of each system or the value of the procurement deal.
> 
> It said the procurement was "based on the assurance of the Russian party to transfer the technology and localize the manufacturing and sustainment of these armament systems in the Kingdom", but provided no timeframe.
> 
> A number of deals have been signed during this week's trip by King Salman to Russia, the first by a Saudi monarch



Yes, thats logical. PAC-123456789 obviously cant do anything against yemeni Scud-D Variants.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Just a little detail:
When Iran got new Russian radars in ~2008, the Gamma-DE was not disclosed while Nebo was.
This is a example in which a system is regarded as *secret*.
It probably served a few years until its element count went to low to operate effectively. Russians could not deliver replacement TRMs (item out of production).

10 years later it was disclosed at the parade.

It is possible that those Iranian replacement TRMs will be further developed for that large but empty radar array shown at the Eghtedar 40 exhibition.
Generally S-band AESAs are regarded as better performing in size/power (Gamma-S PESA/AESA), but L-band AESAs could be a choice for a low mobility IRIADF ABM radar (Israeli Green pine is also a L-band AESA but larger).

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Aramagedon

Iran Air Defense System (All Weapons)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CAN_TR

When does the Eyeranians test the Bavar?

Americans for sure need to work on their pronunciation.


----------



## skyshadow

CAN_TR said:


> When does the Eyeranians test the Bavar?
> 
> Americans for sure need to work on their pronunciation.




*The Bavar 373 Air defense System will be unveiled on August 22th*


they will show us the test too but recently we test a Shahab 3 missile and we think its was a test for anti ballistic missile capabilities and it was successful so it some how has S400 capabilities too. but we have to wait until *August 22th*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Russians could not deliver replacement TRMs (item out of production) .



I that case how can they support their own radars, and other customers, if any?
Iranian authorizes are well known for being dishonest with respect to claiming things have been done without the support of the original vendor. They expect the foreign and even domestic vendors such as MOD come and fix the issues for free after the warranty period is over. And, if they don’t do that, Iranian commanders start a propaganda using the state-controlled media!
This Radar is still in the list of export items for Rosoboronexport, and parts should be still available. More importantly, 2300 man-hours is nothing! It is simply only around 6 weeks of job for 10 crews!


----------



## PeeD

Myself said:


> I that case how can they support their own radars, and other customers, if any?
> Iranian authorizes are well known for being dishonest with respect to claiming things have been done without the support of the original vendor. They expect the foreign and even domestic vendors such as MOD come and fix the issues for free after the warranty period is over. And, if they don’t do that, Iranian commanders start a propaganda using the state-controlled media!
> This Radar is still in the list of export items for Rosoboronexport, and parts should be still available. More importantly, 2300 man-hours is nothing! It is simply only around 6 weeks of job for 10 crews!



For now it seems Iran is the only export costumer and the sole operator ( Russians skipped it and went for Gamma-S). They may still offer it in case a large contract is made, then yes, they may would restart the production.
2300 hours is not much yes, IEI would have to produce the TRMs and the rest by the 2300 hours IRIADF work.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

Time to time we need to read between the lines: during the show-off ceremony the reporter mentioned the retrofitted radar (Falagh) will help the S-300 system. So, maybe the story is that the Radar by self did not have any issue and was running fine, but Russians refused, or could not make the necessary changes Iran had asked to make the Radar compatible with the existing S-300 systems.
By the way, do we know what is the difference between these two versions of Gamma-DE?


----------



## PeeD

They are basically the same as far as known. The S-300PMU2 is already fully compatible with the Gamma-DE, so no need for change.
Of course it is an ideal radar asset if you want to use your S-300 as ABM system (sector scan/starring capability).

Gamma-DE is simply not in service in sufficient numbers, it was not even spotted in Algeria or Vietnam which are typical costumers of special Russian gear.
I still think Russians offered the Gamma-DE to not too many countries and Iran was only allowed due to the cancelled S-300 contract compensation.
As said, it may have opened the door to all new S-band AESAs Iran has developed.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Myself said:


> By the way, do we know what is the difference between these two versions of Gamma-DE?
> View attachment 573513


The prototype/test versions appeared to have a curved radome,whereas the production version did not.
Interestingly the pic of the flat radome appears to have been produced from an altered curved radome pic.




looks pretty similar to this pic doesnt it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> The S-300PMU2 is already fully compatible with the Gamma-DE, so no need for change.


It is not like what you stated at all. The interface module between these two units is an ‘option’ for the customers, and they need to pay for the interface cards/modules itself as well as programming, and commissioning. Spending only 2,300 man-hour can match with this kind of projects, though. 



PeeD said:


> I still think Russians offered the Gamma-DE to not too many countries and Iran was only allowed


Russia has clearly offered both versions for export openly. So, if no one beside Iran has shown interest - for any reasons - is another story.


----------



## PeeD

Myself said:


> It is not like what you stated at all. The interface module between these two units is an ‘option’ for the customers, and they need to pay for the interface itself as well as programming, and commissioning.








That's the S-400 and yes, maybe it's a empty catalog promise but they say they are compatible as is the other claimed item: Avtobaza-M, which Iran got with the S-300 and is operating it with.



Myself said:


> Russia has clearly offered both versions for export openly. So, if no one beside Iran has shown interest - for any reasons - is another story.



Maybe. Not everything Russia offers for export it is ready to deliver to anyone. The Gamma-DE has pretty good performance on the paper.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*New Iranian air defense system is superior to the S-300: report*



*According to the Russian aviation publication Avia.Pro, this upgraded air defense system will not only replace the Russian-supplied S-300, but also surpass the latter.*
*


https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/new-iranian-air-defense-system-is-superior-to-the-s-300-report/*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

skyshadow said:


> *New Iranian air defense system is superior to the S-300: report*
> 
> 
> *According to the Russian aviation publication Avia.Pro, this upgraded air defense system will not only replace the Russian-supplied S-300, but also surpass the latter.
> 
> https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/new-iranian-air-defense-system-is-superior-to-the-s-300-report/*


Not sure how informed that source is.

"According to the data presented, the Iranian Bavar-373 radars can detect air targets at distances of up to 300 kilometers," 

I thought Meraj-4 had 400km range? Some say that Bavar's missiles will have a 300km interception range, let alone a 300km detection range!


----------



## skyshadow

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Not sure how informed that source is.
> 
> "According to the data presented, the Iranian Bavar-373 radars can detect air targets at distances of up to 300 kilometers,"
> 
> I thought Meraj-4 had 400km range? Some say that Bavar's missiles will have a 300km interception range, let alone a 300km detection range!



yes but maybe thay meant missile range as Bavar 373 should have a 300+ km range for sure if it wants to cach up with its radar range, as for Meraj-4 having 400km range? they never said its range but dude Qamar radar has 450 km range and Qamar radar is half of the size of Meraj-4 



look at them and compare them for yourself and guess the range of Meraj-4, i will say its well above 600 km



*Qamar radar*
*




















now look at this beast


Meraj-4 radar 














*

*
*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

skyshadow said:


> yes but maybe thay meant missile range as Bavar 373 should have a 300+ km range for sure if it wants to cach up with its radar range, as for Meraj-4 having 400km range? they never said its range but dude Qamar radar has 450 km range and Qamar radar is half of the size of Meraj-4


Meraj 4 was on the IEI website (when it was active) and it was listed as having 400km range. 

Also detection range of Meraj-4 (or any main radar) ≠ interception range of missile 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998159249229406209

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iskander

My salutations to all Iranian members 
I wonder about the detection range of Raad-1 and Raad-2 electro-optical systems against fighter sized targets and whether the cited 150 KM and 300 KM detection ranges of the new thermal camera named TIC-S-2 are against fighters or against other types of aircraft 
Regarding the cassegrain antenna of Raad-1 and Raad-2 i wonder if it belongs to a fire control Radar or something else 
TIC-S-2 Thermal camera
http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1129/TIC-S-2





Raad-1 and Raad-2

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Iskander said:


> My salutations to all Iranian members
> I wonder about the detection range of Raad-1 and Raad-2 electro-optical systems against fighter sized targets and whether the cited 150 KM and 300 KM detection ranges of the new thermal camera named TIC-S-2 are against fighters or against other types of aircraft
> Regarding the cassegrain antenna of Raad-1 and Raad-2 i wonder if it belongs to a fire control Radar or something else
> TIC-S-2 Thermal camera
> http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1129/TIC-S-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raad-1 and Raad-2


I red in another article that for fighter size objects it is 90Km range. Albeit, that was almost 2 years ago so the new ones may have improved.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

Iskander said:


> My salutations to all Iranian members
> I wonder about the detection range of Raad-1 and Raad-2 electro-optical systems against fighter sized targets and whether the cited 150 KM and 300 KM detection ranges of the new thermal camera named TIC-S-2 are against fighters or against other types of aircraft
> Regarding the cassegrain antenna of Raad-1 and Raad-2 i wonder if it belongs to a fire control Radar or something else
> TIC-S-2 Thermal camera
> http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1129/TIC-S-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raad-1 and Raad-2




Maybe there are "lens free cameras" arranged in a kind of "phased array".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iskander

Arminkh said:


> I red in another article that for fighter size objects it is 90Km range. Albeit, that was almost 2 years ago so the new ones may have improved.


ِcould you give me the link, please ? in fact, the introduction of systems like these is an important development for Iranian air defenses since it would permit them to create an alternative to radars in case of collapse or degradation of radar network due to enemy EW and SEAD especially if deployed in sufficient numbers and permet detection of stealth aircraft ad the identification of decoys.



Ich said:


> Maybe there are "lens free cameras" arranged in a kind of "phased array".


I don't think so

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Iskander said:


> ِI don't think so



Yes, not now. Me just gave a hint of future technics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Iskander said:


> My salutations to all Iranian members
> I wonder about the detection range of Raad-1 and Raad-2 electro-optical systems against fighter sized targets and whether the cited 150 KM and 300 KM detection ranges of the new thermal camera named TIC-S-2 are against fighters or against other types of aircraft
> Regarding the cassegrain antenna of Raad-1 and Raad-2 i wonder if it belongs to a fire control Radar or something else
> TIC-S-2 Thermal camera
> http://www.kowsartrading.com/products/1129/TIC-S-2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raad-1 and Raad-2


These are announced numbers.
Raad 1
Range:24km
altitude:14km

Raad2
Range of optical seeker: 55km
Range of optical tracker:80km
Range of laser rangefinder:80km
Radio range: 60km

http://jangaavaran.ir/سامانه-های-پدافندی-خانواده-رعد/

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Arminkh

Iskander said:


> ِcould you give me the link, please ? in fact, the introduction of systems like these is an important development for Iranian air defenses since it would permit them to create an alternative to radars in case of collapse or degradation of radar network due to enemy EW and SEAD especially if deployed in sufficient numbers and permet detection of stealth aircraft ad the identification of decoys.
> 
> 
> I don't think so


Please read my post here:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-ground-forces-news-and-equipment.367996/page-32#post-6532666

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1162378927568039938

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DoubleYouSee

mohsen said:


> These are announced numbers.
> Raad 1
> Range:24km
> altitude:14km
> 
> Raad2
> Range of optical seeker: 55km
> Range of optical tracker:80km
> Range of laser rangefinder:80km
> Radio range: 60km
> 
> http://jangaavaran.ir/سامانه-های-پدافندی-خانواده-رعد/


It was so intresting....thanks to brothers who did such an effort to make it...........fantastic.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran officially settles in the club of 4 greatest power in air defense system of the world

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


>


AS YOU MENTIONED IT'S SASHIRAZ'S SITE,AND THEY WANT TO UNVEIL IT IN SHIRAZ............IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE YESTERDAY they spoke about it in shiraz...........

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


>



I hope they show all components. I wanna know if there really is a Sayyad 5.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> I hope they show all components. I wanna know if there really is a Sayyad 5.


Sayyad 5, the missile? or the system?



DoubleYouSee said:


> AS YOU MENTIONED IT'S SASHIRAZ'S SITE,AND THEY WANT TO UNVEIL IT IN SHIRAZ............IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE YESTERDAY they spoke about it in shiraz...........



we have to wait and see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

IEI has developed a automatic tracking system for the Rapier SAM.

I hope the IRIADF/IRIAF buys it as the Rapier with day-only human operated sight is really not up to date anymore. The system has already a small effective envelope reaction time and mistakes require a automatic day/night tracking system with instant reaction.
It's true that the Rapier is a quite low performing system but if the task is only protection of one smaller site, namely IRIAF airbases, then it becomes useful if reaction time is decreased.
Countering subsonic PGM and CM, is a role IRIAF airbases need and Iran has a large number of Rapier systems.

Such things like turning the Rapier back into a useful system have become possible due to the thermal optics revolution in Iran.
One plus-point here is that Irans dry climate allows such 40 year old missiles to remain conserved.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> Sayyad 5, the missile? or the system?
> 
> 
> 
> we have to wait and see.



I meant the Sayyad 5 missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> I meant the Sayyad 5 missile.



i think there is as its been 4 years since Sayyad 4 it never took Iran 4 years to build a new missile from the same family like Sayyad or Fateh families and i think we will see a new missile soon probably a medium range one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iskander

mohsen said:


> These are announced numbers.
> Raad 1
> Range:24km
> altitude:14km
> 
> Raad2
> Range of optical seeker: 55km
> Range of optical tracker:80km
> Range of laser rangefinder:80km
> Radio range: 60km
> 
> http://jangaavaran.ir/سامانه-های-پدافندی-خانواده-رعد/





Arminkh said:


> Please read my post here:
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-ground-forces-news-and-equipment.367996/page-32#post-6532666


Thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raghfarm007

Report on Iranian Radars:

Part 1:
https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...-اول-مسیری-که-21-سال-قبل-با-رادار-ملی-آغاز-شد

Part 2:

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...دید-رادارهای-ایرانی-جایی-برای-پنهانکاران-نیست

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## un4given.1991

Iskander said:


> My salutations to all Iranian members



hello brother
I want to thank you on behalf of the Iranian members here for your posts in المنتدى العربي للدفاع والتسليح .it's always an honor to help knowledgeable and wonderful person like you

PS: and i love your avatar

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

PeeD said:


> IEI has developed a automatic tracking system for the Rapier SAM.
> 
> I hope the IRIADF/IRIAF buys it as the Rapier with day-only human operated sight is really not up to date anymore. The system has already a small effective envelope reaction time and mistakes require a automatic day/night tracking system with instant reaction.
> It's true that the Rapier is a quite low performing system but if the task is only protection of one smaller site, namely IRIAF airbases, then it becomes useful if reaction time is decreased.
> Countering subsonic PGM and CM, is a role IRIAF airbases need and Iran has a large number of Rapier systems.
> 
> Such things like turning the Rapier back into a useful system have become possible due to the thermal optics revolution in Iran.
> One plus-point here is that Irans dry climate allows such 40 year old missiles to remain conserved.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mohsen

First hand info about downed Triton:

It was shot down 16.5km above the ground and from 90km away.

* نماینده ولی‌فقیه در سپاه مطرح کرد *
*پیام رهبر انقلاب پس از اسقاط گلوبال هاوک: دست‌تان درد نکند، کار بزرگی انجام دادید*

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Mithridates

mohsen said:


> First hand info about downed Triton:
> 
> It was shot down 16.5km above the ground and from 90km away.
> 
> * نماینده ولی‌فقیه در سپاه مطرح کرد *
> *پیام رهبر انقلاب پس از اسقاط گلوبال هاوک: دست‌تان درد نکند، کار بزرگی انجام دادید*


this news solves the misunderstandings regard the sewom khordad system with other systems too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> First hand info about downed Triton:
> 
> It was shot down 16.5km above the ground and from 90km away.
> 
> * نماینده ولی‌فقیه در سپاه مطرح کرد *
> *پیام رهبر انقلاب پس از اسقاط گلوبال هاوک: دست‌تان درد نکند، کار بزرگی انجام دادید*


Are you sure the numbre are accurate ,if I recall correctly previously they stated 75km away and the altitude was around 19km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> Are you sure the numbre are accurate ,if I recall correctly previously they stated 75km away and the altitude was around 19km.



it dose not matter if its was in 16 km or 19 km altitude what dose matter is that Sayyad 2 missile has more then 90 km range and not 75 km.


and that is the pic from that night if im not wrong it shows Sayyad 2 missiles were used.







are we giving them air defenses or what? why they keep ditching our offers.


*Minister: Iran Aims to Help Boost Iraq’s Defense Power*


*https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...-iran-aims-to-help-boost-iraq-s-defense-power*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> Are you sure the numbre are accurate ,if I recall correctly previously they stated 75km away and the altitude was around 19km.


what I'm sure is that previously they said it was above 50,000ft and never mentioned from which distance.


----------



## SubWater

skyshadow said:


> it dose not matter if its was in 16 km or 19 km altitude what dose matter is that Sayyad 2 missile has more then 90 km range and not 75 km.
> 
> 
> and that is the pic from that night if im not wrong it shows Sayyad 2 missiles were used.


They used new missile called third Khordad to shot down MQ-4.
That missile not publicize to media yet but some guys mention it in the first hours of MQ-4 shot down.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

SubWater said:


> They used new missile called third Khordad to shot down MQ-4.
> That missile not publicize to media yet but some guys mention it in the first hours of MQ-4 shot down.



3rd of Khordad is a system, it can launch Sayyad 2 missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

skyshadow said:


> it dose not matter if its was in 16 km or 19 km altitude what dose matter is that Sayyad 2 missile has more then 90 km range and not 75 km.
> 
> 
> and that is the pic from that night if im not wrong it shows Sayyad 2 missiles were used.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are we giving them air defenses or what? why they keep ditching our offers.
> 
> 
> *Minister: Iran Aims to Help Boost Iraq’s Defense Power*
> 
> 
> *https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...-iran-aims-to-help-boost-iraq-s-defense-power*


Milky wayin the background what a beautiful scene

They reluctant because they afraid get sanctioned Iraq has has no industry no agriculture no tourism not even services sector all they is oil now even that been looted now imagine America sanction them

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SubWater

arashkamangir said:


> 3rd of Khordad is a system, it can launch Sayyad 2 missile.


No, missile name is 3rd Khordad in the 3rd of Khordad System. As I said not yet publicize so we can ignore it for now.


















More like Taer family not Sayad family

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Malik Alashter said:


> Milky wayin the background what a beautiful scene
> 
> They reluctant because they afraid get sanctioned Iraq has has no industry no agriculture no tourism not even services sector all they is oil now even that been looted now imagine America sanction them



agreed but Iraq and Lebanon need some air defense system as soon as possible Israel is already attacking Iraq i hope Iraq gets some air defense systems soon be it from Iran or Russia but i hope they chose Iran's offer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

SubWater said:


> No, missile name is 3rd Khordad in the 3rd of Khordad System. As I said not yet publicize so we can ignore it for now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More like Taer family not Sayad family



3rd of Khordad system can fire multiple missiles from Taer series to Sayyad 2 series.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Malik Alashter

skyshadow said:


> agreed but Iraq and Lebanon need some air defense system as soon as possible Israel is already attacking Iraq i hope Iraq gets some air defense systems soon be it from Iran or Russia but i hope they chose Iran's offer.


You Furs Majoos we don't want your system hahahaha we can buy Chinese cheap and good

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Malik Alashter said:


> You Furs Majoos we don't want your system hahahaha we can buy Chinese cheap and good



well good luck with that way of thinking in Iraq we already seeing what happens when you buy Chines drones let see how there air defense system look like in couple of years.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Malik Alashter

skyshadow said:


> well good luck with that way of thinking in Iraq we already seeing what happens when you buy Chines drones let see how there air defense system look like in couple of years.


I've been sarcastic

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> well good luck with that way of thinking in Iraq we already seeing what happens when you buy Chines drones let see how there air defense system look like in couple of years.



https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ssion-capable-as-other-buyers-give-up-on-them

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

arashkamangir said:


> https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ssion-capable-as-other-buyers-give-up-on-them


Blame the corruption not the planes when they get the money to buy spares they keep the money for them then to hell with Iraq security and Iraqis at all that's the kind of people we have

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Malik Alashter said:


> I've been sarcastic


yes i got that, that's way i said good luck with that way of thinking as i understood that you mean there way of thinking and not a personal opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Malik Alashter said:


> Blame the corruption not the planes when they get the money to buy spares they keep the money for them then to hell with Iraq security and Iraqis at all that's the kind of people we have


In more favourable political circumstances Iraq would buy drones from Iran. S-129 would be similar price to CH-4 (Hamaseh much cheaper) and Iran would be far more reliable than any other country in helping with maintenance and spare parts. 

When Daesh was storming through Iraq, Iran was the first country in the world to help (sending tanks and fighter jets etc).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Battle of Waterloo said:


> In more favourable political circumstances Iraq would buy drones from Iran. S-129 would be similar price to CH-4 (Hamaseh much cheaper) and Iran would be far more reliable than any other country in helping with maintenance and spare parts.
> 
> When Daesh was storming through Iraq, Iran was the first country in the world to help (sending tanks and fighter jets etc).



Iraq won't risk US sanctions, even after 2021 the US will do everything in their power to prevent Iran from acquiring modern weapons. They did this back in the early 90s after the fall of the Soviets, when Russian arms were going for cheap because of their weak economy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

TruthHurtz said:


> Iraq won't risk US sanctions, even after 2021 the US will do everything in their power to prevent Iran from acquiring modern weapons. They did this back in the early 90s after the fall of the Soviets, when Russian arms were going for cheap because of their weak economy.


Iran already exports a lot of military equipment to Iraq, just no 'big ticket' items. Something like Hamaseh or Ababil (instead of S-129) might similarly not result in US sanctions against Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SubWater

arashkamangir said:


> 3rd of Khordad system can fire multiple missiles from Taer series to Sayyad 2 series.


did I said something else?
When your system can fire two different missiles is not strange to have third type of missile for that too !!!!
I said that b/c in above our brothers were discussing about range of missiles, and that was confusing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

*Iran withdraws S-300 from Gulf coast*
*Sean O’Connor, Indianapolis* - Jane's Defence Weekly 
19 August 2019
Follow

In a possible sign that Tehran no longer sees an imminent escalation of tensions in the Gulf, the S-300 long-range air-defence system that was deployed to Asaluyeh in May has been withdrawn, satellite imagery shows.

A full S-300PMU-2 battery – one of four Iran received from Russia in 2016 – was deployed to an airfield in Asaluyeh from its base near Bushehr, enabling it to cover the central Gulf. Satellite imagery shows the battery vacated the site between 11 and 22 July.

https://www.janes.com/article/90524/iran-withdraws-s-300-from-gulf-coast

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> *Iran withdraws S-300 from Gulf coast*
> *Sean O’Connor, Indianapolis* - Jane's Defence Weekly
> 19 August 2019
> Follow
> 
> In a possible sign that Tehran no longer sees an imminent escalation of tensions in the Gulf, the S-300 long-range air-defence system that was deployed to Asaluyeh in May has been withdrawn, satellite imagery shows.
> 
> A full S-300PMU-2 battery – one of four Iran received from Russia in 2016 – was deployed to an airfield in Asaluyeh from its base near Bushehr, enabling it to cover the central Gulf. Satellite imagery shows the battery vacated the site between 11 and 22 July.
> 
> https://www.janes.com/article/90524/iran-withdraws-s-300-from-gulf-coast


They probably figured 3rd Khordad is more than enough to deter the enemies

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## hussainb72

TheImmortal said:


> *Iran withdraws S-300 from Gulf coast*
> *Sean O’Connor, Indianapolis* - Jane's Defence Weekly
> 19 August 2019
> Follow
> 
> In a possible sign that Tehran no longer sees an imminent escalation of tensions in the Gulf, the S-300 long-range air-defence system that was deployed to Asaluyeh in May has been withdrawn, satellite imagery shows.
> 
> A full S-300PMU-2 battery – one of four Iran received from Russia in 2016 – was deployed to an airfield in Asaluyeh from its base near Bushehr, enabling it to cover the central Gulf. Satellite imagery shows the battery vacated the site between 11 and 22 July.
> 
> https://www.janes.com/article/90524/iran-withdraws-s-300-from-gulf-coast



Or maybe it will be replaced by a better system in 2 days. Who knows.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## PeeD

Bavar-373 radars both have now an IIF array added. Plus the engagement radar has 4 side lobe canceling sub arrays.
Missile is the Sayyad-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Iskander

PeeD said:


> Missile is the Sayyad-4.


there are 3 types of missiles for bavar 373 to be unveiled or i am wrong

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Bavar-373 radars both have now an IIF array added. Plus the engagement radar has 4 side lobe canceling sub arrays.
> Missile is the Sayyad-4.


Is it just me or do these radars look HUGE? Bigger than we've previously seen them. The one in the centre specifically.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## PeeD

Radars are effectively the same, just the IFF array makes it look much larger (at 200km+ range you need a large IFF array). Engagement radar has additionally grown by the 4 SLC arrays added.

I'm quite sure that there are two different missiles shown. The one launched is significantly different than the SD-4 shown on the ground. The missile test launched had different fin angles and size plus a very prominent step between the booster and warhead/guidance section. Could be due to early model variant and final design, but could also be more than that. The box seems a little too large for the SD-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Draco.IMF

still hot launch...as some members sayd B-373 will use cold launch

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## PeeD

As a multi-missile system, the Bavar-373 does not need a cold start system for its longest range component: Cold launch with a TVC system is needed by the S-300/-400 (among other reasons) to cover low flying, close targets. The missile can be *instantly* directed early on without high aerodynamic losses.
The Sayyad-4 on the other hand will likely be used only against +50km targets and almost never against popping up CM like targets. Hence it does not need cold start or TVC for directing towards the target, it fly on ballistic trajectory to get to altitude and the aerodynamic losses are low enough on such a trajectory.
TVC and cold launch have other benefits too but only TVC would be worth the added costs for ABM role.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Radars are effectively the same, just the IFF array makes it look much larger (at 200km+ range you need a large IFF array). Engagement radar has additionally grown by the 4 SLC arrays added.
> 
> I'm quite sure that there are two different missiles shown. The one launched is significantly different than the SD-4 shown on the ground. The missile test launched had different fin angles and size plus a very prominent step between the booster and warhead/guidance section. Could be due to early model variant and final design, but could also be more than that. The box seems a little too large for the SD-4.


I thought that at first too, guessed maybe it could be Sadid-630. But upon closer inspection I think it's just a trick of the light, the red missile showed it too at first but then it was gone. Look at the zoomed in pictures below.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163767312656338945

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I thought that at first too, guessed maybe it could be Sadid-630. But upon closer inspection I think it's just a trick of the light, the red missile showed it too at first but then it was gone. Look at the zoomed in pictures below.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163767312656338945



Yes, plus it might be a variation in the prototype phase.

On why the S-band AESA component of this effectively dual band system has no side lobe canceling arrays but the X-band AESA has: It's a cost issue: On the S-band component it can be integrated in the array, sacrificing a smaller numbers of the total TRM count for SLC task.
On the X-band component, all of the relatively expensive TRMs are needed for illuminating/tracking/data-link, its most cost effective to use PESA sub arrays for SLC purpose.

Alone the cost for such a large active array... 10.000-15.000 TRM elements... A very expensive method for Iranian doctrine.

PS: This should be the worlds first operational dual-band SAM system: Chinese have a new HQ-16 variant that is dual band, but not ready/in service. The relationship between the acquisition radar and engagement radar is most likely beyond that, they are sensor-fusion twins.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## NaCon



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Yes, plus it might be a variation in the prototype phase.
> 
> On why the S-band AESA component of this effectively dual band system has no side lobe canceling arrays but the X-band AESA has: It's a cost issue: On the S-band component it can be integrated in the array, sacrificing a smaller numbers of the total TRM count for SLC task.
> On the X-band component, all of the relatively expensive TRMs are needed for illuminating/tracking/data-link, its most cost effective to use PESA sub arrays for SLC purpose.
> 
> Alone the cost for such a large active array... 10.000-15.000 TRM elements... A very expensive method for Iranian doctrine.
> 
> PS: This should be the worlds first operational dual-band SAM system: Chinese have a new HQ-16 variant that is dual band, but not ready/in service. The relationship between the acquisition radar and engagement radar is most likely beyond that, they are sensor-fusion twins.



So do you still stand by your assertions from about 120 pages ago, in 2017? Given how these radars have evolved over that time. It does strike me as odd that a CW radars (with the vunerabilities and limitations associated with them) would be used as a part of an anti-stealth system. Also, I'm intrigued at how 2 advanced radars would be cheaper than 1 large, very advanced "do-it-all" radar like the MPQ-65, or even the 30N6.



PeeD said:


> A quick analysis of MTNs photos
> 
> So now the names for each of the Bavars radars are mentioned. Hence let me further explain what I think about the Bavars radar systems as I did before i this thread.
> 
> One of the Bavar battery radars is called engagement radar and the other accusation and engagement radar. Both work in the same bandwidth, both are phased arrays and as said earlier apparently active ones. So why using two such radars in the Bavar battery and not just one like in the S-300PM/400, Patriot and all the others?
> 
> I speculate that the reason is that the Bavar has a higher emphasis to work effectively against VLO, stealth targets while using SARH guided long range SAMs.
> 
> If you want to use a long range SARH guided missile against a stealth target at max. range you will have a hard time to track the target at those ranges in S- to X-band for which their VLO features are best optimized. It will even have a hard time to detect the target.
> A somewhat complex but feasible solution is the following one which fits the Bavars displayed systems exactly.
> 
> Long range surveillance radar data is used as the highest tier source of information this can be by large static systems such as the IRGC's Ghadir or the IRIADF OTH radar which is in development or already operational. This is passed down to lower tier long range surveillance systems such as the Meraj-4, Matla ol Fajr-3 or Nebo-SVU.
> Iran has no own mobile Nebo-SVU equivalent, a mobile VHF AESA with space time processing, digital beamforming and most importantly for our case sufficiently accurate 3D coordinate information. But with the static Fath-14 we know that they are working on what would become a Nebo-SVU equivalent.
> 
> High tier system such as Ghadir/OTH radars can only do early warning of the rough area where the target should be. The first system of the greater Bavar system which could detect a stealth target is successfully would be a Nevo-SVU like system, potentially using its AESA beamforming capability to search in a limited portion of the airspace with greater concentration of RF energy to archive greater dynamic range. The features of the Nebo-SVU I described above made it the first VHF-band radar with accurate enough resolution to successfully guide a SARH SAM towards it with a good chance for the SAM seeker to pick up the target a terminal phase. This theoretical operation was made famous by Carlo Kopp for Australian Airpower for the S-300PM/400.
> 
> Now lets come back to those two Iranian Bavar battery radars:
> 
> One is a apparently a AESA wich is enough for following tasks: 360° conventional radar search, sector search using electronic scanning, digital beamforming to track and illuminate a target (needs to be CW/FMCW), track the missile if necessary and create a datalink beam to provide guidance updates to the SAM (if sufficiently advanced). The general functions described are also performed by the S-300/400s Tombstone/Gravestone radars and thus in theory this single radar would be sufficient for the Bavar battery operation. Because its called engagement radar we should expect a CW(FMCW illumination capability.
> 
> The other dedicated engagement radar has no search function, is apparently a AESA too and have digital beamforming capability to concentrate CW/FMCW illumination in a smaller portion of the airspace than PESAs such as the engagement radars of S-300/400 and Patriot. This feature would give it probably a similar illumination intensity at the target as the S-300/400 while operating at a much lower emitting power as well as smaller aperture size.
> 
> To put this together I think there is a special mode of operation which is used against stealth targets or targets very far away: A Nebo-SVU like radar has detected a stealth target at extended ranges such as 250km using beamforming as described above to archive better range (by knowing the rough portion of airspace where the target should be by higher tier early warning systems).
> This information is passed to a Bavar battery. The SAM is launched with those coordinates feed into its INS. The search and engagment radar of the Bavar starts to sporadically emitting in order to track the SAMs position and feed it with guidance updates via a dedicated data-link beam produced by the beamformer. At this point this Bavar radar does not see the stealth target, it only uses the coordinated provided to it by the Nebo-SVU-like radar.
> Coming closer terminal range the dedicated engagement/illumination radar is activated to illuminate the portion of airspace where the Nebo-SVU-like radar tracks the target. Also this radar sees no target and tracks nothing.
> Of course at one point the SAM get close enough to the target to pick up the RF energy reflected by the target and the inaccuracy coordinate info provided by the Nebo-SVU-like system is no longer necessary. A SAGG/TVM like terminal SARH guidance kicks in, does the necessary trajectory corrections and possibly sends back what its seeker detects via data-link to do cross-processing with the information provided by the Nebo-SVU-like or other sensors.
> 
> Hence at the moment I think the Bavars search and engagement radar is the main battery radar used for large targets and at lower ranges than the max. SAM range (possibly for use with lower range SAMs of the Bavar), it also a secondary search function is necessary.
> The dedicated engagement radar is a illumination radar possibly not even possessing receiving capabilities. A illumination radar with no receiving system would be a bad decision for system redundancy but could be a wise one for cost effectiveness and knowing that against stealth and very distance targets no tracking would be possible anyway.
> 
> This is my explanation for this unusual arrangement of two such radars. It would make a lot sense for a system designed against stealthy opponents or designed for very long range engagement.
> 
> A few notes: The engagement-only radar would certainly have a receive function for tracking, for redundancy purposes its "a must", its provides the battery with the capability to to remain operational even if one of the two battery engagement radars has been killed.
> 
> The Meraj-4 takes the place of the Big Bird in the S-300/400, a large ~6000 element PESA S-Band search radar (but its anti-stealth capability could be reduced compared to the Big Bird due to the higher frequency).
> 
> The Najam 802 is not proven to be related to the Bavar, but compared to the larger Meraj-4 it is apparently a AESA system with beam forming and more sophisticated capabilities (foremost beam concentration to get a track of a distend/stealth target). It resembles the Russian Gamma-S which s also part of the Nebo-M multiband system.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> still hot launch


Yes Hot launch Sayyad-5
maybe they name it now Bavar-373 which i think it would be most likely out come

for real Bavar 373 I mean S-400 maybe another 4 months

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## DoubleYouSee

yavar said:


> Yes Hot launch Sayyad-5
> maybe they name it now Bavar-373 which i think it would be most likely out come
> 
> for real Bavar 373 I mean S-400 maybe another 4 months


it's being lunched vertically which can intercept all threat coming from all direction's(unlike patriot which cover just one direction).....so why should we spend more money to get cold lunch?!.......as far as i know the advantage of the cold lunch is confronting all way's coming threat nothing more...........so by Bavar-373 we achived this charactristic.....correct me if i'm wrong

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> So do you still stand by your assertions from about 120 pages ago, in 2017? Given how these radars have evolved over that time. It does strike me as odd that a CW radars (with the vunerabilities and limitations associated with them) would be used as a part of an anti-stealth system.



Basically yes. Back then I didn't believe such a large X-band AESA would make economic sense. But now I think it uses normal TRM and Iran has managed to produce cost effective X-band arrays.
I still believe in the dual band concept if used against VLO target --> blind illumination concept.

A S-band array has a ~20dB benefit over a X-band one if used against VLO target. As dual band system the Bavar benefits from that while S-300/-400 relay on a single band X-band array.
The Bavar engagement radar is certainly lower power than a Tombstone but apparently achieves a higher gain to achieve the same or higher performance.



AmirPatriot said:


> Also, I'm intrigued at how 2 advanced radars would be cheaper than 1 large, very advanced "do-it-all" radar like the MPQ-65, or even the 30N6.



First you have a degree of redundancy. Total element, phase shifter, count is also lower.
The price should be higher yes, especially because these are AESAs. But good luck with jamming or even locating such a dual band AESA system.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> As a multi-missile system, the Bavar-373 does not need a cold start system for its longest range component: Cold launch with a TVC system is needed by the S-300/-400 (among other reasons) to cover low flying, close targets. The missile can be *instantly* directed early on without high aerodynamic losses.
> The Sayyad-4 on the other hand will likely be used only against +50km targets and almost never against popping up CM like targets. Hence it does not need cold start or TVC for directing towards the target, it fly on ballistic trajectory to get to altitude and the aerodynamic losses are low enough on such a trajectory.
> TVC and cold launch have other benefits too but only TVC would be worth the added costs for ABM role.


*but it changes trajectory look at this pics and you can clearly see TVC.*












*am i wrong? and were is Meraj-4 radar????*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## DoubleYouSee

PeeD said:


> Basically yes. Back then I didn't believe such a large X-band AESA would make economic sense. But now I think it uses normal TRM and Iran has managed to produce cost effective X-band arrays.
> I still believe in the dual band concept if used against VLO target --> blind illumination concept.
> 
> A S-band array has a ~20dB benefit over a X-band one if used against VLO target. As dual band system the Bavar benefits from that while S-300/-400 relay on a single band X-band array.
> The Bavar engagement radar is certainly lower power than a Tombstone but apparently achieves a higher gain to achieve the same or higher performance.
> 
> 
> 
> First you have a degree of redundancy. Total element, phase shifter, count is also lower.
> The price should be higher yes, especially because these are AESAs. But good luck with jamming or even locating such a dual band AESA system.


Although i can't find out what you specialist in these fields are saying,i read your comment to learn more

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iskander

L-ASR4 radar could be the VHF radar component for Bavar 373 system for detecting stealth targets

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Aramagedon

B-373


https://www.instagram.com/tv/B1Yg53OhP_a/?igshid=1gnw1nvj7e9gs

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> *but it changes trajectory look at this pics and you can clearly see TVC.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *am i wrong? and were is Meraj-4 radar????*



Yes one can be mislead by that. Look at Fatah launches at separatist Kurd targets and Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 launches. This course changes are possible just with fins.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> *but it changes trajectory look at this pics and you can clearly see TVC.
> am i wrong?*



Look at this video of the PAC-2. It makes the same sharp turn and offset nozzle at 00:13, but AFAIK it doesn't have TVC (I'd have to ask @eagle2007 to be sure about that). Sayyad-4 has a maximum altitude of 27 km and there's not much point in TVC unless you want to go above that.








PeeD said:


> Basically yes. Back then I didn't believe such a large X-band AESA would make economic sense. But now I think it uses normal TRM and Iran has managed to produce cost effective X-band arrays.
> I still believe in the dual band concept if used against VLO target --> blind illumination concept.
> 
> A S-band array has a ~20dB benefit over a X-band one if used against VLO target. As dual band system the Bavar benefits from that while S-300/-400 relay on a single band X-band array.
> The Bavar engagement radar is certainly lower power than a Tombstone but apparently achieves a higher gain to achieve the same or higher performance.
> 
> 
> 
> First you have a degree of redundancy. Total element, phase shifter, count is also lower.
> The price should be higher yes, especially because these are AESAs. But good luck with jamming or even locating such a dual band AESA system.



So just to clarify, this smaller array with the SLC arrays is the X-band:






And this next one with the large IFF is the S-band?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## PeeD

It can be said that:
- Bavar with X-band asset can engage non-stealth targets at long ranges. It can also engage BMs.
- Bavar with S-band asset can engage stealth targets at close range
- Bavar with both radars combined and intact can engage stealth targets at long range. It also gets much more robust in terms of ECM and beaming/notching.

Meraj-4 and Nebo are strictly speaking not integral parts of the Bavar system but higher level assets. They support several Bavar batteries.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Yes one can be mislead by that. Look at Fatah launches at separatist Kurd targets and Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 launches. This course changes are possible just with fins.



*well i be damned


one of the radars has a camera on it ( just for fun )  *









PeeD said:


> It can be said that:
> - Bavar with X-band asset can engage non-stealth targets at long ranges. It can also engage BMs.
> - Bavar with S-band asset can engage stealth targets at close range
> - Bavar with both radars combined and intact can engage stealth targets at long range. It also gets much more robust in terms of ECM and beaming/notching.
> 
> Meraj-4 and Nebo are strictly speaking not integral parts of the Bavar system but higher level assets. They support several Bavar batteries.





AmirPatriot said:


> Look at this video of the PAC-2. It makes the same sharp turn and offset nozzle at 00:13, but AFAIK it doesn't have TVC (I'd have to ask @eagle2007 to be sure about that). Sayyad-4 has a maximum altitude performanceis 27 km and there's not much point in TVC unless you want to go above that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So just to clarify, this smaller array with the SLC arrays is the X-band:
> View attachment 574970
> 
> 
> And this next one with the large IFF is the S-band?
> 
> View attachment 574974





great work by my brothers i want to copy your post some times and i want to see if its OK by you guys?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

Let me clarify two important technical details:
- You want your heavy SAM to point into the right intercept trajectory and direction before the boost kicks in fully and accelerates the SAM to a very high speed. Any change of course once at high speed creates heavy kinamtic and energy penalties you want to avoid.
But a long range engagement always follows the same upward ballistic trajectory. The losses are very small hence. So if other, smaller SAMs cover the shorter ranges and lower altitudes, you don't need TVC if your targets are air breathing.

- AESA for use as angagment radar is a waste: AESAs have the benefit of reliability. But engagement radars only work for minutes and seconds, no needs for the several thousand hours a AESA enables.
I can only explain it for achieving higher gain somehow. It of course brings other benefits, mainly in ECCM and ABM capabilities, but they are hardly worth the cost associated with it. S-500 however is claimed to use a AESA engagement radar too... My explanation is higher gain.

@skyshadow 
Sure, everything is welcome to inform Iranians.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Russel

PeeD said:


> Yes one can be mislead by that. Look at Fatah launches at separatist Kurd targets and Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 launches. This course changes are possible just with fins.


I highly doubt it’s by fin. Looks like s300/400 missile course correction.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

DoubleYouSee said:


> it's being lunched vertically which can intercept all threat coming from all direction's(unlike patriot which cover just one direction).....so why should we spend more money to get cold lunch?!.......



brother I'm not talking about this system which its real name is Sayyad 5 and most likely will be shown as Bavar 373. the one i am talking about is round tube and cold launch and it is equvenet to S-400 .

so to your qoustion cold launch has it advantges

My opinion

Sayyad-1 50KM






Sayyad-2 100KM / 2C 115KM






Sayyad-3 120KM / 3C 130KM










Sayyad-4 / 150KM










Sayyad-5 / Tlash 5 250KM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piDXSaUwVNc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvjAJc1LXhM

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Sayyad-5 / Tlash 5 250KM

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ich

Are you sure Iran has a tube one with CL and is not S300? Are there some pics?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

I am glad i finally saw Sayyad 4 vertical hot launch. This alone is a major achievement. I suspect there will be additional media content on Aug 22 and I think the PressTV clip is leaked early  as you cannot find any of these contents on their homepage or YouTube channel.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Shams313

arashkamangir said:


> I am glad i finally saw Sayyad 4 vertical hot launch. This alone is a major achievement. I suspect there will be additional media content on Aug 22 and I think the PressTV clip is leaked early  as you cannot find any of these contents on their homepage or YouTube channel.


It's looks like celebrating Eid early day...
And that confirms there are total 3 Eid in 2019.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Ich said:


> Are you sure Iran has a tube one with CL and is not S300? Are there some pics?


you ask me ??


----------



## arashkamangir

When we get the official announcement on Aug 22, lets revisit some of the earlier posts in regards to the trucks used.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

I think we have a offcial record here too: This should be the first AESA based SAM with illumination capability.
Whether it is CW, FMCW or peudo/interrupted-CW/FMCW.
There is an AESA Patriot in the works and the S-500 will also feature it plus see based systems for use with Standard family of SAMs, but this is the first one of those systems still in work/testing.
That HQ-16 upgraded variant is still in work too.
3rd Khordad would be the only other system I know of but its not certain whether it is really a AESA, could be a unusual PESA design.

Btw. Again, the missile during testing looks different to the Sayyad-4 mock up. Point is: A giant 10x10 truck like the Zoljanah is too much for a Sayyad-4 like missile, maybe it has just reserves for a future larger missile. Maybe there are two different missile. Maybe the missile changed much from the early Sayyad-4 concept.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> I think we have a offcial record here too: This should be the first AESA based SAM with illumination capability.
> Whether it is CW, FMCW or peudo/interrupted-CW/FMCW.
> There is an AESA Patriot in the works and the S-500 will also feature it plus see based systems for use with Standard family of SAMs, but this is the first one of those systems still in work/testing.
> That HQ-16 upgraded variant is still in work too.
> 3rd Khordad would be the only other system I know of but its not certain whether it is really a AESA, could be a unusual PESA design.
> 
> Btw. Again, the missile during testing looks different to the Sayyad-4 mock up. Point is: A giant 10x10 truck like the Zoljanah is too much for a Sayyad-4 like missile, maybe it has just reserves for a future larger missile. Maybe there are two different missile. Maybe the missile changed much from the early Sayyad-4 concept.



most likely options are that those are Sayyad M and C models or it could be Sayyad A for all we know.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Note that the most similar system in layout is the TK-3 SAM from Taiwan:






Same gap between the twin canisters, hot, vertical launch.
Both sacrifice minimum range to avoid higher complexity and cost of a TVC and cold start system.
I hope to see a cold start TVC SAM component of the size of the Sayyad-2/3, to cover targets that require such reaction times and high altitude maneuverability.
However aside missile, even more critical are the radar systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> I think we have a offcial record here too: This should be the first AESA based SAM with illumination capability.
> Whether it is CW, FMCW or peudo/interrupted-CW/FMCW.
> There is an AESA Patriot in the works and the S-500 will also feature it plus see based systems for use with Standard family of SAMs, but this is the first one of those systems still in work/testing.
> That HQ-16 upgraded variant is still in work too.
> 3rd Khordad would be the only other system I know of but its not certain whether it is really a AESA, could be a unusual PESA design.
> 
> Btw. Again, the missile during testing looks different to the Sayyad-4 mock up. Point is: A giant 10x10 truck like the Zoljanah is too much for a Sayyad-4 like missile, maybe it has just reserves for a future larger missile. Maybe there are two different missile. Maybe the missile changed much from the early Sayyad-4 concept.



Or perhaps we could be looking at a shared truck between Sayyad-4 and Sayyad-5? Couldn't they load more Sayyad 4 missiles onto the 10x10 truck?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Well the Zoljanah certainly offers growth potential, whether a Sayyad-5 exists or not.

Another point: I was always wondering how the gain of a AESA could be improved to let a small array like that of the Bavar engagement radar, compete with the much larger array of the S-300/-400 family.
One idea was a novel array that is 3 dimensional. However I never saw such a 3D array anywhere and had doubts whether it would provide any benefits in gain.
Today, I have seen the first 3D arrangement in a radar array: The Bavar engagement radar with its 4 sub-arrays to the sides of the main array.
It is 3D because of the angle they have, waveforming is done outside of the planar plane.
So I revive my old idea: Instead of a pure SLC subarray, this might be a novel kind of wave interference sub array that improves effective gain. I guess the science behind such a system would be a huge problem however.

Maybe these or not even SLC arrays but 4 separate data-link channels...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar- 373 long range Air defense system



























*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This Bavar 373 seems very surprising to me on several levels. I can not wait to see the official specifications ..

I was wondering since the release of this radar if it was a component of Bavar 373? Who knows more about this intriguing radar?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

The Zoljanah 10x10 TEL has 2,5-3m additional reserve in length for a longer/larger container. The Sayyad-4 looks like to be its undersized secondary missile. The goal would certainly be a ARH seeker, long range missile like the S400 has.
I wish to see a smaller missile such as the SD-3 on the Zafar 8x8 off-road TEL as its smallest component. Favorably with cold launch and TVC like BukM3/HQ-16, but with more power.

Funny: Back in 2010 Iran just had the Sayyad-1/HQ-2 and the Shahin/HAWK, this Bavar-373 would have looked absolutly amazing back then. But with the Sayyad-2/3, Tabas, 3rd Khordad, 15th Khordad, I'm a little spoiled. They systematically worked towards this capability, step by step.
Acquisition radar was spoiled by the Najm-802B first
Sayyad-4 by Sayyad-2/-3
It's the X-band engagement radar that is the most amazing item.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> I was wondering since the release of this radar if it was a component of Bavar 373? Who knows more about this intriguing radar?



A very innovative radar, yes but not connected to the Bavar.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Mr Iran Eye said:


> This Bavar 373 seems very surprising to me on several levels. I can not wait to see the official specifications ..
> 
> I was wondering since the release of this radar if it was a component of Bavar 373? Who knows more about this intriguing radar?
> View attachment 574997


Kayhan HF radar..........as it's been written on it

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I sincerely wonder if there is a Bavar 373 and a Bavar 373 II? I look in my radar photos and there are other configurations. And Iran has surprised us for years with new radars coming from nowhere

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

The 4 TEL design looks good, much better than the 2 TEL design they showed. 

But from the footage the missile fired looks red, which looks like a Sayyad 3 missile not 4 - or am I wrong?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Battle of Waterloo said:


> The 4 TEL design looks good, much better than the 2 TEL design they showed.
> 
> But from the footage the missile fired looks red, which looks like a Sayyad 3 missile not 4 - or am I wrong?


SD-3 and SD-4 look like each other with a difference that the later is a little fat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Battle of Waterloo said:


> The 4 TEL design looks good, much better than the 2 TEL design they showed.
> 
> But from the footage the missile fired looks red, which looks like a Sayyad 3 missile not 4 - or am I wrong?



red color is a universal code for test so that's that, as for if it's a Sayyad 3 missile?? it's not as the fins are completely different in shape and size so it's not Sayyad 3.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

Aug 22 can't come soon enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> Aug 22 can't come soon enough.



You have basically seen the Bavar 373.

I don’t know what more people want. The radars, the FC systems, the launchers have all be unveiled over time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> You have basically seen the Bavar 373.
> 
> I don’t know what more people want. The radars, the FC systems, the launchers have all be unveiled over time.



The media content and the drama that follows... All the trash talking goodies and butt hurtings hahah

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> You have basically seen the Bavar 373.
> 
> I don’t know what more people want. The radars, the FC systems, the launchers have all be unveiled over time.



the results of those test against fighters and ballistic missiles we did not saw those yet and some good pictures of the system.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

yavar said:


> you ask me ??



@yavar Ah, sorry, yes, the question is for you. Me forgot to quote.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Ich said:


> Are you sure Iran has a tube one with CL and is not S300? Are there some pics?


Well soon or later it would be unveiled .i am more then sure.
The one I was hoping to get involved was the one equivalent to Russian S-400 with round tubes and cold launch and Yes I sure they not S-300. Because we made them and once you see it you notice defences in design .

This was the original Bavar program to make copy of S-300

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

yavar said:


> Well soon or later it would be unveiled .i am more then sure.
> The one I was hoping to get involved was the one equivalent to Russian S-400 with round tubes and cold launch and Yes I sure they not S-300. Because we made them and once you see it you notice defences in design .
> 
> This was the original Bavar program to make copy of S-300



This doesn’t make sense. If anything, Iran would just upgrade up Bavar 373 to S-400/S-500 standard over time.

S-400 isn’t great because it has “circular tubes” and “cold launch”. Bavar-373 is a copy of the S-300 greatest technologies. That much is evident. Lack of cold launch has already been discussed and that is because B-373 is a long range system. 

Iran avoids the pitfalls of western and eastern armies of trying to JAM everything into one system. (Jack of all trade)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

As things stand before we get more materials tomorrow, this missile structure of the system looks likely:

10x10 Zoljanah has 2,5-3 meter length reserve for a longer canister.
If the canisters are heavier armored against fragments than the S-300 tubes, it would still not justify the additional axis. Footprint is immensely important in Iranian doctrine, going for a easily identifiable 10x10 off-road truck needs good reasons.
Hence it would make best sense to use the additional weight capability of the TEL to carry 6, instead of the 4 missiles of the S-300. Well possible that it would fit, although the gap between the canisters is to small in the photos (with the attachment the used).
The additional lenght could then be used for future "S-200 replacing" missiles that could have a 2,5-3 meter longer canister and a load of 4 or 2, depending on weight.

8x8 Zafar would be a ideal TEL for a Sayyad-3 as the lower range component of the system. Current Sayyad-2/-3 TEL is not off-road capable, but the Bavar system is. Hence Zafar trucks would be ideal for a 3x2 canister configuration for a total of 6 missiles. It would likely also still have a 2-3m length reserve in such a configuration. However as no Zafar based TEL has been seen, it's possible that the Bavar allows non-off-road capable Sayyad-3 Iveco truck for this missile component (unlikely to allow the system to use its all-off-road capability for the smallest missile component).

The final ideal "wartime" system structure would then be: 2 10x10 TEL, 2 8x8 TEL, 2 8x8 trucks for acquisition and enagagment radar. That would result in 12 Sayyad-4 and 12 Sayyad-3 for a total of 24 missiles for which a S-300/-400 would need 6 TELs. A final third missile component would then be a extra large Sayyad variant that would fit in a 2 or 4 canister configuration on the 10x10 TEL.

Soviet doctrine had sometimes were diverging and high requirements: The single S-300P missile needed to be able to intercept CMs, BMs, low-altitude, high altitude, short range and long range targets. Solution was to equip each missile with a TVC system and cold launch.
Iranian solution is spread on several specialized missiles, bringing down cost but also create the problem that one of the components could be exhausted.
However because a SAM system is a layered system under normal conditions, Sayyad-4 would be spent on the attacker first, before Sayyad-3 would be used. If threat situation is low, use of Sayyad-4 could be avoided to use the more economical Sayyad-3.

PS: For a 6 missile, HQ-16-like, Sayyad-3 TEL a 6x6 off-road truck like that which carries the command post, would also be sufficient insted of the 8x8 Zafar.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## un4given.1991

yavar said:


> Yes Hot launch Sayyad-5
> maybe they name it now Bavar-373 which i think it would be most likely out come
> 
> for real Bavar 373 I mean S-400 maybe another 4 months





yavar said:


> Well soon or later it would be unveiled .i am more then sure.
> The one I was hoping to get involved was the one equivalent to Russian S-400 with round tubes and cold launch and Yes I sure they not S-300. Because we made them and once you see it you notice defences in design .
> 
> This was the original Bavar program to make copy of S-300



OMID313 from military.ir was saying the same thing :


> در تصوير اول ،كادر قرمز سمت چپ
> 
> دو كشنده كنار هم
> 
> به لانچرها دقت كنيد...
> 
> استوانه ايي هستند!!!!!
> 
> همونطور كه حدس زده ميشد باور تركيبي از سيستمهاي كلد لانچ (استفاده از موشك صياد 4) و هات لانچ (صياد ٣) و البته كه دومي مختص موشك هاي بالستيك و كروز طراحي شده(خاطرتون كه هست رئيس جمهور زمان رونمايي درخواست ازمايش روي موشك بالستيك رو كردند)
> 
> 
> 
> البته ناگفته نماند كه اينا ديگه قديمي شده
> 
> از گوشه و كنار حرف از باور بعدي زده ميشه
> 
> 
> 
> حالا ما كه خيلي خبر نداريم ولي خاطرتون هست كه قبلا ميگفتن از تركيب چند رادار موفق شدند قابليت كشف رادارگريزها رو پيدا كنن؟؟
> 
> اين اواخر شنيدين كه گفتن ميخوان برد صياد ٣ رو افزايش بدن؟؟
> 
> http://www.irna.ir/fa/News/83133843
> 
> 
> 
> صياد ٤ چطور؟؟
> 
> فكر نميكنيد با توجه به تجربه ي ذوالفقار،، رسوندن برد صياد ٤ از ٢٠٠ به ٣٠٠ يا بيشتر غير ممكن نيست؟؟
> 
> 
> 
> اگر پنج شش سال ديگه نمونه وطني اس ٤٠٠ رو ديدين هيچ تعجب نكنيد،،
> 
> من هم نميكنم .






> حالا كه رونمايي باور رو در پيش داريم در ادامه اين پست سال گذشته مواردي رو اصلاح و اضافه ميكنم
> 
> به اعتقاد من ما دو سيستم مجزاي ورتيكال لانچ رو توسعه داديم
> 
> يكي به صورت پرتاب گرم و ديگري پرتاب سرد
> 
> 
> 
> در مورد سامانه اول
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> در سال 95 و در كوران مذاكرات هسته ايي كه البته نياز به همكاري چين و روسيه وجود داشت رونمايي از سامانه ايي كلد لانچ مشابه سامانه هاي روسي و توانمندي بالاتر از اس 300 كه تا منتها اليه جسم و روح طرف روسي رو مورد عنايت قرار ميداد كار عاقلانه ايي نبود لذا سامانه باور ٢٧٣ رونمايي شد
> 
> نكته اول
> 
> اين نام سازماني سامانه هست اين اسم رو چند جايي شنيدم والبته ممكنه در اينده با نام ديگه ايي رونمايي بشه اما فعلا همين نام رو بكار ميبرم
> 
> نكته دوم
> 
> در رونمايي هاي گذشته در حوزه پدافندي هميشه در كنار اينكه موشك سامانه نمايش داده ميشد فيلمي از تست سامانه هم منتشر ميشد اما در اين مورد ما صرفا نمايشي از مجموع سيستم هاي كنار هم قرار گرفته شده رو داشتيم كه ممكن هست برخي از اونها هيچ ارتباطي به هم نداشته باشند صرفا چند عكس يادگاري و ديگر هيچ
> 
> لذا خيلي روي سيستم ها مخصوصا رادارهاي باور 273 حساب نكنيد شايد قصد اصلي سردرگم كردن ما بوده باشد(توجه داشته باشيد موشك حضور داشت اما اجازه انتشار تصاوير را ندادند)
> 
> نكته سوم
> 
> با توجه به اندازه گيري هاي كه دوستان انجام داده بودند طول كنيستر حدود شش ونيم متر براورد ميشود
> 
> موشك صياد ٣ نميتواند گزينه ايي مناسب براي اين سامانه باشد از طرفي طولي يك الي يك و نيم متر كمتر از اين لانچر دارد در ثاني قبلا لانچر و سامانه اين موشك مشخص شده و براي پراي پرتاب نيازي به اين لانچر بزرگ ندارد
> 
> اما موشك صياد ٤ كه دليل اول ما بر وجود سامانه ثانويه هست
> 
> اين موشك اولا بر اساس موشك كلد لانچ 48n6 طراحي شده (با توجه به شباهت دو موشك) در ثاني طولي معادل هفت و نيم متر دارد و اصلا متناسب با كنيستر شش و نيم متري باور ٢٧٣ نيست
> 
> پس ما موشكي با ابعاد بين دو موشك ذكر شده داريم كه نه نامش رو شنيديم نه اصلا اون رو ديده ايم البته جز قسمت سر موشك،،
> 
> در بنري كه در نمايشگاه سال گذشته رؤيت شد
> 
> تصويري از نمونه هاي اوليه سامانه باور ٢٧٣ را نشان ميداد كه از لانچرهاي كوتاهتر از نمونه نهايي و رونمايي شده استفاده ميكرد لذا مقداري از نوك اين موشك شش ونيم متري قابل مشاهده است اين موشك نه صياد ٤ هست نه صياد ٣
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اما دو فرضيه در مورد باور ٢٧٣ وجود دارد
> 
> سامانه ايي برد بلند براي اهداف هوايي يعني به نوعي برادر بزرگتر پانزده خرداد كه محتملترين فرضيه هست
> 
> فرضيه دوم و ضعيف تر اين هست كه هدف نهايي اين سيستم رسيدن به سامانه ايي براي هدف قرار دادن موشكهاي بالستيك در بالاي جو باشد مثل تاد و پيكان ٣ هر چند اين احتمال بعيد هست اما با توجه به تجهيز برخي كشورهاي منطقه مثل پاكستان اسرائيل عربستان و امارات به موشك هاي بالستيك و ديگر كشورها كه دير يا زود اتفاق خواهد افتاد ماهم به همين نسبت دير يا زود بايد به سمت ساخت چنين سامانه ايي گام برداريم
> 
> 
> 
> و اما سامانه دوم
> 
> برگرديم به تصاوير ماهواره ايي همونطور كه قبلا اشاره كردم در كادر قرمز سمت چپ تصوير لانچرهاي استوانه ايي شكل باور كاملا مشخص هستن و اين دليل دوم ما بر وجود سامانه ثانويه هست اما دليل سوم چيست؟؟
> 
> به تصوير ماهواره ايي توجه كنيد شايد نكته جالب اين تصوير نَه كادر قرمز سمت چپ ،، بلكه كادر قرمز سمت راست باشد!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> در واقع اين تصوير كاميوني هست كاملا متفاوت و متمايز نسبت به تمام كاميونهاي موجود در تصوير ،،به فرم خاص كابين و استتار يكدست تيره توجه كنيد در تصوير ماهواره ايي از رونمايي باور ٢٧٣ هم چيزه مشابهي نميتوان يافت
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> به اعتقاد من ما يك كاميون ١٠*١٠ ذوالجناح با كابين( به قول دوستان كله مورچه ايي )همراه با لانچر استوانه ايي رو در كادر سمت راست داريم
> 
> يعني اين تصوير
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> كه البته دوستان تصور ميكردند وجود خارجي ندارد
> 
> اين هم تصوير فوتوشاپ شده از اين سيستم
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اگر اين حدس ما درست باشد تازه متوجه ميشويم كه چرا كاميون ذوالجناح با دو كابين مختلف توليد شده يكي براي سامانه باور ٣٧٣ و استتار خاص خودش و ديگري هم براي سامانه باور ٢٧٣
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> اما در مورد رونمايي پيش رو
> 
> با توجه به سياست جالب و ابهام اميزي كه وزارت دفاع در مورد اين سامانه ها در پيش گرفته دست حضرات براي رونمايي كاملا باز هست ميتوانند سيستم كلد لانچ را با نام باور ٣٧٣ رونمايي كنند و رونمايي از سيستم هات لانچ به اينده موكول شود
> 
> و هم ميتوانند بر عكس همين اقدام را انجام بدهند يعني سيستم هات لانچ و پرتاب موشك شش و نيم متري سامانه را منتشر كنند و صياد ٤ و سيستم كلد لانچ را فعلا پشت پرده نگه دارند و در زمان مناسبتر با نام مثلا باور ٤٧٣ رونمايي كنند
> 
> مورد ضعيف تر اين است كه هردو سامانه با نام باور ٣٧٣ رونمايي شوند

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

Some observations and ideas:

1- It is not clear why since the introduction of S-200VE system to Iran, the maximum engagement altitude (service ceiling) for all Iranian made AD systems has been limited to 27 km? Is it only a misleading information for media? Or 27 km is a threshold above which a different technology will be required? Or really there is no demand for an AD system to be designed for higher elevations? Just as a reminder, SR-71 could climb up to 26 ~ 27 km easily; while MiG-25 and A-12 could climb even beyond 27 but for a very short period of time. So, 27 km was a good top-off set point for Vega system.
Any consideration for anti BM missions?

2- S-200 VE still rocks with its magnificent +240 km engagement range! Apparently, Russia has recently delivered Dubna version to Syria (S-200M with +300 km engagement range). Is Bavar-373 also capable of guiding S-200 VE missiles, similar to Tombstone?

3- Almost in all S-300 test videos available on internet, the system is tested for double- fire killing probability; which has not been the case for Iranian AD systems, where always a single missile is fired against a no-maneuvering target. I am not sure if Karrar is a good simulated target for advanced AD systems, or not?

4- To me Zafar 8824 is nothing but a renovated Babr-400 which itself was a renovation of the very old versions of MAZ-537 Iran purchased 100 of them during the Shah era. It is completely different and inferior to MAZ-7910 used by older versions of S-300. Unlike its magnificent semitrailer load, Iranian versions are very limited to heavy flatbed off-road loads especially after Iran messed up with its engine / transmission (Iveco). So, maybe that is the reason they had to use Zoljenah for heavier 48N6E-like missiles. Russian TELs have been also switched from flatbed loaded MAZ-7910 to semitrailer loads for newer and heavier canisters.

And the most important thing:

5- How is a Bavar-373 complex itself protected against air attacks? I do not see any short range AD system in Iran’s doctrine to protect its new long range AD systems such as 15- Khordad or Bavar-373. Even older Iranian S-200 systems are vulnerable to air attacks by cruise missiles and gliding bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*so as it turned out we just getting started the next phase is the unstoppable one *



*ایران در گام دوم انقلاب یک قدرت شکست‌ناپذیر خواهد بود*

http://defapress.ir/fa/news/358716/ایران-در-گام-دوم-انقلاب-یک-قدرت-شکست‌ناپذیر-خواهد-بود

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

yavar said:


> Well soon or later it would be unveiled .i am more then sure.
> The one I was hoping to get involved was the one equivalent to Russian S-400 with round tubes and cold launch and Yes I sure they not S-300. Because we made them and once you see it you notice defences in design .
> 
> This was the original Bavar program to make copy of S-300



Interesting. So the "Tubes" we saw at parade 6-7 years ago were part of a real existing development? It would be awesome if we could see it in the next parades.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> It can be said that:
> - Bavar with X-band asset can engage non-stealth targets at long ranges. It can also engage BMs.
> - Bavar with S-band asset can engage stealth targets at close range
> - Bavar with both radars combined and intact can engage stealth targets at long range. It also gets much more robust in terms of ECM and beaming/notching.
> 
> Meraj-4 and Nebo are strictly speaking not integral parts of the Bavar system but higher level assets. They support several Bavar batteries.



I have been reading some of your posts from 2017 on the Keypublishing forum regarding using SAGG/TVM missiles in a SAM system to form a bi-static radar arrangement to defeat stealth aircraft. Very interesting stuff and I'm actually still going through it. Some very robust discussion over there it seems.

I have two questions.

1. Could the Bavar's twin radar arrangement also designed to make use of this bi-static concept? If so, how?

2. In bi-static operation, would you agree that having a network of AWACS aircraft over the battlespace would help fight off stealth targets? In your earlier discussions on keypublishing you were talking about how the missile SAGG receivers themselves would form part of the bi-static arrangement. The criticism to this was that missiles have a limited energy and therefore attack vector that they can approach and detect the target at. Modern datalinks mean tactical aircraft can engage targets with their AAMs without using their own radars, just relying on the AWACS. Something like an E-3 (or smaller if the radar can be made more compact) which can cruise at 450 kts at ~40,000 ft, with 10 hours endurance/8000 km range can use their obviously high mobility to get the right angles to avoid the frontal arc and underbelly of something like an F-35 which are the stealthiest parts of that aircraft. A network of 3-5 aircraft like this (depending on how robust it needs to be) defending the entire Persian Gulf coast could overlap and engage an F-35 from different directions, effectively surrounding it and meaning whatever way it turns, there's always a 'vulnerable' side pointing to a radar. And of course these AWACS have the traditional benefits of being able to plug holes in air defences, aiding with offensive operations, detecting low flying aircraft and cruise missiles in Iran's mountainous terrain.

(Those circles are 250 km range circles for engaging stealth aircraft. I concede that these are entirely nominal on account of how powerful AWACS radars are)

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

I will give you a more detailed answer on the bi-static effect of the Bavar later, but for now: American stealth PR is also made to mislead adversaries to invest in dead end systems and technologies.
Only sober nations who only follow physics won't fall into such a economical traps.
There are solutions to degrade stealth effects into a region where they loose their relevance.
Russia was the pioneer in this field, but Iran has also developed unique counter techniques.
Today Mersad 2 has been made anti-stealth.
3rd Khordad has been made anit-stealth
Sayyad-2 IRGC was the first anit-stealth system
S-200 Talash-3 is anti stealth to some degree
And Bavar is now the leading anti-stealth system.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> I will give you a more detailed answer on the bi-static effect of the Bavar later, but for now



I eagerly await that detailed answer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

AmirPatriot said:


> I eagerly await that detailed answer.


https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/985871/جزئیاتی-از-سامانه-پدافندی-باور۳۷۳-برد-باور-۳۰۰-کیلومتر-است

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Deputy of defense minister:
Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.


جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Iskander

PeeD said:


> Today Mersad 2 has been made anti-stealth.
> 3rd Khordad has been made anit-stealth
> Sayyad-2 IRGC was the first anit-stealth system
> S-200 Talash-3 is anti stealth to some degree
> And Bavar is now the leading anti-stealth system.


How ?


----------



## DoubleYouSee

mohsen said:


> Deputy of defense minister:
> Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.
> 
> 
> جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است


maybe 65km is for anti ballistic missiles


----------



## arashkamangir

Iskander said:


> How ?



Assuming he didn't misspoke, there might be an anti ballistic missile designed for B373. Again, why is it so far fetched for this system to have expandability to tackle different layers beyond the norm of S-300/s-400? It has powerful radars which can be linked to other radars/sensors, from its software and capable of hardware to go beyond its current visible package.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DoubleYouSee

mohsen said:


> Deputy of defense minister:
> Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.
> 
> 
> جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است


About 1 week ago they said it has 400km range


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> Deputy of defense minister:
> Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.
> 
> 
> جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است


This is completely out of the blue, at least from official channels. Wow.

I presume the 6 target intercept is for this seemingly ABM configuration.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> I will give you a more detailed answer on the bi-static effect of the Bavar later, but for now: American stealth PR is also made to mislead adversaries to invest in dead end systems and technologies.
> Only sober nations who only follow physics won't fall into such a economical traps.
> There are solutions to degrade stealth effects into a region where they loose their relevance.
> Russia was the pioneer in this field, but Iran has also developed unique counter techniques.
> Today Mersad 2 has been made anti-stealth.
> 3rd Khordad has been made anit-stealth
> Sayyad-2 IRGC was the first anit-stealth system
> S-200 Talash-3 is anti stealth to some degree
> And Bavar is now the leading anti-stealth system.



PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has *active* and *semi-active* radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??



Myself said:


> Some observations and ideas:
> 
> 1- It is not clear why since the introduction of S-200VE system to Iran, the maximum engagement altitude (service ceiling) for all Iranian made AD systems has been limited to 27 km? Is it only a misleading information for media? Or 27 km is a threshold above which a different technology will be required? Or really there is no demand for an AD system to be designed for higher elevations? Just as a reminder, SR-71 could climb up to 26 ~ 27 km easily; while MiG-25 and A-12 could climb even beyond 27 but for a very short period of time. So, 27 km was a good top-off set point for Vega system.
> Any consideration for anti BM missions?
> 
> 2- S-200 VE still rocks with its magnificent +240 km engagement range! Apparently, Russia has recently delivered Dubna version to Syria (S-200M with +300 km engagement range). Is Bavar-373 also capable of guiding S-200 VE missiles, similar to Tombstone?
> 
> 3- Almost in all S-300 test videos available on internet, the system is tested for double- fire killing probability; which has not been the case for Iranian AD systems, where always a single missile is fired against a no-maneuvering target. I am not sure if Karrar is a good simulated target for advanced AD systems, or not?
> 
> 4- To me Zafar 8824 is nothing but a renovated Babr-400 which itself was a renovation of the very old versions of MAZ-537 Iran purchased 100 of them during the Shah era. It is completely different and inferior to MAZ-7910 used by older versions of S-300. Unlike its magnificent semitrailer load, Iranian versions are very limited to heavy flatbed off-road loads especially after Iran messed up with its engine / transmission (Iveco). So, maybe that is the reason they had to use Zoljenah for heavier 48N6E-like missiles. Russian TELs have been also switched from flatbed loaded MAZ-7910 to semitrailer loads for newer and heavier canisters.
> 
> And the most important thing:
> 
> 5- How is a Bavar-373 complex itself protected against air attacks? I do not see any short range AD system in Iran’s doctrine to protect its new long range AD systems such as 15- Khordad or Bavar-373. Even older Iranian S-200 systems are vulnerable to air attacks by cruise missiles and gliding bombs.



well it has altitude up to *65 KM* and not *27km *and *300 km ( *which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range* so i will say it has 400 km range )* range and not *200 km.*



AmirPatriot said:


> This is completely out of the blue, at least from official channels. Wow.
> 
> I presume the 6 target intercept is for this seemingly ABM configuration.



they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars??

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


> PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has *active* and *semi-active* radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??
> 
> 
> 
> we it has altitude up to *65 KM* and not *27km *and *300 km ( *which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range* so i will say it has 400 km range )* range and not *200 km.*


even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

DoubleYouSee said:


> even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km


exactly my point well said, well said.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

DoubleYouSee said:


> About 1 week ago they said it has 400km range


No, they didn't.
Previous official info stated it's range is 1,5 times more than S300 (which was 200km), so it meant 300km. yet 65km altitude for radar was new.


----------



## AmirPatriot

mohsen said:


> No, they didn't.
> Previous official info stated it's range is 1,5 times more than S300 (which was 200km), so it meant 300km. yet 65km altitude for radar was new.


That's a good point... maybe these specs are for the radar, not the missile?



DoubleYouSee said:


> even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km


That was for the early version of 3rd Khordad, even before the shootdown there was a parade where they said one of its newest missiles had a 105 km range.



skyshadow said:


> they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars?


Often radars are less capable against certain targets, like ballistic missiles for example.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> That's a good point... maybe these specs are for the radar, not the missile?
> 
> 
> That was for the early version of 3rd Khordad, even before the shootdown there was a parade where they said one of its newest missiles had a 105 km range.
> 
> 
> Often radars are less capable against certain targets, like ballistic missiles for example.



yes but not in half, that's big setback or that they are lying.


and they said Sayyad 2 has 75 km range but two days ago they said it hit the drone like what 90 km away? that's why im saying that they do not give us real numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


> agreed but Iraq and Lebanon need some air defense system as soon as possible Israel is already attacking Iraq i hope Iraq gets some air defense systems soon be it from Iran or Russia but i hope they chose Iran's offer.


The pattern seems to be that Iraqi govt needs serious pressure or embarrasment from US or/and ISrael before Iraqi govt will take action to help Iraqis.

Also, Iraqi govt probably interpreted Iran's AD offer as an AD offer for Iraqi groups that Iran supports. lol. Just sayin...there's what people say and there's what people mean..



TruthHurtz said:


> Iraq won't risk US sanctions, even after 2021 the US will do everything in their power to prevent Iran from acquiring modern weapons. They did this back in the early 90s after the fall of the Soviets, when Russian arms were going for cheap because of their weak economy.


But remember that if US sanctions IRaq, Iraq will kick all US troops out too, so sorry, US doesnt hold all the leverage in its dance with Iraq. Iraq might be a bit disabled now, but its not a puppet state. Oil is still insurance. Dont you see it saving Maduro?



Arminkh said:


> They probably figured 3rd Khordad is more than enough to deter the enemies


I think its because US stopped further escalation.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


>



what a beauty. I want to see test footage, cant wait for more content tomorrow.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## 925boy

arashkamangir said:


> Aug 22 can't come soon enough.


HOw do you even know Iranian govt / MOD will give actual full specifications of this Bavar system?


----------



## Smarana Mitra

skyshadow said:


> well it has altitude up to *65 KM* and not *27km *and *300 km ( *which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range* so i will say it has 400 km range )* range and not *200 km*


It is really surprising that is developed such complex Staten which even countries like China, India, France and UK are finding it hard. Only is and Russia has comparable system.

I find this a bit suspicious as Iran didn't have any previous teach record of development it's own seekers and AESA radar needed for such powerful missile

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

skyshadow said:


> yes but not in half, that's big setback or that they are lying.


Also possible that it's for the engagement radars.



925boy said:


> HOw do you even know Iranian govt / MOD will give actual full specifications of this Bavar system?


There's an article here which released a new video and gives specs as:

https://www.u-news.net/fa/news/30/2...یی-فوق-پیشرفته-باور-373-پرده-برداری-میکند.htm

Maximum detection Range: 320 km
Maximum tracking range: 260 km
Maximum missile engagement range: 200 km
Maximum missile engagement altitude: 27 km
Minimum radar cross-sectional area detectable: 0.001 m²
Number of simultaneously engaged targets: 6 goals
The number of simultaneous guided missiles: 12
Launch System: Hot Launch VLS
Number of launchers per battery: 6 TELs

We can't 100% believe these figures but they come from a source that posted a previously unseen HD video of testing. I would say these figures are smaller because they are for the 2 radars that are specifically for Bavar. As @PeeD has said the Meraj-4 isn't necessarily an integral part of Bavar but it's a higher level asset that Bavar interacts with.

The HD video was on telegram (non-HD version on their website for some reason) so I uploaded the HD version to YouTube.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> 1. Could the Bavar's twin radar arrangement also designed to make use of this bi-static concept? If so, how?



Not bistatic but multi-aspect yes. The would need to operate in the same band to be able to set up a kind of bi-static system but their benefit is that they operate in two different bands simultaneously in real-time.
A bi-static effect happens with the likely SAGG guided Sayyad-4, like it theoretically happens with the S-300 and Patriot.
The Bavar can hover use multi-aspect effect agaist stealth targets: For that the radars need to be placed at distance. The VLO platform will try to put its lowest RCS aspect toward the closest threat emitter and by doing so it can't control the RCS level reflected to the second threat emitter. However if the X-band engagement radar is the second emitter, it may successfully evade it because U.S stealth peaks in effectiveness at X-band. A complex situation... to point the lowest RCS, the location/direction of the threat emitter must be known, but the Bavar radars should have very low side lobes and LPI techniques applied.



AmirPatriot said:


> 2. In bi-static operation, would you agree that having a network of AWACS aircraft over the battlespace would help fight off stealth targets?



Bi-static networks are always fragile. Bi-static effect of an illuminating radar and SARH seeker is very robust.
So you best avoid bi-static networks at the core of your kill chain.
You better avoid assets that require runways in the days of the end of the INF threat and the advent of hypersonic weapons.
AEW would certainly help, best against low flying targets. However if you manage to do it without AEW assets than you are on the robust side.



AmirPatriot said:


> The criticism to this was that missiles have a limited energy and therefore attack vector that they can approach and detect the target at. Modern datalinks mean tactical aircraft can engage targets with their AAMs without using their own radars, just relying on the AWACS.



That criticism is obsolete, I was too conservative/pessimistic back then. In fact the Bavar will operate like this against stealth: Target detected --> SAM launched towards it --> SAM continuously updated via missile up-link --> radar starts to track target in the last seconds --> SARH seeker tries to find a lock and if the target is very stealthy, this X-band lock will only happen in the last 5km, or in other words lat 2-3 seconds. There will be a threshold at which VLO techniques will not be sufficient, especially at distances like below 5km.
A HAWK locks its seeker at 40km with much lower power and aperture levels... a S-200 at 240km... now imagine the Bavar not achieving a lock at 3-5km against the stealth targets and at such close ranges there is a exponential increase in signal strength.
So no, at those close ranges, not even a -50dB VLO system will remain invisible, especially if the bi-static effect kicks in too.
The art here is to first detect the VLO target and somehow guide the SAM towards it. Here Irans art is the use of a separate S-band "engagement" radar that steals away -20dB from the VLO assets stealth budget due to its wavelength. Those 20dB reduction is enough to detect the VLO target at SAM relevant ranges of 200km. The VLO asset still has -5-10dB RCS reduction due to RAM/RAS and 20-30dB reduction due to shaping techniques (plus another 1-10dB due to ECM if available). So it is not useless at all, otherwise the Bavar track to kill it at 400-500km.
Iran could have gone a wrong path too here: Fear stealth performance as much to believe -20dB benefit are not enough and a high degradation of shaping stealth techniques is required --> go for a VHF-band engagement radar to achieve 30-40dB reduction. Luckily testing and physics showed them that 20db reduction is sufficient for the kill-chain and S-band is the right path that brings many other benefits too.

Your idea of bistatic networked AEW would certainly also work well especially against the CM and terrain masking threats, but needs large efforts and is venerable. It is however good in a offensive airpower concept, operating above enemy airspace.

I still want to see a Iranian fighter or bomber RQ-170 that uses stealth techniques: Stealth offers a huge benefit in X-band and higher and if deployed in the right conditions brings a useful advantage. Russians use it for frontal X-band RCS reduction of the Su-57 to improve it's air-to-air performance.



Iskander said:


> How ?



By that 20dB S-band radars offer against stealth: Give the Mersad a Hafez, the S-200 a Najm-804, the 3rd Khordad a Najm-802B.



skyshadow said:


> PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has *active* and *semi-active* radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??



Hopefully SAGG and I hope not for an active seeker for its normal Sayyad-4 SAM: System economy is of great importance, relying on ARH seekers is the easy way to create a LRSAM. Your system get expensive and you loose bistatic and SAGG benefits. Notching, beaming and self defense barrage jamming becomes possible.
ARH seeker is good for a very long range missile, 250km and above if used for high value targets in low numbers.



skyshadow said:


> they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars??



6 targets means that the radar must create more than 13 Separate beams: 6 for the missiles, 6 for the targets and the rest for searching. The greatest aspect and biggest breakthrough about the S-400 aside the 350+km SAM component is its capability to attack 12 targets simultaneously. However a less robust que engagement (AEGIS concept) is also possible: You track only the missiles, and begin to track the targets only in the last seconds and then the next ones already on TWS.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
13


----------



## skyshadow

Smarana Mitra said:


> It is really surprising that is developed such complex Staten which even countries like China, India, France and UK are finding it hard. Only is and Russia has comparable system.
> 
> I find this a bit suspicious as Iran didn't have any previous teach record of development it's own seekers and AESA radar needed for such powerful missile



we we planned for this for so long we worked on it for 10 years and we got some help from Russia and China but we worked really hard for this, one thing you need to know is that Iranian will not stand still so some one can mock them Russians did this to us they said no way you can do this and they did not give us any of radars that we wanted and payed we needed them at that time, so we worked around the clock to build this, yes this technology jump is unlivable for us too but Iran has a lot of engineers.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Not bistatic but multi-aspect yes. The would need to operate in the same band to be able to set up a kind of bi-static system but their benefit is that they operate in two different bands simultaneously in real-time.
> A bi-static effect happens with the likely SAGG guided Sayyad-4, like it theoretically happens with the S-300 and Patriot.
> The Bavar can hover use multi-aspect effect agaist stealth targets: For that the radars need to be placed at distance. The VLO platform will try to put its lowest RCS aspect toward the closest threat emitter and by doing so it can't control the RCS level reflected to the second threat emitter. However if the X-band engagement radar is the second emitter, it may successfully evade it because U.S stealth peaks in effectiveness at X-band. A complex situation... to point the lowest RCS, the location/direction of the threat emitter must be known, but the Bavar radars should have very low side lobes and LPI techniques applied.
> 
> 
> 
> Bi-static networks are always fragile. Bi-static effect of an illuminating radar and SARH seeker is very robust.
> So you best avoid bi-static networks at the core of your kill chain.
> You better avoid assets that require runways in the days of the end of the INF threat and the advent of hypersonic weapons.
> AEW would certainly help, best against low flying targets. However if you manage to do it without AEW assets than you are on the robust side.
> 
> 
> 
> That criticism is obsolete, I was too conservative/pessimistic back then. In fact the Bavar will operate like this against stealth: Target detected --> SAM launched towards it --> SAM continuously updated via missile up-link --> radar starts to track target in the last seconds --> SARH seeker tries to find a lock and if the target is very stealthy, this X-band lock will only happen in the last 5km, or in other words lat 2-3 seconds. There will be a threshold at which VLO techniques will not be sufficient, especially at distances like below 5km.
> A HAWK locks its seeker at 40km with much lower power and aperture levels... a S-200 at 240km... now imagine the Bavar not achieving a lock at 3-5km against the stealth targets and at such close ranges there is a exponential increase in signal strength.
> So no, at those close ranges, not even a -50dB VLO system will remain invisible, especially if the bi-static effect kicks in too.
> The art here is to first detect the VLO target and somehow guide the SAM towards it. Here Irans art is the use of a separate S-band "engagement" radar that steals away -20dB from the VLO assets stealth budget due to its wavelength. Those 20dB reduction is enough to detect the VLO target at SAM relevant ranges of 200km. The VLO asset still has -5-10dB RCS reduction due to RAM/RAS and 20-30dB reduction due to shaping techniques (plus another 1-10dB due to ECM if available). So it is not useless at all, otherwise the Bavar track to kill it at 400-500km.
> Iran could have gone a wrong path too here: Fear stealth performance as much to believe -20dB benefit are not enough and a high degradation of shaping stealth techniques is required --> go for a VHF-band engagement radar to achieve 30-40dB reduction. Luckily testing and physics showed them that 20db reduction is sufficient for the kill-chain and S-band is the right path that brings many other benefits too.
> 
> Your idea of bistatic networked AEW would certainly also work well especially against the CM and terrain masking threats, but needs large efforts and is venerable. It is however good in a offensive airpower concept, operating above enemy airspace.
> 
> I still want to see a Iranian fighter or bomber RQ-170 that uses stealth techniques: Stealth offers a huge benefit in X-band and higher and if deployed in the right conditions brings a useful advantage. Russians use it for frontal X-band RCS reduction of the Su-57 to improve it's air-to-air performance.
> 
> 
> 
> By that 20dB S-band radars offer against stealth: Give the Mersad a Hafez, the S-200 a Najm-804, the 3rd Khordad a Najm-802B.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully SAGG and I hope not for an active seeker for its normal Sayyad-4 SAM: System economy is of great importance, relying on ARH seekers is the easy way to create a LRSAM. Your system get expensive and you loose bistatic and SAGG benefits. Notching, beaming and self defense barrage jamming becomes possible.
> ARH seeker is good for a very long range missile, 250km and above if used for high value targets in low numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 6 targets means that the radar must create more than 13 Separate beams: 6 for the missiles, 6 for the targets and the rest for searching. The greatest aspect and biggest breakthrough about the S-400 aside the 350+km SAM component is its capability to attack 12 targets simultaneously. However a less robust que engagement (AEGIS concept) is also possible: You track only the missiles, and begin to track the targets only in the last seconds and then the next ones already on TWS.



Fantastic post PeeD. You explained it very clearly. 

I just have to ask a couple more things (sorry if it's already been asked), because all our arguments are based on this 

1. How do you know the engagement radars are X-band and S-band?

2. If I may repeat what you said for the purpose of fully understanding it - the S-band radar engages the target and guides the missile towards it using its -20dB advantage. But since S-band radar may not be accurate enough to guarantee the kill, the X-band radar is used once the missile is in the terminal phase (last 5-10 km) since the missile's SAGG receiver is able to pick up the target in this range (hopefully a little bit longer... 3 seconds is very little time especially when you don't have TVC and the target may be manoeuvring!). That all correct?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> 1. How do you know the engagement radars are X-band and S-band?



S-band AESAs are Irans specialty, it worked had in the last 11 years to achieve it. But we know that the illumination radar is X-band due to its smaller size primary, plus it is needed for such a all-round system. 2 S-bands makes no sense, two X-band also not, a L- and S-band is nonsense too.



AmirPatriot said:


> 2. If I may repeat what you said for the purpose of fully understanding it - the S-band radar engages the target and guides the missile towards it using its -20dB advantage. But since S-band radar may not be accurate enough to guarantee the kill, the X-band radar is used once the missile is in the terminal phase (last 5-10 km) since the missile's SAGG receiver is able to pick up the target in this range (hopefully a little bit longer... 3 seconds is very little time especially when you don't have TVC and the target may be manoeuvring!). That all correct?



That's the mode against stealth targets yes. It is basically what the AEGIS system does too (Ship based dual band SAM, although not in the more complex sense of the Bavar).
3 seconds is much time at those speeds, no worries, S-band AESAs are accurate enough up until then.
TVC is long dead at those ranges.
Actually up to the P series the S-300 only used its TVC in the first seconds to align against CM and terrain masking threats, especially to reduce minimal engagement range. Against anything beyond 20-30km, TVC would be already non-functional.
Some believe that from the PM series onward, hoping for a dual pulse like booster, there is enough thrust left to have TVC up to 40km to assist ABM maneuverability at 25-35km altitude. However it is possible that the TVC system is already dead at the upper ABM envelope. It is certainly dead at the 200km (PM) and 250km, 380km (S-400).
It was a strict Soviet requirement back then to counter CM's at close ranges (or crossing, that requires lowest reaction times) as the S-300 has only this single missile option. Cost wise its... not good.

Similarly cold launch: A main reason was to avoid forrest fires. For Iran it makes sense due to simplified silo basing capability.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
6


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


> we we planned for this for so long we worked on it for 10 years and we got some help from Russia and China but we worked really hard for this, one thing you need to know is that Iranian will not stand still so some one can mock them Russians did this to us they said no way you can do this and they did not give us any of radars that we wanted and payed we needed them at that time, so we worked around the clock to build this, yes this technology jump is unlivable for us too but Iran has a lot of engineers.


11 years to be exact

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

well here we go again he conformed that *Bavar 373 missile* can reach up to *65 km in altitude* which is long range *he said*.



He added: "The *Bavar 373* system is capable of defending the interior of the country from low levels up to a height of about* 65 kilometers*, which is considered a *high altitude*; its range is about *300 kilometers*; it has the ability to detect, identify and prioritize 100 targets and engage 6 targets simultaneously at the same time.


https://www.khabaronline.ir/news/12...ین-سامانه-پدافندی-ساخت-ایران-باور۳۷۳-به-روزتر

Reactions: Like Like:
 6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

A lot of speculation about Bavar 373 here loll

It is not easy to know everything because in addition Iran has an integrated defense and works in synergy with their many radar and other integrated system. Admit that Iran is overflowing in announcing new radar. 11 years of work on Bavar 373 so he must be full of high tech surprise. They presented us with radars that we have difficulty knowing their true roles in this integrated defense. And how much new radar we have not seen yet?
The interplay of this powerful embedding defense is going to be a nightmare for the enemy. Iran has always mentioned that they keep certain secrets of war that will be revealed in wartime.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

NEWS !


Iran's Bavar 373 strategic air defense system can simultaneously track 300 targets more than 300 km away and lock on them at a distance of 250 km. Bavar 373 missiles (Sayyad-4) are capable to destroy targets as far as 200 km away.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

Myself said:


> Some observations and ideas:
> 
> 1- It is not clear why since the introduction of S-200VE system to Iran, the maximum engagement altitude (service ceiling) for all Iranian made AD systems has been limited to 27 km? Is it only a misleading information for media? Or 27 km is a threshold above which a different technology will be required? Or really there is no demand for an AD system to be designed for higher elevations? Just as a reminder, SR-71 could climb up to 26 ~ 27 km easily; while MiG-25 and A-12 could climb even beyond 27 but for a very short period of time. So, 27 km was a good top-off set point for Vega system.
> Any consideration for anti BM missions?
> 
> 2- S-200 VE still rocks with its magnificent +240 km engagement range! Apparently, Russia has recently delivered Dubna version to Syria (S-200M with +300 km engagement range). Is Bavar-373 also capable of guiding S-200 VE missiles, similar to Tombstone?
> 
> 3- Almost in all S-300 test videos available on internet, the system is tested for double- fire killing probability; which has not been the case for Iranian AD systems, where always a single missile is fired against a no-maneuvering target. I am not sure if Karrar is a good simulated target for advanced AD systems, or not?
> 
> 4- *To me Zafar 8824 is nothing but a renovated Babr-400 which itself was a renovation of the very old versions of MAZ-537 Iran purchased 100 of them* during the Shah era. It is completely different and inferior to MAZ-7910 used by older versions of S-300. Unlike its magnificent semitrailer load, Iranian versions are very limited to heavy flatbed off-road loads especially after Iran messed up with its engine / transmission (Iveco). So, maybe that is the reason they had to use Zoljenah for heavier 48N6E-like missiles. Russian TELs have been also switched from flatbed loaded MAZ-7910 to semitrailer loads for newer and heavier canisters.
> 
> And the most important thing:
> 
> 5- How is a Bavar-373 complex itself protected against air attacks? I do not see any short range AD system in Iran’s doctrine to protect its new long range AD systems such as 15- Khordad or Bavar-373. Even older Iranian S-200 systems are vulnerable to air attacks by cruise missiles and gliding bombs.



These MAZ trucks would be ancient now, completely unsuitable for carrying a long range air defence system given that they used to be tank carriers. The only remaining similarities are the wheels, which are considerably smaller in pics of Zafar. The platform is more than likely based on the Maz-543, but Iran didn't import considerable numbers of these. It wouldn't be that hard to copy a truck platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

If Bavar can engage 6 targets simultaneously while guiding 12 missiles, it means Bavar fires 2 missiles for every one target. Similar to S-300 system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

DoubleYouSee said:


> 11 years to be exact



guys, Iran worked on air defence systems since the 90's, at least
and documents leaked (communication between Clinton and Jelzin) show that Iran had access to S-300 since the 90's....

*On 5/20/97 Clinton again flags concerns about Russian cooperation w/ Iran on missiles for Yeltsin who doesn’t deny some Russians are doing so.*








Mr Iran Eye said:


> NEWS !
> 
> 
> Iran's Bavar 373 strategic air defense system can simultaneously track 300 targets more than 300 km away and lock on them at a distance of 250 km. Bavar 373 missiles (Sayyad-4) are capable to destroy targets as far as 200 km away.



source?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> If Bavar can engage 6 targets simultaneously while guiding 12 missiles, it means Bavar fires 2 missiles for every one target. Similar to S-300 system.


i would say its 12 targets simultaneously

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Myself

Draco.IMF said:


> guys, Iran worked on air defence systems since the 90's, at least
> and documents leaked (communication between Clinton and Jelzin) show that Iran had access to S-300 since the 90's....
> 
> *On 5/20/97 Clinton again flags concerns about Russian cooperation w/ Iran on missiles for Yeltsin who doesn’t deny some Russians are doing so.*



Great document, and I really appreciate for sharing it. Now we know the source of those S-300PT units. Yet, Tomb Stone Radar was not available with PT versions! Mystery continues and may continue for more years.
So, we can now connect many of the dots:
1- Iran has possessed early versions of SA-10A/S-300PT (most probably PT-1 or PT-1A according to SOC) for a long time. They were obtained directly from Russia. Additional complexes may have been obtained from Belarus, Georgia, Croatia, or any other resources. Iran showed components of this system only once during the army parade because PT versions are stationary units. North Korea may have obtained a sample unit directly or indirectly from Iran for reverse engineering, resulted in mobile NK-06 system. NK-06 clearly uses Flap Lid, not Tomb Stone. But, it resembles a modified S-300PS version.




2- Over time the nature of air threats shifted from regular to the stealth ones, or more complex tactics. Accordingly Iran asked for more advanced versions from Russia namely SA-20/S-300PMU. Russia agreed to sell PMU-1 or -2 complexes, and the preliminary agreement was signed during the Khatami’s presidency sometime around 2001, according to the leaked information. Many officials including Hassan Rohani implicitly or explicitly confirm it:






3- Low oil prices delayed the financial settlements from Iran side, but an evaluation version of PMU might have been supplied to Iran. This can be the source of the Tomb Stone radar shown during the Army parade.
4- Tensions on Iran Nuclear activities escalades. Oil prices started picking up, and Ahmadinejad deposited the required payments sometime around 2007. PMU-1 was not in production line anymore.
5- Russia put hold on the contract due to political issues between Iran and superpowers.
6- Iran kicked off a project called Bavar-373 based on the available PT technology and/or help from other domestic/foreign sources. The main goal is to boost the range of the missile (this is what they referred to at least 1.5 times more range — of course an approximate to move from 5V55R to 48N6) as well as anti stealth capabilities. Concurrent to Bavar project, great efforts were made to obtain the stealth hunter radars and their technology such as Nebu and Gamma.




7- JCPOA got signed and Russia finally delivered S-300 PMU-2 units.
8- Iran learned a lot about the weaknesses and strengths of new S-300 systems. This put 2 to 3 years of delay on Bavar project to improve the original design.
9- Iran is still working with Russia on equivalent S-400 systems.

Defence minister disclosed today more detailed information about the system, in the same line with U News:

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980530001107/جنگنده-کوثر-با-موتور-اوج-تحویل-نهاجا-می‌شود-تولید-۷۷۰-محصول-دفاعی-در

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## T-72B

Mr Iran Eye said:


> NEWS !
> 
> 
> Iran's Bavar 373 strategic air defense system can simultaneously track 300 targets more than 300 km away and lock on them at a distance of 250 km. Bavar 373 missiles (Sayyad-4) are capable to destroy targets as far as 200 km away.


Now this is propaganda

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> Now this is propaganda



hell yaah it is

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> hell yaah it is




Media contents are rolling out:
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/08/21/604138/Iran-defense-industry-day-IRGC-Army-Bavar373


*Iranian armed forces mark National Defense Industry Day*
Wed Aug 21, 2019 07:47PM [Updated: Wed Aug 21, 2019 07:47PM ]

Home
Iran
Defence





Iranian President Hassan Rouhani (2nd L) walks past a Bavar-373 Iranian missile defense system. (File photo)


Iranian armed forces have marked the National Defense Industry Day (August 22) when the country is expected to unveil a wide range of advanced achievements in various fields, including a much-touted air defense system.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said in a statement on Wednesday that it was well on its way to expand its capabilities beyond the current levels and develop even more sophisticated defenses despite the economic pressure against the country.

"At a time that the leaders of the global hegemony and the enemies of the Islamic Revolution and establishment are with spite and envy pursuing the policy of sanctions despite their inability to take on the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, military organizations and in particular the IRGC focus on the strategy of growing and expanding the country's defenses using" indigenous designs, read the statement.

The IRGC noted that the great strides Iran's defense industry has made over the years in terms of land, maritime and aerospace technologies have turned the Islamic Republic into the undisputed power of the region and put it on the same level as trans-regional powers.

The defense industry and its resilience in the face of foreign pressure also provide great examples for the country's economy and industry, the statement added.

The IRGC's downing of an intruding US spy drone over the Persian Gulf last month and its legal seizure of a British tanker in the Persian Gulf also attested to the Iranian defense industry's strategic role.

The Iranian defense industry's effect could also be traced in various aspects of the regional Islamic resistance movements against proxies and terror groups, it said.

Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi also marked the occasion in a statement, saying that Iran, unlike some other countries in the Middle East region, enjoyed great security thanks to its defense industry.

"We live in a country that enjoys a very high level of security despite all the threats and hostilities by the global arrogance and its regional cronies," Admiral Khanzadi said.

The commander said Iran, because of its access to open waters and its geopolitical situation, played a significant role in global security.

*Iran to unveil advanced missile defense system*

Deputy Defense Minister Brigadier General Hojjatollah Ghoreishi also said Wednesday that Iran's Army was also slated to unveil the Bavar-373 advanced surface-to-air missile system on Thursday.

*The Bavar-373 is a mobile missile defense system designed to intercept and destroy incoming targets flying at altitudes of up to 65 kilometers. The system employs missiles that have a maximum range of 300 kilometers.*

General Ghoreishi said the missile is a rival to Russia’s S-300 missile system and brings quite a few substantial upgrades over its Russian equivalent.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Let me give some credits to Russians here: I said that AHR seeker equipped SAMs are the easy path for nations unable to develop a SAGG based system. The same is true for using a AESA radar as illumination radar; its a more expansive path to achieve something a PESA like the Russian Tombstone is able to do at much lower cost.
If you try to achieve something and need a technology that's twice as expensive but you competitor manages to do the same with technology half that price then his skills are higher.

The Russian design for the S-300P engagement radar was incredibly elegant and of high power. Iran may have been unable to copy it in a good way or somehow lacked access. So it may decided/been forced to go for the AESA path in order to achieve similar results.

This is one scenario. The other is that there is a technological reason to switch to AESA technology and that's the reason why Iran did it and Russia is said to have done it for it's S-500.
The most convincing reason to me would be that the AESA design can establish a good track on very high speed, hypersonic targets while the Gravestone has problems to do so. Jamming issues could be another reason, waveform agility and higher bandwidth for hopping.
The S-300P technology has been 50 years in work now and deserves credit, they perfected it with the limited means of that time.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

arashkamangir said:


> The system employs missiles that have a maximum range of 300 kilometers.


Wow...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


> i would say its 12 targets simultaneously


haha......my desktop background was 3rd khordad and i decided to switch on bavar......and now the picture you posted persuade me to do sooner

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

Ongoing ceremony right now

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1164393647330254850

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
 4


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1vOxwqdkDbDGB


----------



## Sina-1

Farsnews is reporting TVC on Sayyad 4.




https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980531000038/سامانه-باور33-چه-ویژگی‌هایی-دارد-دست‌یابی-ایران-به-فناوری‌های-نوین

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Shams313

No pic and video released yet?????
I'm waiting....


----------



## arashkamangir

https://twitter.com/PressTV?ref_src...373-President-Rouhani-Defense-Minister-Hatami


----------



## yavar

Iran domestically made long range air defense system Bavar-373 260 KM range, Altitude 27 KM, detection range 320 KM, ability of 100 target tracking simultaneous, and engaged 6 targets ,
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019...373-President-Rouhani-Defense-Minister-Hatami

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Smarana Mitra said:


> I find this a bit suspicious as Iran didn't have any previous teach record of development it's own seekers and AESA radar needed for such powerful missile


it's not new, we were developing AD since 80s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Here is a ranking of world systems and capabilities from offical data:

1. Aegis combat system with SM-2, -3 and -6
2. THAAD
3. S-400
4. Bavar-373
5. S-300PM
6. Arrow-2/3
7. HQ-9
8. Patriot PAC-3
9. Tien Kung-3
10. Aster
11. North Korean S-300P variant
12. Indian ASAT

This translates to:
1. Russia (due to compactness mobility and all-round capability of the S-400)
2. U.S.A (higher capability systems but, not very economical and fragile)
3. China (before Iran due to tested ASAT and S-300 based systems)
4. Iran (missile-wise inferior to Israel but radar wise superior)
5. Israel (better missiles and more powerful radars than Iran, but either expensive high-tech solutions, much larger and static (radars) or less sophisticated. Higher ABM capability, lower anti-air)
6. France/Europe (expensive, high-tech solutions with lower ranges, low robustness)
7. Taiwan (much U.S support and less sophisticated radars)
8. North Korea (old technology, probably lacking SARH seeker, but overall high performing system)
9. India (expensive high-tech solutions on ASAT missile, but lacking LRSAM system radars)
10. Japan (lack of range and robustness plus expensive solutions)
11. South Korea (no ready product, only projects)

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## hussainb72

yavar said:


> Iran domestically made long range air defense system Bavar-373 260 KM range, Altitude 27 KM, detection range 320 KM, ability of 100 target tracking simultaneous, and engaged 6 targets ,
> https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019...373-President-Rouhani-Defense-Minister-Hatami



Looking at the way the missile turns while the nozzle is still pointing downwards in the vid should mean that the missile has TVC right?

And I hope that we can see more stuff being unveiled today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

@PeeD, join the Other forum  u r missed there

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

guys it seems like there is a misunderstanding regarding the max service ceiling, like any other system bavar's anti ballistic ceiling is different than the anti aircraft one so as the max range. the max ABM calling is 65 km and max AA is 27 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Bavar-373 is a mobile missile defense system designed to intercept and destroy hostile targets at 65 km altitude. The system uses missiles with a maximum range of 300 km. It is a competitor of the Russian S-300, because it is optimized from the Iranian design missile batteries Sayad 2 and Sayad 3. The long-range Bavar 373 is capable of simultaneously identifying up to 300 targets, to detect 100 targets and to engage six targets at a time. Aerospace technicians from the Iranian Armed Forces and the national defense industry have designed the device in less than 10 years and have just delivered it to Iran's Integrated Air Defense Command.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar-373 long range air defense system*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD in this image it says the S-band radar is for "kashf va shenasayi". This implies it is *not* an engagement radar. Does this mean it cannot guide missiles towards the target as we hoped?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD in this image it says the S-band radar is for "kashf va shenasayi". This implies it is *not* an engagement radar. Does this mean it cannot guide missiles towards the target as we hoped?
> 
> View attachment 575302


one battalion can manage 24 missile......correct me if i'm wrong

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD in this image it says the S-band radar is for "kashf va shenasayi". This implies it is *not* an engagement radar. Does this mean it cannot guide missiles towards the target as we hoped?
> 
> View attachment 575302


Engagement radars are acquisition radars that track and collect data on target and also illumination radars,there are many different guidance techniques and advanced AD systems use multiple guidance systems, for different type of missiles but also for backup.Engagement radars are integral part of AD while Early warning and search radars are mostly dedicated assets used in addition on battery or battalion level(or division, puk..if different organization is used)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar-373 long range air defense system*


If possible upload pic of fire control room.
Did the ministry nammed those radars? Where's the miraj-4 radar..?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

sanel1412 said:


> Engagement radars are acquisition radars that track and collect data on target and also illumination radars,there are many different guidance techniques and advanced AD systems use multiple guidance systems, for different type of missiles but also for backup.Engagement radars are integral part of AD while Early warning and search radars are mostly dedicated assets used in addition on battery or battalion level(or division, puk..if different organization is used)



Me and PeeD have been discussing how Bavar had two radars in addition to the separate Meraj-4 radar. PeeD assessed that these were an X-band engagement radar and an S-band radar for both tracking and engagement. The S-band radar would aid Bavar in engaging stealth targets. However in the image I posted the text underneath the S-band radar implies that it is only an acquisition radar with no engagement capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Here is a ranking of world systems and capabilities from offical data:
> 
> 1. Aegis combat system with SM-2, -3 and -6
> 2. THAAD
> 3. S-400
> 4. Bavar-373
> 5. S-300PM
> 6. Arrow-2/3
> 7. HQ-9
> 8. Patriot PAC-3
> 9. Tien Kung-3
> 10. Aster
> 11. North Korean S-300P variant
> 12. Indian ASAT
> 
> This translates to:
> 1. Russia (due to compactness mobility and all-round capability of the S-400)
> 2. U.S.A (higher capability systems but, not very economical and fragile)
> 3. China (before Iran due to tested ASAT and S-300 based systems)
> 4. Iran (missile-wise inferior to Israel but radar wise superior)
> 5. Israel (better missiles and more powerful radars than Iran, but either expensive high-tech solutions, much larger and static (radars) or less sophisticated. Higher ABM capability, lower anti-air)
> 6. France/Europe (expensive, high-tech solutions with lower ranges, low robustness)
> 7. Taiwan (much U.S support and less sophisticated radars)
> 8. North Korea (old technology, probably lacking SARH seeker, but overall high performing system)
> 9. India (expensive high-tech solutions on ASAT missile, but lacking LRSAM system radars)
> 10. Japan (lack of range and robustness plus expensive solutions)
> 11. South Korea (no ready product, only projects)



lets give Iran just one more decade....

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD in this image it says the S-band radar is for "kashf va shenasayi". This implies it is *not* an engagement radar. Does this mean it cannot guide missiles towards the target as we hoped?
> 
> View attachment 575302



well Iran just said that this radar will guide the missile until it hits the target

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Me and PeeD have been discussing how Bavar had two radars in addition to the separate Meraj-4 radar. PeeD assessed that these were an X-band engagement radar and an S-band radar for both tracking and engagement. The S-band radar would aid Bavar in engaging stealth targets. However in the image I posted the text underneath the S-band radar implies that it is only an acquisition radar with no engagement capabilities.



Illumination is only possible via the X-band radar. If the X-band radar is dead, the SARH seeker can't be used anymore. You then can only use a ARH seeker SAM or... or a special kind of guidance... the 15th Khordad also has just a S-band radar without illumination capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

DoubleYouSee said:


> one battalion can manage 24 missile......correct me if i'm wrong



*no* every *battery of Bavar 373* can fire *24 missiles*, one *battalion* has *a lot more batteries* of Bavar 373 in it and *every battalion has one Meraj-4 radar* too but *one battery* of Bavar 373 *dose not have Meraj-4 radar*.


this is one *battery *of Bavar 373*, *not* battalion*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Sina-1 said:


> Farsnews is reporting TVC on Sayyad 4.
> View attachment 575260
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980531000038/سامانه-باور33-چه-ویژگی‌هایی-دارد-دست‌یابی-ایران-به-فناوری‌های-نوین


Its possible as we havent yet seen a close up of the nozzle of the production missile,only the mock ups shown in the parades.Based on these mock ups and the lack of any apparent rear mounted tvc system such as in the chinese hq9 interceptor,if the sayyad 4 is fitted with tvc then its pretty likely that it would use a similar system to the s300s 48n6e interceptor which has its tvc paddles mounted within the nozzle and linked to the planar control surfaces,tho a less likely option could be gas injection using something like freon or exhaust gasses tapped from the motor itself such as used in the s300vm.I think in all likelihood that if the sayyad 4 does have tvc then it will be of the paddle/vane type as iran has considerable experience with this type of system via its ballistic missile programs.




If the sayyad 4 is tvc equipped,then it will probably look something like this.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> If possible upload pic of fire control room.
> Did the ministry nammed those radars? Where's the miraj-4 radar..?



there is no pics of control room no one was allowed to go there, no they did not say what are the names of those two radars, this is one *battery *of Bavar 373 *batteries *dose not have Meraj-4 radar*, *every* battalion *of Bavar 373 will have one Meraj-4 radar


this is one *battery *of Bavar 373 and *batteries *do not have Meraj-4 radar only *battalion *have them.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Illumination is only possible via the X-band radar. If the X-band radar is dead, the SARH seeker can't be used anymore. You then can only use a ARH seeker SAM or... or a special kind of guidance... the 15th Khordad also has just a S-band radar without illumination capability.



So if the S-band radar cannot illuminate the target, how is the missile guided from launch until terminal (from which point the X-band radar takes over) against stealth targets? Just command guidance?

This is bearing in mind that the X-band illumination of the target won't be picked up by the missile's receiver until the terminal stage aka the last 5-10 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> So if the S-band radar cannot illuminate the target, how is the missile guided from launch until terminal (from which point the X-band radar takes over) against stealth targets? Just command guidance?
> 
> This is bearing in mind that the X-band illumination of the target won't be picked up by the missile's receiver until the terminal stage aka the last 5-10 km.



Yes via missile up- und hopefully also down-link to enable SAGG.
X-band illumination is only required for the very terminal phase.

As @sanel1412 said, there are often several guidance methods in this kind of modern SAM. I think its a sensitive topic and I won't speculate about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Yes via missile up- und hopefully also down-link to enable SAGG.
> X-band illumination is only required for the very terminal phase.


Thank God... I thought that one poster had ruined everything we'd talked about.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*Name:* Bavar-373










*Title:* Long Range Air Defense System











*Mission*


Detect And Track And Engage Stealth Fighter jets And Stealth Bombers And Stealth Drones And Cruise Missiles, Anti-Radiation Missiles And Ballistic Missiles And AWACS Planes And Reconnaissance Aircraft And Jets And All Type Of Helicopters And....*.
*











*Capabilities*


Minimum Detection Range: 450 KM.

tracking Range: 260 KM.

Missile Range: +200 KM.

Missile Altitude: 27-30 KM.

Detection: Up To 300 targets.

Engaging Targets With Minimum radar cross-section Of: 0.0001m2

Simultaneous Tracking: Up To 60 targets Simultaneously.

Simultaneous Engagement: Up To 6 targets Simultaneously.

Number Of Guided Missiles Simultaneously : 12 Missiles Simultaneously

Launch System: Hot Launch

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## PeeD

No test against Shahab-3 and in total not much new after the leaked footage two days ago.

So lets compare it to the S-400:

Pro S-400: Very large and very powerful PESA array in it's Gravestone engagement radar. Allows engagement of 12 instead of 6 simultaneous targets.
Con: Lack of waveform agility, easier to detect and locate.

Pro Bavar-373: Dual-band at battery level. Gives a benefit of ~20dB for detection and tracking of stealth targets and much more robust ECCM.
Con: None except cost, theoretically S-400 can do this too but a battalion level only (Big Bird).

Pro S-400: 380km range ARH SAM component.
Con: Easier to jam, significantly more expensive. Bavar-373 lacks such a long range component against high-value targets.

Pro Bavar-373: All off-road capability, including CP, S-400 only in special sub-variant without CP.

Con Bavar-373: Unknown how/if the X-band engagement radar achieves range and illumination performance in the class of the S-300/-400. An AESA needs to be very large or very expensive (GaN) to achieve that. It's possible that Iran has found a innovative and economical solution to this in connection with higher gain. A backfeed PESA would be still possible and much more cot effective, but powerlevels would be too low to make sense compared to the spacefeed high power S-300/-400 system.
In worst case a blind illumination by a backfeed PESA is done, with the task to just put enough RF energy on the target for the Sayyad-4 seeker to pick it up in the last seconds of the terminal phase.

Pro S-400: Small minimum range to fight against CM class targets. Thats due to the TVC system. Bavar-373 potentially lacks this as it's not designed to be spent on CM class targets.

Pro S-400: Cold launch makes sure the system can operate in forrest areas and minimized potential damage to the TEL.
Con: More expensive and not fail-proof.

Pro Bavar-373: 10x10 TEL offers growth potential for heavier/larger missiles.
Con: More expensive, larger footprint.

Pro S-400: May have the benefit of increased maneuverability if used in ABM role as TVC system might still be active in shorter range engagements. Still possible that the Sayyad-4 has TVC too.
Con: Higher cost per round, only operational in the short boost phase.

Pro S-400: SAGG guidance system for better ECCM and counter-beaming/notching capability and lower SAM cost. Bavar-373 may or may not have an equivalent.

Conclusion is: For the Bavar-373 radars to achieve similar range and illumination performance as the S-400 or even S-300, some groundbreaking innovations or high cost systems are required. A open question for now.

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Conclusion is: For the Bavar-373 radars to achieve similar range and illumination performance as the S-400 or even S-300, some groundbreaking innovations or high cost systems are required. A open question for now.



The good news is that just like how the S-300 developed into S-400, our Bavar can develop and become more formidable. With the technological gains that Iran is making, it can in future improve power delivery, gain, the sophistication of the T/R modules, even the array size if need be. The possibilities with this system stretch far and wide.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> The good news is that just like how the S-300 developed into S-400, our Bavar can develop and become more formidable. With the technological gains that Iran is making, it can in future improve power delivery, gain, the sophistication of the T/R modules, even the array size if need be. The possibilities with this system stretch far and wide.



It wasn't my intention to say that the Bavar has defiantly a inferior radar component. I actually believe the X-band radar uses an unconventional method to achieve long range illumination.
Plus as a AESA design it is rather easily upscaleable if deemed necessary.
But I think it is already what it needs to be: supporting illumination beyond 250km is not even done by the S-400, from there onwards ARH seeker are used.
I hope that at highest GaA TRMs are used, relative low power ones that are cost effective.
The array is so large for a X-band AESA that several thousand elements are necessary, about 10.000.

I believe that the goal was to create a more powerful radar than the Tombstone and even Gravestone, a next generation radar system. Dual-band to counter stealth and AESA to better counter IRBMs and hypersonics.

So, power levels aside, the Bavar radars are actually more advanced than that of the S-400.
Now that high res photos of them are available, I actually firmly believe that a very unconventional method is used to improve illumination power levels.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## T-72B

Iskander said:


>


Change the detection range to 320-450km

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Mithridates said:


> guys it seems like there is a misunderstanding regarding the max service ceiling, like any other system bavar's anti ballistic ceiling is different than the anti aircraft one so as the max range. the max ABM calling is 65 km and max AA is 27 km.


Shouldn't those numbers be the other way round (i.e. 65km ceiling for AA and 27km altitude ceiling for ABM)?

Also, why is the max detection range 320km when Meraj-4 was shown to have 400km+ range?


----------



## PeeD

-600km detection range of future Iranian Nebo. Battalion level.
-450km detection range of Meraj-4. Battalion level
-320km detection range of S-band acquisition radar
-260km precision track range of S-band acquisition radar or detection range of X-band engagement radar
-200km precision track and illumination range of X-band engagement radar

This would be a possible interpretation of the numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Iskander

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Also, why is the max detection range 320km when Meraj-4 was shown to have 400km+ range?


maybe the stated 320 km detection range is for battery level and 450 km detection range is for battallion level like PeeD stated

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Shouldn't those numbers be the other way round (i.e. 65km ceiling for AA and 27km altitude ceiling for ABM)?
> 
> Also, why is the max detection range 320km when Meraj-4 was shown to have 400km+ range?



no aircraft can go above 30 km but BMs can so 65 KM for ABM.

yes they have Meraj-4 they showed one *battery of Bavar 373, batteries *dose not have Meraj-4 only a* battalion *of Bavar 373 has Meraj-4 radar*.*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Defense minister:
Due to some considerations, new radar achievements weren't unveiled to public.

امیر حاتمی: ۷۷۰ محصول دفاعی را در کشور تولید می‌کنیم - مشرق نیوز

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Now that high res photos of them are available, I actually firmly believe that a very unconventional method is used to improve illumination power levels.


You mean the "3D Radar" array, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> You mean the "3D Radar" array, right?



Key method is "constructive wave interference" achieved by that 3D-space wave forming concept described in the earlier post.

I need to say that the rumored switch from PESA engagement radar to a AESA one in the S-500, could mean that PESA is for some reason a technological dead-end. The S-500 is the counter-hypersonics system hence I believe it needs to add potential extra agility of an AESA to work well at those speeds.
If that's the case, and the reason for the Bavar AESAs is not the easier overall radar system design, then it is ahead of the S-400 in this field.
Another possible explanation for AESA engagement radar on the S-500 could be that Russians anticipate that the lack of waveform agility will make the Gravestone prone to ECM techniques that try to exploit that limitation.

In total it must be doubted that export S400 variants are able to work in a dual-band SAGG mode to detect stealth objects. Here again the Bavar-373 is superior to at least export S-400s. The apparent lack of the 96L6E to do electronic azimuth scan is the heavy handicap with the S-400 that does not allow real-time dual-band operation.
Export S-400 are forced to simply try to establish a track with their X-band Gravestone engagement radar, against X-band optimized stealth targets. Even the brute force of the Gravestone can cause unacceptable range reductions there.
Blind dual-band illumination as pioneered by the Aegis system and used in the Bavar-373 that could solve the problem and exploit bi-static seeker effect does also not work with export S-400.

So we see that again the Bavar-373 has potentially a huge benefit over export S-400 if the threat are stealth assets (which is a main concern for Iran).
In theory Russian standard S-400 may be able to work in dual-band blind illumination mode if a battalion level Big Bird is used for that task.

I must also add that the 380km range, expensive, high-value missile of the S-400 can use its ARH seeker to attack a stealth target detected by the Big Bird or 96L6 from top aspect and achieve a terminal track. But this may not prove very robust.
So compared to the Bavar-373 with it's native counter-stealth capability, the high value SAM component of the S-400 can give it a counter-stealth capability via a trick Russians normally avoid for economic and robustness reasons (ARH).

PS: Bavar-373 is well suitet for Patriot, S-300, S-400 like endo-atmospheric ABM operations but its possible that higher capability ABM roles have been given to the IRGC-ASF and their systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Key method is "constructive wave interference" achieved by that 3D-space wave forming concept described in the earlier post.
> 
> I need to say that the rumored switch from PESA engagement radar to a AESA one in the S-500, could mean that PESA is for some reason a technological dead-end. The S-500 is the counter-hypersonics system hence I believe it needs to add potential extra agility of an AESA to work well at those speeds.
> If that's the case, and the reason for the Bavar AESAs is not the easier overall radar system design, then it is ahead of the S-400 in this field.
> Another possible explanation for AESA engagement radar on the S-500 could be that Russians anticipate that the lack of waveform agility will make the Gravestone prone to ECM techniques that try to exploit that limitation.
> 
> In total it must be doubted that export S400 variants are able to work in a dual-band SAGG mode to detect stealth objects. Here again the Bavar-373 is superior to at least export S-400s. The apparent lack of the 96L6E to do electronic azimuth scan is the heavy handicap with the S-400 that does not allow real-time dual-band operation.
> Export S-400 are forced to simply try to establish a track with their X-band Gravestone engagement radar, against X-band optimized stealth targets. Even the brute force of the Gravestone can cause unacceptable range reductions there.
> Blind dual-band illumination as pioneered by the Aegis system and used in the Bavar-373 that could solve the problem and exploit bi-static seeker effect does also not work with export S-400.
> 
> So we see that again the Bavar-373 has potentially a huge benefit over export S-400 if the threat are stealth assets (which is a main concern for Iran).
> In theory Russian standard S-400 may be able to work in dual-band blind illumination mode if a battalion level Big Bird is used for that task.
> 
> I must also add that the 380km range, expensive, high-value missile of the S-400 can use its ARH seeker to attack a stealth target detected by the Big Bird or 96L6 from top aspect and achieve a terminal track. But this may not prove very robust.
> So compared to the Bavar-373 with it's native counter-stealth capability, the high value SAM component of the S-400 can give it a counter-stealth capability via a trick Russians normally avoid for economic and robustness reasons (ARH).
> 
> PS: Bavar-373 is well suitet for Patriot, S-300, S-400 like endo-atmospheric ABM operations but its possible that higher capability ABM roles have been given to the IRGC-ASF and their systems.



@PeeD based in available info, what which radars are suitable for exo atmospheric ABM? We know we have satellite tracking ground stations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Another critical point:
I'm confident that Bavar-373 uses a SAGG system.
A SAGG system together with a realtime dual-band SAM system greatly improves the capability of a SAGG system.

So how I know that Bavar-373 has SAGG? Because the Sayyad-4 lacks lateral stripe, proximity fuse, antennas at its warhead section while both Sayyad-2/3 have them. The only reason why to omit them is SAGG, especially SAGG in combination with a dual-band SAM.
ECM resistance reaches such a high level with dual-band SAGG, that there is no need for that sensor anymore nd fusing is done at the best and most confident point via the SAGG system.

Patriot and TK-3 for example lack this capability.

This detail is of great importance.



arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD based in available info, what which radars are suitable for exo atmospheric ABM? We know we have satellite tracking ground stations.



Primary Ghadir for now and Iranian Nebo at mobile tactical level. Enough to que a IIR seeker. 
Iran certainly works on a UHF, L- or even S-band large aperture radar, likely similar to those large Israeli Green pine based AESAs for Arrow-2/3.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Key method is "constructive wave interference" achieved by that 3D-space wave forming concept described in the earlier post.



I understand the basic principle of this and have read a little bit about it in simple terms.

I also understand that if you have AESA TRMs then the 4 additional side arrays can be electronically steered to align the waves as required.

What I don't quite understand is what is the utility of this concept? Sure, the angle creates some more compactness, but the constructive interference effect is (surely?) not more than the sum of its parts. If that assumption is true, then why utilise this effect at all?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

PeeD said:


> Key method is "constructive wave interference" achieved by that 3D-space wave forming concept described in the earlier post.
> 
> I need to say that the rumored switch from PESA engagement radar to a AESA one in the S-500, could mean that PESA is for some reason a technological dead-end. The S-500 is the counter-hypersonics system hence I believe it needs to add potential extra agility of an AESA to work well at those speeds.
> If that's the case, and the reason for the Bavar AESAs is not the easier overall radar system design, then it is ahead of the S-400 in this field.
> Another possible explanation for AESA engagement radar on the S-500 could be that Russians anticipate that the lack of waveform agility will make the Gravestone prone to ECM techniques that try to exploit that limitation.
> 
> In total it must be doubted that export S400 variants are able to work in a dual-band SAGG mode to detect stealth objects. Here again the Bavar-373 is superior to at least export S-400s. The apparent lack of the 96L6E to do electronic azimuth scan is the heavy handicap with the S-400 that does not allow real-time dual-band operation.
> Export S-400 are forced to simply try to establish a track with their X-band Gravestone engagement radar, against X-band optimized stealth targets. Even the brute force of the Gravestone can cause unacceptable range reductions there.
> Blind dual-band illumination as pioneered by the Aegis system and used in the Bavar-373 that could solve the problem and exploit bi-static seeker effect does also not work with export S-400.
> 
> So we see that again the Bavar-373 has potentially a huge benefit over export S-400 if the threat are stealth assets (which is a main concern for Iran).
> In theory Russian standard S-400 may be able to work in dual-band blind illumination mode if a battalion level Big Bird is used for that task.
> 
> I must also add that the 380km range, expensive, high-value missile of the S-400 can use its ARH seeker to attack a stealth target detected by the Big Bird or 96L6 from top aspect and achieve a terminal track. But this may not prove very robust.
> So compared to the Bavar-373 with it's native counter-stealth capability, the high value SAM component of the S-400 can give it a counter-stealth capability via a trick Russians normally avoid for economic and robustness reasons (ARH).
> 
> PS: Bavar-373 is well suitet for Patriot, S-300, S-400 like endo-atmospheric ABM operations but its possible that higher capability ABM roles have been given to the IRGC-ASF and their systems.



If that all is the fact, me feel sorry for every country which cant build this kind of dualband stealth detect itself and all they can do is to buy S-400 export version if Israel/US is near their borders - but it wont help them.

The iranian way seems to be the only way for a country to counter that, whereas me think this kind of AD will be obsolet in 20 years. But these are 20 years with a chance to survive. Good job, Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> I understand the basic principle of this and have read a little bit about it in simple terms.
> 
> I also understand that if you have AESA TRMs then the 4 additional side arrays can be electronically steered to align the waves as required.
> 
> What I don't quite understand is what is the utility of this concept? Sure, the angle creates some more compactness, but the constructive interference effect is (surely?) not more than the sum of its parts. If that assumption is true, then why utilise this effect at all?



This way you can create antenna pattern lobes that are like pencil style beams and steer the beam to follow or track an object without the need to move the entire antenna. Effectively, you are creating instances of super high gain and through phases of the waves you can translate the constructively interfered beam and change the angles. Generally, phase array antennas can do this by design. AESA's have an additional benefit of frequency hopping within a band for each individual TRMs. While PESAs have fewer signal generators prior to the patch antennas and can also frequency hope, the AESA's individual patch antennas are a whole signal generator, signal amplifier and antenna as a package. This means you have so much more control over the duty cycle of each patch antenna in AESA design as well as the operating frequency and their firing rate. The challenge with AESA setup is that you need to not only control individual patch antenna TRMs but you also have interpret them making the signal processing computationally expensive. However since it can give so much control, you can consistently hop in frequency, change polarization and emit super well defined (super high gain) beam that cannot be picked up another antenna that easily. Think of how a laser beam propagates. 

Frequency hopping and polarization shifting are another methods of making radar signal interception hard. In all, i have heard that good AESAs have flat signal response curves so their signal can blend in with background noise in the band that its operating and only the transmitting radar knows what signal it is expecting due to transmission time and time flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

in this U.S. MILITARY LAYS OUT it say Iran has PANTSIR (SA-22) Surface-to-Air Missile System


*WHAT KIND OF WEAPONS DOES IRAN HAVE? U.S. MILITARY LAYS OUT ARSENAL IN PLAYING CARDS*

*https://www.newsweek.com/weapons-iran-us-playing-cards-1455728*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> in this U.S. MILITARY LAYS OUT it say Iran has PANTSIR (SA-22) Surface-to-Air Missile System
> 
> 
> *WHAT KIND OF WEAPONS DOES IRAN HAVE? U.S. MILITARY LAYS OUT ARSENAL IN PLAYING CARDS*
> 
> *https://www.newsweek.com/weapons-iran-us-playing-cards-1455728*



Yeah I wouldn't be surprised, wouldn't they be shipped as package with S-300 PMU2 for battery protection?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Shouldn't those numbers be the other way round (i.e. 65km ceiling for AA and 27km altitude ceiling for ABM)?


planes do not fly that high i assume they refer to it's ABM max altitude engagement ceiling. i think this way because a pilot once was saying that one of maneuvers to counter SAMs is to increase the ceiling. as you have wings and lift you can do it easily while the missile should use considerable amount of it's rocket engine energy to overcome the gravity. that's why in ABM mode ADs have considerable smaller combat range. i assume it's the source of misunderstandings about the Bavar range alongside with different radars it uses.


Battle of Waterloo said:


> Also, why is the max detection range 320km when Meraj-4 was shown to have 400km+ range?


it seems like they didn't include meraj-4 for each battery.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Mithridates said:


> planes do not fly that high i assume they refer to it's ABM max altitude engagement ceiling. i think this way because a pilot once was saying that one of maneuvers to counter SAMs is to increase the ceiling. as you have wings and lift you can do it easily while the missile should use considerable amount of it's rocket engine energy to overcome the gravity. that's why in ABM mode ADs have considerable smaller combat range. i assume it's the source of misunderstandings about the Bavar range alongside with different radars it uses.
> 
> it seems like they didn't include meraj-4 for each battery.


Good points, thank you for the clarification.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> I understand the basic principle of this and have read a little bit about it in simple terms.
> 
> I also understand that if you have AESA TRMs then the 4 additional side arrays can be electronically steered to align the waves as required.
> 
> What I don't quite understand is what is the utility of this concept? Sure, the angle creates some more compactness, but the constructive interference effect is (surely?) not more than the sum of its parts. If that assumption is true, then why utilise this effect at all?



Its all about the gain of the illumination lobe. With this idea I'm widely speculating, well beyond the other things I said (I'm a mechanics guy not electronics).
The logic is this: Iranians sit down, look at the S-300/-400 and figure out that trying to achieve the same brute force illumination power levels requires a similarly large (=expensive) system and while Russians have 50 years of experience and are masters at this PESA technology, Iran has none. A race that can hardly be won.
Conclusion would be to try to develop a higher gain radar that achieves the same but at much lower power levels.
How this was managed is the big unknown, apparently not by some silly approach like expensive high power GaNs.
The auxiliary antennas could be just maintenance hatches, or SLC antennas that just improves ECCM capability and makes locating more difficult. But they could be responsible how higher gain levels were achieved.

Other details: The radar aperture of both, engagement and acquisition radar are use to create two separate, redundant missile up link channels to receive missile seeker data. So not only two different data-links are available, they also operate at a different frequency as the radar functions. A complete nightmare if you want to jam the system, or just apply self defense jamming to survive. The PESA of the S-400 does not offer this capability.
Its these details that makes these systems: S-300PM, S-400, HQ-9, Bavar-373 so feared; their kill-chain is so redundant and powerful that only kinematic evasion becomes a option for survival. All single sensor systems, from Arrow-2/3 to Aster lack this legality. An ARH seeker equipped SAM can be defended against via a self defense towed barrage jammer, namely the closer the seeker get to the target, the higher jamming intensity becomes... SAGG guidance completely negates this effect and dual-band SAGG... multiplies it... That's why all the fuzz about S-400, it's close to mythical. Once you enter its no-escape zone, next to nothing will keep you alive.
That's also why exo-atmospheric ABM systems or even Arrow-2 are more advanced(expensive) missile wise but overall system-wise the systems S-300PM, S-400, HQ-9, Bavar-373 and to some extend Aegis (less cost-efficient, high-tech solutions) but are the real masterpieces.
System cost is of greatest importance: Aegis with SM-6 is a expensive solution but it seems Bavar-373 costs less than half that of a export S-300PMU-2 battery and 1/4 that of export S-400. Internal Russian prices should be closer to each other, while the Bavar-373 applies usually more expensive AESA technology for its radars.

Irans requirement to establish full border coverage are at least 20 Bavar-373 batteries.

PS: I still remember 10 years ago when S-300 were not delivered... I was hoping for a LRSAM system that would be made of a AIM-54 Phoenix copy with a large booster attached to it. A TPS-43, JY-14 or Nebo-SVU (foreign radars), would detect the target, and the Phoenix SAM shot towards it, receiving updates via a ground data-link antenna.
With the technology Iran had at hand back then, this appeared as the most promising solution to create a LRSAM...
Bavar-373 of 2019 is magnitudes more potent and cost effective than that desperate solution would have been and compared to Chinese and North Korean copies of the S-300PM and P series, it is a indigenous system with Iranian signature.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Myself



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## PeeD

The layout-wise closet system to the Bavar-373 is the Japanese vertical hot-launch Tyoe-03 Chu SAM:






Note the 3 row canister layout.

Here in 2 canister layout:






But thats where similarities end. The Japanese SAM has only 1/4 of he range of the Bavar-373, has a TWS-only AESA radar without illumination capability and uses a expensive, less robust ARH seeker for its SAM.
Pair it with the heavy Taiwanese TK-3 and you get closer, add to that S-300 guidance technology and you have a system close to the Bavar-373 basically.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> Yeah I wouldn't be surprised, wouldn't they be shipped as package with S-300 PMU2 for battery protection?



well last night Iran said bavar can protect it self which means it dose not need alot of protection

and that Bavar 2 is being built so there is a Bavar 474

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Its all about the gain of the illumination lobe. With this idea I'm widely speculating, well beyond the other things I said (I'm a mechanics guy not electronics).
> The logic is this: Iranians sit down, look at the S-300/-400 and figure out that trying to achieve the same brute force illumination power levels requires a similarly large (=expensive) system and while Russians have 50 years of experience and are masters at this PESA technology, Iran has none. A race that can hardly be won.
> Conclusion would be to try to develop a higher gain radar that achieves the same but at much lower power levels.
> How this was managed is the big unknown, apparently not by some silly approach like expensive high power GaNs.
> The auxiliary antennas could be just maintenance hatches, or SLC antennas that just improves ECCM capability and makes locating more difficult. But they could be responsible how higher gain levels were achieved.
> 
> Other details: The radar aperture of both, engagement and acquisition radar are use to create two separate, redundant missile up link channels to receive missile seeker data. So not only two different data-links are available, they also operate at a different frequency as the radar functions. A complete nightmare if you want to jam the system, or just apply self defense jamming to survive. The PESA of the S-400 does not offer this capability.
> Its these details that makes these systems: S-300PM, S-400, HQ-9, Bavar-373 so feared; their kill-chain is so redundant and powerful that only kinematic evasion becomes a option for survival. All single sensor systems, from Arrow-2/3 to Aster lack this legality. An ARH seeker equipped SAM can be defended against via a self defense towed barrage jammer, namely the closer the seeker get to the target, the higher jamming intensity becomes... SAGG guidance completely negates this effect and dual-band SAGG... multiplies it... That's why all the fuzz about S-400, it's close to mythical. Once you enter its no-escape zone, next to nothing will keep you alive.
> That's also why exo-atmospheric ABM systems or even Arrow-2 are more advanced(expensive) missile wise but overall system-wise the systems S-300PM, S-400, HQ-9, Bavar-373 and to some extend Aegis (less cost-efficient, high-tech solutions) but are the real masterpieces.
> System cost is of greatest importance: Aegis with SM-6 is a expensive solution but it seems Bavar-373 costs less than half that of a export S-300PMU-2 battery and 1/4 that of export S-400. Internal Russian prices should be closer to each other, while the Bavar-373 applies usually more expensive AESA technology for its radars.
> 
> Irans requirement to establish full border coverage are at least 20 Bavar-373 batteries.
> 
> PS: I still remember 10 years ago when S-300 were not delivered... I was hoping for a LRSAM system that would be made of a AIM-54 Phoenix copy with a large booster attached to it. A TPS-43, JY-14 or Nebo-SVU (foreign radars), would detect the target, and the Phoenix SAM shot towards it, receiving updates via a ground data-link antenna.
> With the technology Iran had at hand back then, this appeared as the most promising solution to create a LRSAM...
> Bavar-373 of 2019 is magnitudes more potent and cost effective than that desperate solution would have been and compared to Chinese and North Korean copies of the S-300PM and P series, it is a indigenous system with Iranian signature.





some very good intell PLS do listen

https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2094681

so we have *high power laser air defense system* ( which was *state secret* until now) for shooting down *Fighter jets* congratulations to all Iranian brothers.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## raptor22

skyshadow said:


> well last night Iran said bavar can protect it self which means it dose not need alot of protection
> 
> and that Bavar 2 is being built so there is a Bavar 474


I don't think it would be called 474 as "373" was chosen as it means something.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

raptor22 said:


> I don't think it would be called 474 as "373" was chosen as it means something.



ofcourse i just wanted to show it's going to be a series air defense system like S300 , S400 , S500 family

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

skyshadow said:


> ofcourse i just wanted to show it's going to be a series air defense system like S300 , S400 , S500 family


just a side note:...I have not seen a reporting of Bavar 373 in the russian main international media "*Sputnik"*_ (they usually report any thing Iran puts out)_
I may have missed it but if true then it tells us a lot about how Russians are either pissed that Iran developed this or simply they just do not like competition.. makes me simile The student has outsmarted the master...lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

The honesty is when he says that Bavar-373 is suited for tracking mach 9-10 targets while the S-400 manages mach 14. His knowledge about the THAAD was a little off, maybe because it is not a air-defense but ABM-only system.
He confirmed that its is not an obscure kind of PESA but a AESA as I have said since years.

Regarding honesty: In my last posts I made the case for SAGG guidance and how much deadlier and cost-efficient it is compared to ARH seeker SAMs.
So much is true
However there are operating regimes where ARH can't be avoided and SAGG can't be applied, these are:
- Targeting cruise missiles over the horizon. Here only ARH with a networked warning sensor can enable to kill them at stand-off ranges of beyond 40km. There is a method to achieve it via SAGG on which Iran seems to be working, but I won't detail that.
- Targeting extreme long range targets. Again horizon limitations would disable the use of SAGG guided systems beyond ~300km effectively against medium altitude targets. That's why Bavar-373 and S-300PM go to 200km and S-400 to 250km, not beyond. Here a 40N6 or SM-6 like SAM is needed, making use of top aspect approach against stealthy targets. Soviet doctrine avoided this because ARH seeker of that time were deemed too expensive and fragile to ECM and they still are today in many ways.
- ARH seeker SAMs allow multiple target engagement in a saturation scenario. That scenario is questionable itself because engaging weapons cheap enough to used in a saturation scenario are not what you want to intercept with your expensive ARH-seeker SAM. The S-350 is a post-Soviet concept for such a ARH-seeker system. Preferably Iran will protect its high value objects with several Iranian Pantsirs or 3rd Khordad class systems.

Outside of capitalist western military industry, Iran must be wise enough not to follow technologies which make no economic sense such as PAC-3 vs. Houthi Burkan-2.
For example: Build a heavy SAM with a 200kg warhead by building a larger booster. DO NOT, build a supermaneuverable hit-to-kill PAC-3 with a complex thruster system and ARH-seeker. Enlarging the booster and filling it with propellant is a more cost effective approach and the large directed warhead assures kill without "hit-to-kill".

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> Iran must be wise enough not to follow technologies which make no economic sense such as PAC-3 vs. Houthi Burkan-2.


Actually it does  
It makes economic sense for the American companies marketing it. The objective is not to stop any missiles, but to deplete the Arabs on their oil money.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## T-72B

aryobarzan said:


> just a side note:...I have not seen a reporting of Bavar 373 in the russian main international media "*Sputnik"*_ (they usually report any thing Iran puts out)_
> I may have missed it but if true then it tells us a lot about how Russians are either pissed that Iran developed this or simply they just do not like competition.. makes me simile The student has outsmarted the master...lol


Sputnik has cover the news of B-373 tho
https://sputniknews.com/military/20...built-s-300-analogue-defence-system--reports/

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

T-72B said:


> Sputnik has cover the news of B-373 tho
> https://sputniknews.com/military/20...built-s-300-analogue-defence-system--reports/


Thank you..I stand corrected.


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD I know this is a difficult question to answer, but approximately what range would you think something like Bavar's S-band radar to detect something like an F-35 at? It would be incredible if it had enough range for the full kinematic performance of the Sayyad-4 to be utilised.

And once it detects it, to be clear, does it illuminate the target (for a dual-band SAGG seeker) or just get the raw radar return itself and use command guidance to send the target to within range of the X-band return (if it doesn't have a dual-band SAGG seeker)?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD I know this is a difficult question to answer, but approximately what range would you think something like Bavar's S-band radar to detect something like an F-35 at? It would be incredible if it had enough range for the full kinematic performance of the Sayyad-4 to be utilised.
> 
> And once it detects it, to be clear, does it illuminate the target (for a dual-band SAGG seeker) or just get the raw radar return itself and use command guidance to send the target to within range of the X-band return (if it doesn't have a dual-band SAGG seeker)?



Actually I have already calculated estimations; between 150 and 200km.

S-band track data is "fused" with X-band track data, Meraj-4 interrupted track data, possibly Iran-Nebo track data. Plus Sayyad-4 X-band seeker data in the terminal phase plus IR sensor data from engagement radar and likely also Sayyad-4. All this, plus more, is then used to make sure the warhead is detonated at the right time, distance and angle.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## yavar

ایران معاون وزیر دفاع و رئیس شرکت صنایع الکترونیک (صاایران) ( رئیس سازمان صنایع الکترونیک وزارت دفاع ) امیر سرتیپ شاهرخ شهرام: ساخت سامانه ای بهتر از باور-۳۷۳ (نزدیک به سطح اس-۴۰۰ ) در دستر کار است که در آینده درباره آن خبر رسانی می کنیم.

**ساخت سامانه‌هایی بهتر از باور۳۷۳ در دستور کار
رئیس سازمان صنایع الکترونیک وزارت دفاع گفت: فرازهایی برتر از سامانه باور 373 را در دستور کار داریم که در آینده درباره آن خبررسانی می کنیم.
https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980601000081/باور-۳۷۳-برتر-از-سامانه-پاتریوت-آمریکاست-به-سلاح-لیزری-دست-پیدا

Iran Defense Ministery representative of Iran Electronics Industries Co. (SAIran) also chief of the Iran Electronics Industries Co. Army Brigadier Gen. Shahrokh Shahram: Building better then the Bavar-373 air defense systems, (close to S-400 level) is on going which we will be announce in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## T-72B

What do you guys think?


----------



## DoubleYouSee

وزیر دفاع همچنین در پاسخ به سوالی پیرامون بی‌نیازی کشور از خرید خارجی با وجود سامانه‌های داخلی، گفت: نیازی به خرید سامانه های خارجی نخواهیم داشت و حتما نسخه های بعدی سامانه باور ۳۷۳ متناسب با تغییرات، قابلیت های جدیدی خواهد داشت و نسل های بعدی آن امنیت نسل های بعدی را تامین کند.
We will have new versions of B-373


T-72B said:


> What do you guys think?


I think it would


T-72B said:


> What do you guys think?


I think americans send this frog to fight Iran.......in 10 minutes he destroyed all iranian military capability...........no one better than him could do that

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

Few years ago Yeaver give a list of 3 or 4 types of baver air defence system in iranmilitaryforum.net
I request Yeaver again give that list hear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

guys considering that bavar utilizes 2 radars, is there any possibility for multi spectrum frequency analyses for bavar or not??
@PeeD bro do you have any idea about this??


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

yavar said:


> ایران معاون وزیر دفاع و رئیس شرکت صنایع الکترونیک (صاایران) ( رئیس سازمان صنایع الکترونیک وزارت دفاع ) امیر سرتیپ شاهرخ شهرام: ساخت سامانه ای بهتر از باور-۳۷۳ (نزدیک به سطح اس-۴۰۰ ) در دستر کار است که در آینده درباره آن خبر رسانی می کنیم.
> 
> **ساخت سامانه‌هایی بهتر از باور۳۷۳ در دستور کار
> رئیس سازمان صنایع الکترونیک وزارت دفاع گفت: فرازهایی برتر از سامانه باور 373 را در دستور کار داریم که در آینده درباره آن خبررسانی می کنیم.
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980601000081/باور-۳۷۳-برتر-از-سامانه-پاتریوت-آمریکاست-به-سلاح-لیزری-دست-پیدا
> 
> Iran Defense Ministery representative of Iran Electronics Industries Co. (SAIran) also chief of the Iran Electronics Industries Co. Army Brigadier Gen. Shahrokh Shahram: Building better then the Bavar-373 air defense systems, (close to S-400 level) is on going which we will be announce in the future.


Few years ago Yeaver give a list of 3 or 4 types of baver air defence system in iranmilitaryforum.net
I request Yeaver again give that list hear.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Note that if Iran's Bavar-373 requirement is ~24 batteries, there is a need to produce 240.000 TRM modules just for the engagement radar. It's spread across the production years but also requires spare elements.

Just to make sure everyone is aware on the industrial scale of this project.



Mithridates said:


> guys considering that bavar utilizes 2 radars, is there any possibility for multi spectrum frequency analyses for bavar or not??
> @PeeD bro do you have any idea about this??



Sure, this is an important capability of the Bavar-373, in that way it can distinguish between decoys or stealth and non-stealth assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

aryobarzan said:


> just a side note:...I have not seen a reporting of Bavar 373 in the russian main international media "*Sputnik"*_ (they usually report any thing Iran puts out)_
> I may have missed it but if true then it tells us a lot about how Russians are either pissed that Iran developed this or simply they just do not like competition.. makes me simile The student has outsmarted the master...lol



a lot of people were silent in past 2 days just *RT news* did a report. let haters burn 



PeeD said:


> The honesty is when he says that Bavar-373 is suited for tracking mach 9-10 targets while the S-400 manages mach 14. His knowledge about the THAAD was a little off, maybe because it is not a air-defense but ABM-only system.
> He confirmed that its is not an obscure kind of PESA but a AESA as I have said since years.
> 
> Regarding honesty: In my last posts I made the case for SAGG guidance and how much deadlier and cost-efficient it is compared to ARH seeker SAMs.
> So much is true
> However there are operating regimes where ARH can't be avoided and SAGG can't be applied, these are:
> - Targeting cruise missiles over the horizon. Here only ARH with a networked warning sensor can enable to kill them at stand-off ranges of beyond 40km. There is a method to achieve it via SAGG on which Iran seems to be working, but I won't detail that.
> - Targeting extreme long range targets. Again horizon limitations would disable the use of SAGG guided systems beyond ~300km effectively against medium altitude targets. That's why Bavar-373 and S-300PM go to 200km and S-400 to 250km, not beyond. Here a 40N6 or SM-6 like SAM is needed, making use of top aspect approach against stealthy targets. Soviet doctrine avoided this because ARH seeker of that time were deemed too expensive and fragile to ECM and they still are today in many ways.
> - ARH seeker SAMs allow multiple target engagement in a saturation scenario. That scenario is questionable itself because engaging weapons cheap enough to used in a saturation scenario are not what you want to intercept with your expensive ARH-seeker SAM. The S-350 is a post-Soviet concept for such a ARH-seeker system. Preferably Iran will protect its high value objects with several Iranian Pantsirs or 3rd Khordad class systems.
> 
> Outside of capitalist western military industry, Iran must be wise enough not to follow technologies which make no economic sense such as PAC-3 vs. Houthi Burkan-2.
> For example: Build a heavy SAM with a 200kg warhead by building a larger booster. DO NOT, build a supermaneuverable hit-to-kill PAC-3 with a complex thruster system and ARH-seeker. Enlarging the booster and filling it with propellant is a more cost effective approach and the large directed warhead assures kill without "hit-to-kill".





AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD I know this is a difficult question to answer, but approximately what range would you think something like Bavar's S-band radar to detect something like an F-35 at? It would be incredible if it had enough range for the full kinematic performance of the Sayyad-4 to be utilised.
> 
> And once it detects it, to be clear, does it illuminate the target (for a dual-band SAGG seeker) or just get the raw radar return itself and use command guidance to send the target to within range of the X-band return (if it doesn't have a dual-band SAGG seeker)?



did you see *the pics of new missile* ( well the new warhead to be exact ) and the* new laser Air defense system* that were kind of unveiled??? if i'm not wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Note that if Iran's Bavar-373 requirement is ~24 batteries, there is a need to produce 240.000 TRM modules just for the engagement radar. It's spread across the production years but also requires spare elements.
> 
> Just to make sure everyone is aware on the industrial scale of this project.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, this is an important capability of the Bavar-373, in that way it can distinguish between decoys or stealth and non-stealth assets.



Is the quantity requirement publicized already?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Iran's new *laser Air defense system *was shown to us just today*.




laser Air defense system








*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> Iran's new *laser Air defense system *was shown to us just today*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> laser Air defense system
> 
> View attachment 575637
> View attachment 575638
> *


any info over it's output power??


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> any info over it's output power??



nothing and i mean noooooothing not even a smile 

just the things that Amir Shahrokh said.

maybe some Turkish bothers can help us they have similar projects in plan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

aryobarzan said:


> just a side note:...I have not seen a reporting of Bavar 373 in the russian main international media "*Sputnik"*_ (they usually report any thing Iran puts out)_
> I may have missed it but if true then it tells us a lot about how Russians are either pissed that Iran developed this or simply they just do not like competition.. makes me simile The student has outsmarted the master...lol


https://sputniknews.com/military/20...built-s-300-analogue-defence-system--reports/

https://www.rt.com/news/467026-iran-bavar-missile-system/


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> https://sputniknews.com/military/20...built-s-300-analogue-defence-system--reports/
> 
> https://www.rt.com/news/467026-iran-bavar-missile-system/



what he means is that when we said bavar is better then s300 sputnik did a full report that no s300 is better and so onnnn. but now they say nothing that if its is better or not.




*ولادیمیر ساژین در پایان گفت: « بدین ترتیب، با جمعبندی آنچه گفته شد، با توجه به تجربه جهانی ساخت تسلیحات، سیستم « باور373» نمی تواند از نظر مشخصات تاکتیکی — فنی برتر از سیستم « اس-300» باشد. سیستم های پدافند هوایی و دفاع موشکی روسیه می توانند اساسی برای ساخت سیستم های آتی پدافند هوایی بشوند و همراه با « باور-373» و دیگر سامانه ها از مرزهای ایران دفاع کنند.*

https://ir.sputniknews.com/world/201608241811030/

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> Is the quantity requirement publicized already?



~10.000 was said for the X-band engagement radar during the interview and the S-band acquisition radar would have around 4000 (calculated).
The semi-conductor industry required to support all that is one of the hurdles you have if you select the AESA path.
Necessary financial resources need to be made available to expand the current S-band based TRM industry to real mass-production levels. Hopefully a pace of more than 4 batteries per year will be achieved.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

PeeD said:


> ~10.000 was said for the X-band engagement radar during the interview and the S-band acquisition radar would have around 4000 (calculated).
> The semi-conductor industry required to support all that is one of the hurdles you have if you select the AESA path.
> Necessary financial resources need to be made available to expand the current S-band based TRM industry to real mass-production levels. Hopefully a pace of more than 4 batteries per year will be achieved.


we will have cheshm oghab (eagle eye) AESA radar too, probably we should invest many money for industrial scale production at the beginning but it will ease the way for other productions along with government pocket.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> ~10.000 was said for the X-band engagement radar during the interview and the S-band acquisition radar would have around 4000 (calculated).
> The semi-conductor industry required to support all that is one of the hurdles you have if you select the AESA path.
> Necessary financial resources need to be made available to expand the current S-band based TRM industry to real mass-production levels. Hopefully a pace of more than 4 batteries per year will be achieved.



no i meant the battery quantity request by IRADF. You mentioned 24 batteries, I am just wondering how you got that number.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> ~10.000 was said for the X-band engagement radar during the interview and the S-band acquisition radar would have around 4000 (calculated).
> The semi-conductor industry required to support all that is one of the hurdles you have if you select the AESA path.
> Necessary financial resources need to be made available to expand the current S-band based TRM industry to real mass-production levels. Hopefully a pace of more than 4 batteries per year will be achieved.



There was a article some weeks ago mentioning "Air Defence" is one of the fields which was put into "National Projects" (highest priority), so financial resources should be secured, no matter what

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> no i meant the battery quantity request by IRADF. You mentioned 24 batteries, I am just wondering how you got that number.



Speculation based on Irans geography and if an all-around "border barrier" deployment is the final goal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

gotcha. thanks


----------



## Myself

yavar said:


>



It is very weird to hear that Iran has not received 48N6E2 for its S-300 batteries, or maybe he just wants to exaggerate about Bavar-373!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

@PeeD you have any idea what the purpose of these "handles" are on the sub-arrays?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> @PeeD you have any idea what the purpose of these "handles" are on the sub-arrays?
> 
> View attachment 575666



They are literally handles haha

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> They are literally handles haha


I know  just thought it's weird to put them slap bang in the middle of a radar array. PeeD did say one possibility was that these 'sub-arrays' are just maintenance hatches... looks unlikely to me, but it's a possibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> I know  just thought it's weird to put them slap bang in the middle of a radar array. PeeD did say one possibility was that these 'sub-arrays' are just maintenance hatches... looks unlikely to me, but it's a possibility.



actually, is it possible to load panels from the rear? I wonder how heavy are those panels


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Actually I have already calculated estimations; between 150 and 200km.


I must say, that does sound quite optimistic...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iskander

AmirPatriot said:


> I must say, that does sound quite optimistic...
> 
> View attachment 575669


and that's for VHF band Radars the most efficient band against stealth targets so higher frequency bands must be less efficient


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> I must say, that does sound quite optimistic...
> 
> View attachment 575669



@AmirPatriot, the F-22 achieves a 0.0001M^2 RCS at only certain angles, most likely at the front. I don't think it can achieve that level of RCS against SAMs. @PeeD's calculations were likely base on different RCS values.

Also please beware that once you have AESA, you can do some signal processing and filtering to identify signal anomalies for each TRM. Remember, you have so much control over each TRM, that you you will know the time of flight for each signal initiation as well as the wave form.

Combining this with Bistatic nature of this system as well as presence of powerful OTH and VHF radars as part of an integrated air defence, we have a robust anti stealth system.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> @AmirPatriot, the F-22 achieves a 0.0001M^2 RCS at only certain angles, most likely at the front. I don't think it can achieve that level of RCS against SAMs. @PeeD's calculations were likely base on different RCS values.
> 
> Also please beware that once you have AESA, you can do some signal processing and filtering to identify signal anomalies for each TRM. Remember, you have so much control over each TRM, that you you will know the time of flight for each signal initiation as well as the wave form.
> 
> Combining this with Bistatic nature of this system as well as presence of powerful OTH and VHF radars as part of an integrated air defence, we have a robust anti stealth system.



Even with optimistic guidance capability, Iran likely won’t be able to engage an F-22 until 45KM away from AD system.

So it is to iran’s benefit to have systems deployed along border region to be able to detect and engage F-22’s within a 50-100KM intrusion into its airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-72B

skyshadow said:


> Iran's new *laser Air defense system *was shown to us just today*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> laser Air defense system
> 
> View attachment 575637
> View attachment 575638
> *


Any possiblity to use lasers on Fighters like this


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> Any possiblity to use lasers on Fighters like this



well the pic is not opening for me so i do not know what you are referring too but they said it will work on 5 gen Fighters


----------



## T-72B

@skyshadow 
I mean this





Also @skyshadow some sources say that B-373 can track 100 targets while other sources say 300 so which one is true?



skyshadow said:


> *Name:* Bavar-373
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Title:* Long Range Air Defense System
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Mission*
> 
> 
> Detect And Track And Engage Stealth Fighter jets And Stealth Bombers And Stealth Drones And Cruise Missiles, Anti-Radiation Missiles And Ballistic Missiles And AWACS Planes And Reconnaissance Aircraft And Jets And All Type Of Helicopters And....*.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Capabilities*
> 
> 
> Minimum Detection Range: 450 KM.
> 
> tracking Range: 260 KM.
> 
> Missile Range: +200 KM.
> 
> Missile Altitude: 27-30 KM.
> 
> Detection: Up To 300 targets.
> 
> Engaging Targets With Minimum radar cross-section Of: 0.0001m2
> 
> Simultaneous Tracking: Up To 60 targets Simultaneously.
> 
> *Simultaneous Engagement: Up To 6 targets Simultaneously.
> 
> Number Of Guided Missiles Simultaneously : 12 Missiles Simultaneously*
> 
> Launch System: Hot Launch


Still lose to S-300PMU-2 radar which can engage 36 targets and guide 72 missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

I was inspired by Russian claims on RCS. It's actually fairly simple and I will explain how I figured it out:

- The F-35 without shaping techniques should be at 5dB
- With shaping techniques anything between -20-30dB reduction is physically possible imo. Resulting in -25dB overall performance
-RAS and RAM allow for another -25dB reduction, resulting in a total of -50dB which is very conservative my any merits.

Ok now here it what happens when operating against the Bavar-373:
- S-band to X-band reduces shaping performance by at least 5dB. Resulting in -45dB overall performance.
- S-band to X-band reduces RAS/RAM performance by around 20dB. Resulting in -25dB overall performance.
- Ground aspect and non-optimized angles peaking at the sides at least degrades the -25dB to 3x that RCS area resulting in -20dB overall performance
- ECCM capabilities of such modern AESAs bring effectively no significant performance reductions when ECCM is applied. So the grand total stays at -20dB, while it would again improve to -25-30dB on legacy radars.

Now whats the performance of the Bavar-373 acquisition radar against a -20dB target from the released value (+ some assumptions)?
85km.
However in real world conditions this value changes: The subsonic very optimized F-117 with newest and best RAM/RAS may achieve that effectively -20dB but the F-35 is more likely to land at -10dB which results in 150km radar performance.

Conclusions is: If we assume that ideal applied stealth allows for -50dB improved RCS reduction (0,00001, smaller than a pea) and 10dB less for the less optimized supersonic F-35 with total execution of -40dB, resulting at -20dB against the Bavar-373 acquisition radar, then it kills the target at 150km.

Luckily for the Bavar-373, it has upper echelon battalion level radar assets with Meraj-4 and potentially Iranian-Nebo. These will detect the -10dB target at over 200km max. engagement range (Meraj-4) and over 300km (Iranian-Nebo). Not to talk about even higher echelon assets like Ghadir etc.
These can allow for a launch up with mid-course updates until the target comes within the range of the Bavar-373 battery level assets. In all situations the F-35 will be painted by 3-4 and more radars from different angles and some of them are extremely difficult to locate and turn away the peak aspects from.

Russians claim effective values of -5dB for F-22(F-35) which likely is because they talk about VHF-band assets. If that is the case and the Bavar-373 has the Iranian-Nebo supporting it, the range would become that max value of 200km.

So it can be said:
- Bavar-373 has a range of 85km against an ideal stealth asset (a kind of super F-117).
- 150km against a non-ideal one in the class of the F-35
- 200km, its max. range, if being supported by the Iranian-Nebo as acquisition radar.

As those radars have very high ECCM capabilities, the range reduction penalty due to successful and highly intensive ECM would be negligible or at best 20% from my estimations.

@T-72B 

As a battalion maybe. A normal S-300PMU2 battery can engage 6 targets, as the Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## AmirPatriot

And here's my blog post about it. An in-depth analysis of Iran's Bavar-373 long-range air defence system, detailing its advanced AESA radars and possible anti-stealth capabilities.

*Iran's Bavar-373: A Profile*

posted by Amir on August 24, 2019

Since the cancellation of the first S-300PMU-1 delivery by Russia in 2010, Iran vowed to develop a superior system, and the Bavar-373 was finally fully unveiled on Defence Industry Day on 22nd August 2019 after roughly 9 years of development.






Read the full blog post and analysis at the link below

https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Sina-1

AmirPatriot said:


> And here's my blog post about it. An in-depth analysis of Iran's Bavar-373 long-range air defence system, detailing its advanced AESA radars and possible anti-stealth capabilities.
> 
> *Iran's Bavar-373: A Profile*
> 
> posted by Amir on August 24, 2019
> 
> Since the cancellation of the first S-300PMU-1 delivery by Russia in 2010, Iran vowed to develop a superior system, and the Bavar-373 was finally fully unveiled on Defence Industry Day on 22nd August 2019 after roughly 9 years of development.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full blog post and analysis at the link below
> 
> https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html


Great piece Amir Jan! Thanks for writing it!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

T-72B said:


> some sources say that B-373 can track 100 targets while other sources say 300 so which one is true?


It can discover 300 targets, prioritize 100 of them, track 60 and engage with 6 of them simultaneously.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sina-1 said:


> Great piece Amir Jan! Thanks for writing it!


Glad you liked it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

PeeD said:


> I was inspired by Russian claims on RCS. It's actually fairly simple and I will explain how I figured it out:
> 
> - The F-35 without shaping techniques should be at 5dB
> - With shaping techniques anything between -20-30dB reduction is physically possible imo. Resulting in -25dB overall performance
> -RAS and RAM allow for another -25dB reduction, resulting in a total of -50dB which is very conservative my any merits.
> 
> Ok now here it what happens when operating against the Bavar-373:
> - S-band to X-band reduces shaping performance by at least 5dB. Resulting in -45dB overall performance.
> - S-band to X-band reduces RAS/RAM performance by around 20dB. Resulting in -25dB overall performance.
> - Ground aspect and non-optimized angles peaking at the sides at least degrades the -25dB to 3x that RCS area resulting in -20dB overall performance
> - ECCM capabilities of such modern AESAs bring effectively no significant performance reductions when ECCM is applied. So the grand total stays at -20dB, while it would again improve to -25-30dB on legacy radars.
> 
> Now whats the performance of the Bavar-373 acquisition radar against a -20dB target from the released value (+ some assumptions)?
> 85km.
> However in real world conditions this value changes: The subsonic very optimized F-117 with newest and best RAM/RAS may achieve that effectively -20dB but the F-35 is more likely to land at -10dB which results in 150km radar performance.
> 
> Conclusions is: If we assume that ideal applied stealth allows for -50dB improved RCS reduction (0,00001, smaller than a pea) and 10dB less for the less optimized supersonic F-35 with total execution of -40dB, resulting at -20dB against the Bavar-373 acquisition radar, then it kills the target at 150km.
> 
> Luckily for the Bavar-373, it has upper echelon battalion level radar assets with Meraj-4 and potentially Iranian-Nebo. These will detect the -10dB target at over 200km max. engagement range (Meraj-4) and over 300km (Iranian-Nebo). Not to talk about even higher echelon assets like Ghadir etc.
> These can allow for a launch up with mid-course updates until the target comes within the range of the Bavar-373 battery level assets. In all situations the F-35 will be painted by 3-4 and more radars from different angles and some of them are extremely difficult to locate and turn away the peak aspects from.
> 
> Russians claim effective values of -5dB for F-22(F-35) which likely is because they talk about VHF-band assets. If that is the case and the Bavar-373 has the Iranian-Nebo supporting it, the range would become that max value of 200km.
> 
> So it can be said:
> - Bavar-373 has a range of 85km against an ideal stealth asset (a kind of super F-117).
> - 150km against a non-ideal one in the class of the F-35
> - 200km, its max. range, if being supported by the Iranian-Nebo as acquisition radar.
> 
> As those radars have very high ECCM capabilities, the range reduction penalty due to successful and highly intensive ECM would be negligible or at best 20% from my estimations.
> 
> @T-72B
> 
> As a battalion maybe. A normal S-300PMU2 battery can engage 6 targets, as the Bavar-373.


Would mast mounting of the bavar s and x band radars be worth it at fixed and semi fixed installations to increase both low altitude and over all detection ranges?.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

AmirPatriot said:


> And here's my blog post about it. An in-depth analysis of Iran's Bavar-373 long-range air defence system, detailing its advanced AESA radars and possible anti-stealth capabilities.
> 
> *Iran's Bavar-373: A Profile*
> 
> posted by Amir on August 24, 2019
> 
> Since the cancellation of the first S-300PMU-1 delivery by Russia in 2010, Iran vowed to develop a superior system, and the Bavar-373 was finally fully unveiled on Defence Industry Day on 22nd August 2019 after roughly 9 years of development.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full blog post and analysis at the link below
> 
> https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html


Great article. Thank you. The depth of knowledge of yourself and PeeD in the field of missiles and radars make us all Iranians so proud. Special Tanks to PeeD for taking time to answer all of the questions in detail and without prejudice.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## skyshadow

T-72B said:


> @skyshadow
> I mean this
> View attachment 575673
> 
> 
> Also @skyshadow some sources say that B-373 can track 100 targets while other sources say 300 so which one is true?
> 
> 
> Still lose to S-300PMU-2 radar which can engage 36 targets and guide 72 missiles



i don't know about that ( cannon on fighters ) i do not think that is possible not for Iran at least



yes Iran said Bavar-373 can track up to *300 targets.


*
every *battalion of S-300PMU-2* can engage *36 targets and guide 72 missiles *just like Bavar-373, every *battery of S-300PMU-2* can engage only with *6 targets and guide 12 missiles* again just like Bavar-373, and i just read some were that Bavar-373 radar can engage with *9 targets *i don't know if its reliable or not*,* and not 6. so in that regard they are the same if Iran told us the real numbers as Bavar-373 is not for export and we do not have to say it's real capabilities to the enemy and as i said Bavar-373 may engage with *9 targets.*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980602001006

"He also said that Iran uses 'Oqab (Eagle)' missile shield to confront enemy's flying objects in low altitude, explaining that it can confront fighters, drones and cruise missiles."

What is that oqab, Iranian pantsir???

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980602001006
> 
> "He also said that Iran uses 'Oqab (Eagle)' missile shield to confront enemy's flying objects in low altitude, explaining that it can confront fighters, drones and cruise missiles."
> 
> What is that oqab, Iranian pantsir???



not known but they said that Iran has a system that jammers and interfere with fighters that fly low to scape radars and when fighter realises that its system does not work ( which the pilot thinks its technological as he flying that low ) he would then change altitude and he will go up and our radars will get a lock on his fighter jet.



AmirPatriot said:


> And here's my blog post about it. An in-depth analysis of Iran's Bavar-373 long-range air defence system, detailing its advanced AESA radars and possible anti-stealth capabilities.
> 
> *Iran's Bavar-373: A Profile*
> 
> posted by Amir on August 24, 2019
> 
> Since the cancellation of the first S-300PMU-1 delivery by Russia in 2010, Iran vowed to develop a superior system, and the Bavar-373 was finally fully unveiled on Defence Industry Day on 22nd August 2019 after roughly 9 years of development.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full blog post and analysis at the link below
> 
> https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html



like your analysis 


Iran said the radar can engage targets out of *250 km* ( for the X band )range *and not* 200 km range


X-band radar would be able to engage conventional (non-VLO) aircraft out at ranges of *200 km




more then 320 km for the S bad radar 
*
"the range of detected targets (320 km)"

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Myself

Iranian Raad-1 equivalent system unveiled today in Yemen:

https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980602000985/رونمایی-از-سامانه‌های-پدافند-هوایی-فاطر-۱-و-ثاقب-۱-یمن

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> not known but they said that Iran has a system that jammers and interfere with fighters that fly low to scape radars and when fighter realises that its system does not work ( which the pilot thinks its technological as he flying that low ) he would then change altitude and he will go up and our radars will get a luck on his fighter jet.



Actually ECM/jamming is one of the characteristics of AESA radars. Since it has a broadband amplifiers per each TRM, they can transmit across the band and they can create noise similar to a white noise. Combine that with a pencil shape beam forming, and you have a very powerful jammer that can push noise on a specific spot.

In addition, since it's an AESA, they have inherent ECCM capability as they are operating in a 'broardband' and with a pre coded and pseudo random frequency switching/hopping mode. This prevents the jammer to occupy the right channel easily.

In addition, they are hard to intercept as they can appear as a background noise depending on quality of TRM amplifiers and antenna designs and sensitivity of enemies receiver and signal processing pipeline.



AmirPatriot said:


> And here's my blog post about it. An in-depth analysis of Iran's Bavar-373 long-range air defence system, detailing its advanced AESA radars and possible anti-stealth capabilities.
> 
> *Iran's Bavar-373: A Profile*
> 
> posted by Amir on August 24, 2019
> 
> Since the cancellation of the first S-300PMU-1 delivery by Russia in 2010, Iran vowed to develop a superior system, and the Bavar-373 was finally fully unveiled on Defence Industry Day on 22nd August 2019 after roughly 9 years of development.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full blog post and analysis at the link below
> 
> https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html



Awesome read @AmirPatriot

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## aryobarzan

Question: is there any official kill ever recorded any place for S-300 system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

@AmirPatriot
B373 suppose to have TVC...
A news that confirmed and demonstrated that, may be by fars news in earlier.
U didn't confirmed that...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## hussainb72

Myself said:


> Iranian Raad-1 equivalent system unveiled today in Yemen:
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980602000985/رونمایی-از-سامانه‌های-پدافند-هوایی-فاطر-۱-و-ثاقب-۱-یمن
> 
> View attachment 575778



I am sure they had this system a long time ago, but couldn't unveil it because of the situation in Yemen, but now that there are less threats, they officially showed it to the public.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

aryobarzan said:


> Great article. Thank you. The depth of knowledge of yourself and PeeD in the field of missiles and radars make us all Iranians so proud. Special Tanks to PeeD for taking time to answer all of the questions in detail and without prejudice.



Thanks for the kind words. As you said, we must all give special thanks to @PeeD for his input in the past week, it was very valuable and revealing. I learnt a lot and that was reflected in my blog post.



skyshadow said:


> like your analysis
> 
> 
> Iran said the radar can engage targets out of *250 km* ( for the X band )range *and not* 200 km range
> 
> 
> X-band radar would be able to engage conventional (non-VLO) aircraft out at ranges of *200 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> more then 320 km for the S bad radar
> *
> "the range of detected targets (320 km)"



The numbers and what performance aspect they belong to are translated from the below image, and I am confident of the translation. The Artesh's official Telegram channel gave the exact same numbers.








arashkamangir said:


> Awesome read @AmirPatriot



Mamnoon arashkamangir jan.



Shams313 said:


> @AmirPatriot
> B373 suppose to have TVC...
> A news that confirmed and demonstrated that, may be by fars news in earlier.
> U didn't confirmed that...



It was not clearly demonstrated, that is speculation. As PeeD said earlier the same sharp turn and exhaust offset is seen in the Fateh missiles which we know do not have TVC.

As for the Fars article, I am aware of it. In that section they did not quote a single official and in the past few days no official has said Bavar uses TVC. In fact I don't think they have said that at all during Bavar's whole development path.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

**************************​
One thing I've just realised is that Iran may have bought the 96L6E radar in its S-300 system to act in a similar way against stealth targets as Bavar-373. Just like Bavar, Iran's S-300 (SA-20*C *as the Americans call it) at the battery level has an S-band* acquisition radar (96L6E) and an X-band engagement radar (30N6E2), while the missiles use SAGG guidance. Remains to be seen if the S-300 needs any software modifications to properly operate in this mode, but it does seem possible.

*There's disagreement over whether it's S-band, L-band or even C-band.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> **************************​
> One thing I've just realised is that Iran may have bought the 96L6E radar in its S-300 system to act in a similar way against stealth targets as Bavar-373. Just like Bavar, Iran's S-300 (SA-20*C *as the Americans call it) at the battery level has an S-band* acquisition radar (96L6E) and an X-band engagement radar (30N6E2), while the missiles use SAGG guidance. Remains to be seen if the S-300 needs any software modifications to properly operate in this mode, but it does seem possible.
> 
> *There's disagreement over whether it's S-band, L-band or even C-band.



From all we know 96L6 can't perform azimuth electronic scan; hence you can't use it in the way I described for the Bavar-373.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> From all we know 96L6 can't perform azimuth electronic scan; hence you can't use it in the way I described for the Bavar-373.



I see... one to keep in mind though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



good timing as there are reports that Israel is planing to bomb Houthis in Yemen....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

hussainb72 said:


> I am sure they had this system a long time ago, but couldn't unveil it because of the situation in Yemen, but now that there are less threats, they officially showed it to the public.


Yep, in Jan 2018 when they shot a F-15 the Houthis announced they had used a new missile for that. Nobody knew about SA-6 at the time. Now, 18 months later and after shooting down 2 US MQ-9s, they finally reveal it to the world!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

Hopefully Houthis have received Sayyad-2C with its apparently ARH seeker. Saudis captured a Sayyad-3C body section without the critical seeker and systems sections.
That system would have a extremely low footprint, a small truck with single launcher would be sufficient.
Hezbollah likely has it.
This, together with one of Irans passive thermal camera detection systems like the Seraj would be the absolute guerrilla air defense weapon. A nightmare for any SEAD/DEAD campaign...
This level of technological capability can easily decide the faith of a western air campaign.
Weakpoint is only the ARH seeker itself, self defense jamming can counter it and its true for anything up to the AMRAAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Hopefully Houthis have received Sayyad-2C with its apparently ARH seeker. Saudis captured a Sayyad-3C body section without the critical seeker and systems sections.
> That system would have a extremely low footprint, a small truck with single launcher would be sufficient.
> Hezbollah likely has it.
> This, together with one of Irans passive thermal camera detection systems like the Seraj would be the absolute guerrilla air defense weapon. A nightmare for any SEAD/DEAD campaign...
> This level of technological capability can easily decide the faith of a western air campaign.
> Weakpoint is only the ARH seeker itself, self defense jamming can counter it and its true for anything up to the AMRAAM.



@PeeD do we have any Home on Jamming mode in our seeker pipelines? I know AMRAAM has a HOJ mode.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD do we have any Home on Jamming mode in our seeker pipelines? I know AMRAAM has a HOJ mode.



HOJ is relative easy to implement, however re-acquisition and back to HOJ creates gaps. A method to counter HOJ are towed barrage jammers... A inherent problem with ARH sekers... the close you get to your target, the higher the jamming power level gets...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> Glad you liked it.




داداش این چه کینه ای ازت داره معلومه حسابی سوزوندیش. ایول 




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165329366554992640

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165329714518491136

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## DoubleYouSee

PeeD said:


> Hopefully Houthis have received Sayyad-2C with its apparently ARH seeker. Saudis captured a Sayyad-3C body section without the critical seeker and systems sections.
> That system would have a extremely low footprint, a small truck with single launcher would be sufficient.
> Hezbollah likely has it.
> This, together with one of Irans passive thermal camera detection systems like the Seraj would be the absolute guerrilla air defense weapon. A nightmare for any SEAD/DEAD campaign...
> This level of technological capability can easily decide the faith of a western air campaign.
> Weakpoint is only the ARH seeker itself, self defense jamming can counter it and its true for anything up to the AMRAAM.


should it have a laser range finder to measure the range?!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Myself said:


> Iranian Raad-1 equivalent system unveiled today in Yemen:
> 
> https://www.farsnews.com/news/13980602000985/رونمایی-از-سامانه‌های-پدافند-هوایی-فاطر-۱-و-ثاقب-۱-یمن
> 
> View attachment 575778


What are those on the sides? Ram jet?! Did they have access to S-200? Seems like the ram jets used for S-200 missiles



skyshadow said:


> داداش این چه کینه ای ازت داره معلومه حسابی سوزوندیش. ایول
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165329366554992640
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165329714518491136


He and all his supporters are anti Israel!! 

So I guess that would make him pro Israel?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Iskander

Arminkh said:


> What are those on the sides? Ram jet?! Did they have access to S-200? Seems like the ram jets used for S-200 missiles


Yes Ramjet and those missiles are upgraded 3M9M missiles for SA-6 sam legacy system

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Myself

AmirPatriot said:


> **************************​
> One thing I've just realised is that Iran may have bought the 96L6E radar in its S-300 system to act in a similar way against stealth targets as Bavar-373. Just like Bavar


 Yes indeed they have purchased at least one unit:
















Iranian S-300 units are significantly more expensive than similar units other customers bought from Russia, and the reason is not clear.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Iskander

Myself said:


> Iranian S-300 units are significantly more expensive than similar units other customers bought from Russia, and the reason is not clear.


Likely a customized version

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthHurtz

Myself said:


> Yes indeed they have purchased at least one unit:
> 
> View attachment 575823
> 
> 
> View attachment 575824
> 
> 
> View attachment 575825
> 
> 
> Iranian S-300 units are significantly more expensive than similar units other customers bought from Russia, and the reason is not clear.



lmao iran got scammed


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Hopefully Houthis have received Sayyad-2C with its apparently ARH seeker. Saudis captured a Sayyad-3C body section without the critical seeker and systems sections.
> That system would have a extremely low footprint, a small truck with single launcher would be sufficient.
> Hezbollah likely has it.
> This, together with one of Irans passive thermal camera detection systems like the Seraj would be the absolute guerrilla air defense weapon. A nightmare for any SEAD/DEAD campaign...
> This level of technological capability can easily decide the faith of a western air campaign.
> Weakpoint is only the ARH seeker itself, self defense jamming can counter it and its true for anything up to the AMRAAM.


hopefully they did not .and no Sayyad is too big to be a guerrilla air-defense system


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> hopefully they did not .and no Sayyad is too big to be a guerrilla air-defense system



Noor was not too big for Hezbollah in 2006 hence Sayyad-2C is not too big either.

The missile body captured by Saudis contains technology between SM-1 and SM-2 booster, hence there was no critical technology leak.
The critical seeker section was smuggled in a different more secure way.
SD-2C hold no critical position in Irans SAM doctrine anyway, it is a special but fragile weapon, best used in ambushed. Most useful in most contested airspace.
Plus Iran has export grade projects to prevent critical technology to be captured.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## scimitar19

TruthHurtz said:


> lmao iran got scammed


I hope Russians have good customer care team for all S 300/400 users.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Noor was not too big for Hezbollah in 2006 hence Sayyad-2C is not too big either.
> 
> The missile body captured by Saudis contains technology between SM-1 and SM-2 booster, hence there was no critical technology leak.
> The critical seeker section was smuggled in a different more secure way.
> SD-2C hold no critical position in Irans SAM doctrine anyway, it is a special but fragile weapon, best used in ambushed. Most useful in most contested airspace.
> Plus Iran has export grade projects to prevent critical technology to be captured.


First Hezbollah never fought a guerilla warfare.
Second the launcher shown in Hezbollah video only showed in iran in 2011-2012.
Second Sayyad is 3rd of khordad , it's Bavar-373 it's 15th of khordad .
It's pretty much going to be the backbone of our airdefence so I rather we won't give it to every body.
Also look at 3rd of khordad system which is the smallest Sayyad deployment and tell me how Houthis gonna protect it. And how it's guerilla warfare equipment.





If you want to give Sayyad you must give a tellar and if you want sayyad2 be sayyad2 you must give them Bashir radar.
If you want to give them 15th of khordad then the situation is worse and you must give them the radar otherwise the system is useless

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> First Hezbollah never fought a guerilla warfare.
> Second the launcher shown in Hezbollah video only showed in iran in 2011-2012.
> Second Sayyad is 3rd of khordad , it's Bavar-373 it's 15th of khordad .
> It's pretty much going to be the backbone of our airdefence so I rather we won't give it to every body.
> Also look at 3rd of khordad system which is the smallest Sayyad deployment and tell me how Houthis gonna protect it. And how it's guerilla warfare equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to give Sayyad you must give a tellar and if you want sayyad2 be sayyad2 you must give them Bashir radar.
> If you want to give them 15th of khordad then the situation is worse and you must give them the radar otherwise the system is useless



No, just because the missile shell is Sayyad 2 it doesn't mean it is of the same variant as Iranian counter parts. There are variations in seeker layout, sensitivity, tracking pipeline, sensors and etc.

It has been shown by Houthis to use FLIR IR based tracking in conjunction with SA-6, which is a mish mash of western, Easter and Iranian/Houthis tech... It is a pure gorilla weapon because it is mobile, low foot print yet impactful and hard to identify. Sayyad 2 and Raad missiles are mobile missiles meant for exactly these types of ops.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

@arashkamangir said it.

If Sayyad-2C is the ARH seeker component it does not need Raad, 3rd Khordad or Tabas.
It can be integrated into a FLIR system, just needs the coordinates and not even a mid-course update of used within 20km or so.

Houthis have already deployed R-27T AAMs on small trucks, the same would be done with a Sayyad-2C. One is an IR seeker missile without INS that needs to be locked from the ground and the other is a ARH SAM that activates its seeker search at a coordinate in space.
One of the few guerrilla weapons that can reach out to high altitude, a pure nightmare of the opposing airpower.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> No, just because the missile shell is Sayyad 2 it doesn't mean it is of the same variant as Iranian counter parts. There are variations in seeker layout, sensitivity, tracking pipeline, sensors and etc.
> 
> It has been shown by Houthis to use FLIR IR based tracking in conjunction with SA-6, which is a mish mash of western, Easter and Iranian/Houthis tech... It is a pure gorilla weapon because it is mobile, low foot print yet impactful and hard to identify. Sayyad 2 and Raad missiles are mobile missiles meant for exactly these types of ops.


If you want to use an infrared or optic seeker with maximum of 20-25km detection range why use a missile with the range of 100km .
Better use a short range missile instead.


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> If you want to use an infrared or optic seeker with maximum of 20-25km detection range why use a missile with the range of 100km .
> Better use a short range missile instead.







this fellow here has 50 km range while scanning the horizon and 80 km during interception.
lol i just don't remember it's name.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> @arashkamangir said it.
> 
> If Sayyad-2C is the ARH seeker component it does not need Raad, 3rd Khordad or Tabas.
> It can be integrated into a FLIR system, just needs the coordinates and not even a mid-course update of used within 20km or so.
> 
> Houthis have already deployed R-27T AAMs on small trucks, the same would be done with a Sayyad-2C. One is an IR seeker missile without INS that needs to be locked from the ground and the other is a ARH SAM that activates its seeker search at a coordinate in space.
> One of the few guerrilla weapons that can reach out to high altitude, a pure nightmare of the opposing airpower.


What for ? You WA t to target enemy at range of 20-30km at high altitude use a short range missile that can reach up to 17km . why not use a taer variant ? Has all the specification.



Mithridates said:


> View attachment 575874
> 
> this fellow here has 50 km range while scanning the horizon and 80 km during interception.
> lol i just don't remember it's name.


Not when the weather is not optimal


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> What for ? You WA t to target enemy at range of 20-30km at high altitude use a short range missile that can reach up to 17km . why not use a taer variant ? Has all the specification.



Taer series and Sayyad-2 series have about the same size, they and all others such as Buk series, HQ-16, SM-2, all have the same kinematic objective: Protect city, a division or a ship flotilla.
That's why they have all the same size and layout. Anything larger makes no big difference in that class and anything shorter reduced performance. Its the ideal size for SAMs in this class.

In that sense: Sayyad-2 at 30km range has a significantly higher PK than Sayyad-2 at 75km. Iranian TI cameras can now easily cover 40km and for a 40km, high altitude target, Sayyad-2 has the right size with high PK.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Taer series and Sayyad-2 series have about the same size, they and all others such as Buk series, HQ-16, SM-2, all have the same kinematic objective: Protect city, a division or a ship flotilla.
> That's why they have all the same size and layout. Anything larger makes no big difference in that class and anything shorter reduced performance. Its the ideal size for SAMs in this class.
> 
> In that sense: Sayyad-2 at 30km range has a significantly higher PK than Sayyad-2 at 75km. Iranian TI cameras can now easily cover 40km and for a 40km, high altitude target, Sayyad-2 has the right size with high PK.



wouldnt be Mersad 2 "Mobile System" (Kamin) not a much better suited system for Hezbollah/guerilla warfare? (Low footprint...)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Draco.IMF said:


> wouldnt be Mersad 2 "Mobile System" (Kamin) not a much better suited system for Hezbollah/guerilla warfare? (Low footprint...)



A single SD-2C on a DIY rail on a small two axle truck is sufficient. No Mersad-3 or Sayyad-2 TELs needed, too large.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

Houthis used FLIR maybe Iranian supplied to detect American MQ-9 reaper drones before shotdown

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Iskander said:


> Houthis used FLIR maybe Iranian supplied to detect American MQ-9 reaper drones before shotdown


Actually, it is speculated that the US provided Yemen with those same FLIR systems in 2009 that it now uses to shoot down US F-15s and MQ-9s! 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/950514067055284224
"There is a distinct possibility that *the United States might have supplied the FLIR Systems turret the Yemenis claimed to have employed during this shoot down*. In July 2009, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the Pentagon’s main arms broker, approved a so-called Pseudo-Foreign Military Sales, or Pseudo-FMS, deal that included three Ultra 8500 turrets “or equivalent,” as well as other equipment and contractor support.

The full package, intended as an upgrade for Yemen’s Huey II helicopters, had an estimated value of more than $3.7 million. *The Ultra 8500s by themselves were worth more than $600,000 apiece*."

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-flir-video-showing-shoot-down-of-saudi-f-15s

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Taer series and Sayyad-2 series have about the same size, they and all others such as Buk series, HQ-16, SM-2, all have the same kinematic objective: Protect city, a division or a ship flotilla.
> That's why they have all the same size and layout. Anything larger makes no big difference in that class and anything shorter reduced performance. Its the ideal size for SAMs in this class.
> 
> In that sense: Sayyad-2 at 30km range has a significantly higher PK than Sayyad-2 at 75km. Iranian TI cameras can now easily cover 40km and for a 40km, high altitude target, Sayyad-2 has the right size with high PK.


Then why equip 3rd of khordad with Sayyad-2 and taer ? Why equip 15 khordad with Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 ?



PeeD said:


> A single SD-2C on a DIY rail on a small two axle truck is sufficient. No Mersad-3 or Sayyad-2 TELs needed, too large.


That Sayyad-2 can be tater with appropriate range for the hack.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Actually, it is speculated that the US provided Yemen with those same FLIR systems in 2009 that it now uses to shoot down US F-15s and MQ-9s!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/950514067055284224
> "There is a distinct possibility that *the United States might have supplied the FLIR Systems turret the Yemenis claimed to have employed during this shoot down*. In July 2009, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the Pentagon’s main arms broker, approved a so-called Pseudo-Foreign Military Sales, or Pseudo-FMS, deal that included three Ultra 8500 turrets “or equivalent,” as well as other equipment and contractor support.
> 
> The full package, intended as an upgrade for Yemen’s Huey II helicopters, had an estimated value of more than $3.7 million. *The Ultra 8500s by themselves were worth more than $600,000 apiece*."
> 
> https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-flir-video-showing-shoot-down-of-saudi-f-15s


yes Houthis used them but these systems supplied by Americans before the war started can be distinguished by the company logo in the display


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Iskander said:


> yes Houthis used them but these systems supplied by Americans before the war started can be distinguished by the company logo in the display
> View attachment 575906


did the missile miss the target........it doesn't seem that plane get downed....after explosion;it keeps going on it's way.


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> Then why equip 3rd of khordad with Sayyad-2 and taer ? Why equip 15 khordad with Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 ?



From what is known 3rd Khordad uses SD-2C as its special ARH-seeker component. Taer-2 is its dedicated missile, SARH.
15th Khordad simply can use the missiles IRIADF has due to its Talash programs, SD-2 and SD-3.


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

DoubleYouSee said:


> did the missile miss the target........it doesn't seem that plane get downed....after explosion;it keeps going on it's way.


It is a bit unclear because Houthis claim two instances - one in Jan 2018 and one in March 2018.

Houthis first claimed the Jan 2018 incident was a Tornado shot down, but later said it was a F-15.

Saudis admitted losing a jet over Yemen in January, but they said it was a Tornado not an F-15. Saudis also said in the March incident that a F-15 was hit but survived and returned to base.

However, the Houthis released that video in January 2018 which clearly shows an F-15, so it's not very clear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> From what is known 3rd Khordad uses SD-2C as its special ARH-seeker component. Taer-2 is its dedicated missile, SARH.
> 15th Khordad simply can use the missiles IRIADF has due to its Talash programs, SD-2 and SD-3.





Battle of Waterloo said:


> It is a bit unclear because Houthis claim two instances - one in Jan 2018 and one in March 2018.
> 
> Houthis first claimed the Jan 2018 incident was a Tornado shot down, but later said it was a F-15.
> 
> Saudis admitted losing a jet over Yemen in January, but they said it was a Tornado not an F-15. Saudis also said in the March incident that a F-15 was hit but survived and returned to base.
> 
> However, the Houthis released that video in January 2018 which clearly shows an F-15, so it's not very clear.



That's a splash, the plane was directly hit at least once. Play some DCS and you will recognize a splash


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> Play some DCS and you will recognize a splash



That drone is toast! 

I should get back into DCS...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> That drone is toast!
> 
> I should get back into DCS...



Some video footage can be found here:
https://en.muraselon.com/2019/08/watch-yemens-houthi-new-air-defense-missile-down-us-drone/

I just realized, there is a familiar noise before the missile launches and I think I have heard it from S-300, Sayyad 2, Sayyad 3 and Bavar. I think it's the sound of a canister hatch blowing out, maybe this was not an SA-6 but a Sayyad 2 as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

arashkamangir said:


> Some video footage can be found here:
> https://en.muraselon.com/2019/08/watch-yemens-houthi-new-air-defense-missile-down-us-drone/
> 
> I just realized, there is a familiar noise before the missile launches and I think I have heard it from S-300, Sayyad 2, Sayyad 3 and Bavar. I think it's the sound of a canister hatch blowing out, maybe this was not an SA-6 but a Sayyad 2 as well.



I know what you mean but IMHO it doesn't sound like a canister being fired. If you listen carefully it's actually 2 sounds. Somehow sounds like a couple of rounds being fired out of a gun.


----------



## Iskander

DoubleYouSee said:


> did the missile miss the target........it doesn't seem that plane get downed....after explosion;it keeps going on it's way.


This image is not from the shootdown video but from another video in which the missile missed an Emarati F16 fighter jet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Looks like Iran has reverse engineered TOR 1M

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

The Oghab system will be interesting, aside from that photoshop concept.
Here cold launch and instant directivity are worth the extra costs.
This system can use cold launch to allow the radar system to be at a elevated position without concerns about hot gases. Optical channel also works better with cold launch here.

TVC would make not sense to direct the missile before high acceleration but a TOR-M1 like system could make economic sense. The competing concept is a Pantsir-like mechanical system. However if possible and costs allowing, you want to have as few as possible moving parts, hydraulics and turret.
A TOR-M1 like nose thruster system would allow to have a system without a moving turret and reduce reaction time and reliability.
So the system would have a fixed VLS with a radar mast above it.
Without a turret, such a system could fit a 6x4=24 missile load into a small chassis like the 3rd Khordad vehicle or eve more on Zafar trucks.
AAA gun system would be omitted, those would be on a separate system in that case, favorably a 76mm or 100mm large caliber one with AHEAD like munition.

As new generation system, no two combined radar systems like on Pantsir and TOR-M1 would be used. Instead a multi-role AESA system, the one already known from IEI would be used, mounted on a elevated position above the VLS, best foldable.

The missile system should be hypervelocity Pantsir based with a booster stage. From what was shown, Iran would put it into a TOR-M1 like square container. Iran would also change it by adding a sustainer motor to the second stage in order to extend the range (creating higher costs), plus the mentioned nose thruster system needed for VLS operation.
With the missile its all about the cost, it would be already more complex than the Pantsir (but smaller and cheaper than the TOR-M1), hence this is the questionable part of the system.

All what I said, from chassis, radar, missile, availability of TOR-M1 tech., everything is there in Iran and the question is only if it is economic to combine this all to this proposed Oghab system.

Most cost effective would be a seperate AAA system, maybe without radar system and slaved to the missile Oghab system. For critical crossing CM and supersonic targets, the missile system would be used, for all the rest the large caliber AAA component.

This all is an expensive high performance concept for high value targets.
But today it is really needed, it is needed in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

A mix of Tor M1 and this would be perfect

https://www.armyrecognition.com/chi...f-propelled_anti-aircraft_tracked_armour.html


----------



## skyshadow

the next phases will be interesting 
*

The "eagle" defense system is not a reverse engineered Russian " Tor M-1" *
*

"The next phases is to design a system that uses both artillery and missile weapons."


http://defapress.ir/fa/news/359386/سامانه-پدافندی-عقاب-مهندسی-معکوس-تور-ام-1-روسی-نیست*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Russel

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/149266/Iran-to-unveil-new-homegrown-air-defense-system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran's Oghab (Eagle) mobile short-range air defense system is undergoing final trials ahead of delivery.

The Oghab combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system is designed to counter low flying targets especially cruise missiles.

According to Deputy Commander of Air Defense Forces, Gen. Alireza Elhami the system design has some similarities in design to the Tor missile system.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran's Oghab (Eagle) mobile short-range air defense system is undergoing final trials ahead of delivery.
> 
> The Oghab combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system is designed to counter low flying targets especially cruise missiles.
> 
> According to Deputy Commander of Air Defense Forces, Gen. Alireza Elhami the system design has some similarities in design to the Tor missile system.
> 
> View attachment 576019



this is how the iranian version looks like?
I think this is a chinese Pantsir copy...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Draco.IMF said:


> this is how the iranian version looks like?
> I think this is a chinese Pantsir copy...


absolutely not ! HELLO ????

The Chinese Pantsir


----------



## Draco.IMF

Mr Iran Eye said:


> absolutely not ! HELLO ????
> 
> The Chinese Pantsir
> View attachment 576020








+ im quite sure Iran wouldnt unveil a picture of an Air Defence system which is in final phase and not ready yet...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Looks like Iran has reverse engineered TOR 1M
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Perhaps that may finally answer the mystery of this wind tunnel model.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

Hey the IG link is broken, is there any screenshot of the Iranian Tor?


----------



## skyshadow

arashkamangir said:


> Hey the IG link is broken, is there any screenshot of the Iranian Tor?



no Iran did not show us any

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

[QUOTE = "SpiritOfPersia, post: 11727811, membre: 196697"] Veuillez vous abstenir de publier des informations erronées. Ce système de missile est un système chinois connu sous le nom de:
Système de défense antiaérien courte / moyenne portée FK-1000




[/CITATION]
I am wrong, but I am not the only one to be deceived because it is an Iranian military page about it. And this Chinese system does not appear in the list of the very good military blog that I run ...I am very surprised that the page in question is posted this...Sorry....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

The Oghab system will lack AAA akin to the layout I described as an next gen. solution.

That's good news for VLS layout because a static turret-less design allows more missiles while a turret design (needed for AAA) needs either the VLS system or the radar on that turret which is not compact to realize.
A dedicated AAA vehicle sounds like the best solution.
A supersystem, very large and on a Zafar or Zoljanah truck with missile and AAA may be realized in future.
For now its a missile-only system and hopefully a next generation one like the Russian Morfy system. Range should not exceed 18km for economical reasons.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kiarash

Mr Iran Eye said:


> [QUOTE = "SpiritOfPersia, post: 11727811, membre: 196697"] Veuillez vous abstenir de publier des informations erronées. Ce système de missile est un système chinois connu sous le nom de:
> Système de défense antiaérien courte / moyenne portée FK-1000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/CITATION]
> I am wrong, but I am not the only one to be deceived because it is an Iranian military page about it. And this Chinese system does not appear in the list of the very good military blog that I run ...I am very surprised that the page in question is posted this...Sorry....



Iran Military had put " * File photo" at the end of the caption


----------



## PeeD

It was also said that although similar to TOR-M1 it is not a copy of it.
To me it sounds like the VLS-cold start und thurster directing features will come from the TOR-M1 and the missile hopefully from the high speed Pantsir.

It is quire obvious how a next gen. system should look like:





Like the below one but without a expensive 4 x fixed array layout but a rotating one like above one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> It was also said that although similar to TOR-M1 it is not a copy of it.
> To me it sounds like the VLS-cold start und thurster directing features will come from the TOR-M1 and the missile hopefully from the high speed Pantsir.
> 
> It is quire obvious how a next gen. system should look like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like the below one but without a expensive 4 x fixed array layout but a rotating one like above one.



wouldn't this design sacrifice firing in motion?


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> wouldn't this design sacrifice firing in motion?



Why should the below concept with the VLS on-truck?


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Why should the below concept with the VLS on-truck?



Well maybe im misinterpreting the two in the picture. I saw it as a same system but two different mode: transportation mode and launch mode. I thought the top configuration is for firing and not moving (the launchers are unfolded) while the bottom configuration is for moving and not firing. In the top configuration, there is barely any ground clearance under the VLS flatbed/tray.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

One could imagine an alter Mesbah system that could have an improved Pirooz system or an improved Rapier that sits between the guns in its center. Several configurations can be imagined

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mr Iran Eye said:


> One could imagine an alter Mesbah system that could have an improved Pirooz system or an improved Rapier that sits between the guns in its center. Several configurations can be imagined
> View attachment 576105
> View attachment 576106
> View attachment 576108



All the components are already there. Time for Iran to decide which combination will best suit its purposes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

TruthHurtz said:


> All the components are already there. Time for Iran to decide which combination will best suit its purposes.



not quite, i think we need faster missile to deal with super fast supersonic and eventually hypersonic treats that fly low. Also against saturation attacks like those carried by the zionists, the faster you can take out a target, the more time you would have to prepare another firing solution and generally open up tracking channels for other targets.

Iran definitely needs a relatively compact, high volume VLS system that is atleast as fast as Tor or faster like Pantsir. I also agree with other folks here to have a separate AAA unit. A separate AAA module will add a layer of redundancy in addition to mechanical simplicity of the designs. You can also diversify AAA calibers as you would have the necessary room.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> wouldn't this design sacrifice firing in motion?


no system actually fire in motion
it depend on how fast you can prepare the missiles


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> no system actually fire in motion
> it depend on how fast you can prepare the missiles



look into Tor system?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Ogab would also be Ideal to equip Iranian Navy frigates, Corvettes and fast attack missile boats with.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Some Russian systems like the Tor-M2 have the requirement to fire on the move.
I don't think its really necessary for the Oghab.

Morfey is the layout of a effective next gen. system and from the subsystems it seems Iran is also going for that layout. Pantsir and Tor are legacy layouts by 2019, very high performance but also expensive.
Irans system will get rid of the second radar and employ a single multi-role AESA. If the Oghab is a more primitive design more similar to the Tor or a next gen. system akin to the Morfey, or that the Morfey-like system is a still unknown IRGC-ASF asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Some Russian systems like the Tor-M2 have the requirement to fire on the move.
> I don't think its really necessary for the Oghab.
> 
> Morfey is the layout of a effective next gen. system and from the subsystems it seems Iran is also going for that layout. Pantsir and Tor are legacy layouts by 2019, very high performance but also expensive.
> Irans system will get rid of the second radar and employ a single multi-role AESA. If the Oghab is a more primitive design more similar to the Tor or a next gen. system akin to the Morfey, or that the Morfey-like system is a still unknown IRGC-ASF asset.



@PeeD do you have a candidate for the radar in mind?


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD do you have a candidate for the radar in mind?



Yes, otherwise my speculation would not be so detailed.
But too many enemy "eyes" in here, so no first direct publish policy applies. Information is officially released by Iran, open source.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> look into Tor system?


Tor have a 3min mobility time

But the reaction time of newer generation of tor is around 10sec the system can detect and track while moving but it can't fire while moving it has too stop completely first and then fire the missiles .



Sineva said:


> Perhaps that may finally answer the mystery of this wind tunnel model.


Somehow look like rapier

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

Hack-Hook said:


> Tor have a 3min mobility time
> 
> But the reaction time of newer generation of tor is around 10sec the system can detect and track while moving but it can't fire while moving it has too stop completely first and then fire the missiles .
> 
> 
> Somehow look like rapier



Dude what are you talking about:

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SubWater

arashkamangir said:


> Dude what are you talking about:


Not only Tor even pantsir have ability to fire when its moving.


----------



## Myself

SubWater said:


> Not only Tor even pantsir have ability to fire when its moving.


Enough footages of Soviet-era SAM-8 and 9 exist on Youtube to show the same thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

arashkamangir said:


> Dude what are you talking about:


Well tor m1-2u do that . the rest must stop fitst


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Tor have a 3min mobility time
> 
> But the reaction time of newer generation of tor is around 10sec the system can detect and track while moving but it can't fire while moving it has too stop completely first and then fire the missiles .
> 
> 
> Somehow look like rapier


with an extra booster.


----------



## skyshadow

*
Bavar-373 Long Range Air defense system

































































*

*So Bavar-373 is for export  *


وی توضیح داد: در غرفه امسال ایران یک نمونه هواپیمای جت آموزشی، چند نمونه هواپیمای بدون سرنشین نزدیک پرواز و دورپرواز و چند نمونه موتور هواپیما عرضه خواهیم کرد.

بنی طرفی در واکنش به این پرسش که آیا سامانه پدافند موشکی جدید ایران با عنوان باور ۳۷۳ نیز در این نمایشگاه به نمایش در خواهد آمد؟، *اظهار داشت: این سامانه به تازگی در کشور رونمایی شده است و در نمایشگاه امسال هوا و فضای مسکو شرکت ندارد ، اما قطعا غرفه ایران در این نمایشگاه و نمایشگاه های بعدی در هر کجا جزو بهترین ها خواهد بود.












https://www.irna.ir/news/83453740/نمایشگاه-بین-المللی-هوافضای-روسیه-با-حضور-ایران-آغاز-به-کار-کرد*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AmirPatriot

Iran doesn't need Oghab to fire on the move. The reason Tor-M1-2U has that capability is that it is designed to accompany Russian armour like the Tunguska. Being able to fire on the move against helicopters and PGMs is a great capability in a war of maneuver which armoured forces must fight. This requirement also explains why Tor is (mostly) on a tracked chassis and has some light armour. The SA-8 went even further with the vehicle being amphibious.

The Buk is also designed with similar requirements in mind.

Iran needs Oghab to defend long range air defences and strategic sites from standoff weapons. So it can be on a wheeled chassis with no armour and certainly doesn't need to fire on the move. It just needs to be able to pack up and move away quickly. As for actual capability - it is for defence of air defences, not armies. Helicopters are not the threat, hordes of standoff munitions and cruise missiles are. A high number of missiles (more than Tor-M1's 8) is important and an AESA radar to target multiple targets simultaneously.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Iskander

lets talk about the detection ranges of iranian nebo like VHF radar
http://kowsarhealth.com/products/1192/L-ASR4
According to the published specifications it can detect a target that has a radar cross section of 2 square meter from 600 km away so using the formula below we can calculate the detection ranges for different target RCS :
RCS=1 meter square from 504 km
RCS=0.1 from 284 km
RCS=0.01 from 160 km
RCS=0.001 from 90 km
RCS=0.0001 from 50 km
this makes that radar an excellent candidate for cueing other higher frequency Iranian radars including bavar-373 radars also that radar is better than Nebo-SVU in detection range and some other specifications

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Malik Alashter

Iskander said:


> RCS=1 meter square from 504 km
> RCS=0.1 from 284 km
> RCS=0.01 from 160 km
> RCS=0.001 from 90 km
> RCS=0.0001 from 50 km


So you telling me that this radar can detect a micron from 50 kilometers


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

Malik Alashter said:


> So you telling me that this radar can detect a micron from 50 kilometers


no to be exact it's a 1cm*1cm=0.0001, note that each cm=10^-2 so cm^2=10^-4=0.0001 .
almost a peanut.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

Mithridates said:


> no to be exact it's a 1cm*1cm=0.0001, note that each cm=10^-2 so cm^2=10^-4=0.0001 .
> almost a peanut.


Bro I think it's theoretical number not real ones.
Now if those numbers are legit it would be very vital to an air defense system


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

- Oqab has been equipped to launch missiles to destroy the enemy targets but it will later be equipped with artillery fire too. - <<<<

https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980604000856

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@Iskander numbers are correct, yes. These are next gen. high power systems.

Add to that that in VHF-band RAM/RAS are extremely degraded and wave scattering effects that further degrade shaping techniques.
So add two or three zeros to those numbers against real world stealth assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar




----------



## Mithridates

Malik Alashter said:


> Bro I think it's theoretical number not real ones.
> Now if those numbers are legit it would be very vital to an air defense system


well in real world many things could change but the numbers are almost equal to S-300 specifications.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iskander

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org...defense-capability-for-possible-regional-role

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

AmirPatriot said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166753818245308417


Awesome! TVC concluded!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Russel

AmirPatriot said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166753818245308417


So Iran has hypersonic missile! Convert it to hit ship, then Iran will be first country to field hypersonic anti ship missile!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

Russel said:


> So Iran has hypersonic missile! Convert it to hit ship, then Iran will be first country to field hypersonic anti ship missile!


Iran already fields hypersonic anti ship missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

AmirPatriot said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166753818245308417



could not say i did not told you guys  thanks for this great news

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

AmirPatriot said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166753818245308417


Bro update ur blog post...I already shared the post several places...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Shams313 said:


> Bro update ur blog post...I already shared it post several places...



Thanks for sharing  I updated it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

AmirPatriot said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166753818245308417



I hope the speed of it missiles will improve

Missile 9M96E/9M96E2 (S-350) -> Mach 15
Missile 40N6E (S-400) -> Mach 14

possible he is downplaying the performance a bit and B-373 missiles are faster...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> I hope the speed of it missiles will improve
> 
> Missile 9M96E/9M96E2 (S-350) -> Mach 15
> Missile 40N6E (S-400) -> Mach 14


for all it,s worth
we already have broken fuel and rocket moto technology and as we speak we already have up and running system equivalent Russia S-400 which much better the S-400 export version ( I mean with cold lacuch and round tube

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Russel said:


> So Iran has hypersonic missile! Convert it to hit ship, then Iran will be first country to field hypersonic anti ship missile!



Most long range ABM ADs systems use hypersonic missiles or else how would they intercept the opposing missile in time if they too slow to even reach it in time.

The term “hypersonic” is vague and starts at Mach 7-8 based on speed.

However the Hypersonic glide vehicles you hear about are something completely different. They don’t rely just on speed (which is usually much higher Mach 15-20).

They are also “stealthy” in their glide vehicle signature and they designed to “skip” or “glide” in the upper stages of the atmosphere thus allowing them to have a random flight path that can change while also using the skip to gain greater speed and distance.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Draco.IMF said:


> I hope the speed of it missiles will improve
> 
> Missile 9M96E/9M96E2 (S-350) -> Mach 15
> Missile 40N6E (S-400) -> Mach 14
> 
> possible he is downplaying the performance a bit and B-373 missiles are faster...


40N6E = 3840 m/s = mach 11

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

With a TVC system Bavar-373 minimum range would be improved and its capability to attack low flying fast targets.

What many don't realize is that the motors of S-300 size missile burn only for 10-15 seconds. Only if there are unreported dual pulse variants that burn for a whole minute, the TVC system can support end-game turning capability.
Possible that non-export Russian variants and Bavar-373 enable TVC operation out to 200km.
Then I would agree that it is worth the extra cost, extra malfunction risk and reduced range due to vane drag.
But if it is only for CM interception capability, like at least in early S-300 variants, then I would be disappointed.
Now if a dual- or tri-pulse motor has been developed, that supplies sufficient gas pressure for TVC operation out to max. range, it means super-maneuverability against air targets and limited exo-atmospheric operation capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AmirPatriot

IMPORTANT: In an earlier (now deleted) tweet I misquoted Brig. General Sadegh Nejad, Advisor to the Defence Minister saying Bavar-373 had a maximum velocity of 2800 m/s. That was in fact the maximum target velocity. He did not state the missile velocity.

But it does have TVC.

Sorry for jumping the gun guys.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Arminkh

AmirPatriot said:


> IMPORTANT: In an earlier (now deleted) tweet I misquoted Brig. General Sadegh Nejad, Advisor to the Defence Minister saying Bavar-373 had a maximum velocity of 2800 m/s. That was in fact the maximum target velocity. He did not state the missile velocity.
> 
> But it does have TVC.
> 
> Sorry for jumping the gun guys.


That's even better! It means Sayad 4 should be much faster.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> That's even better! It means Sayad 4 should be much faster.


Well, no. For example the S-300's 48N6E2 has the same maximum target velocity but flies at "only" 2000 m/s...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

Hahaha the host just trash talked the security apparatus for blocking the high rank official from showing up to interview.
I laughed so hard.


yavar said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

"AmirPatriot" 
IMPORTANT: In an earlier (now deleted) tweet I misquoted Brig. General Sadegh Nejad, Advisor to the Defence Minister saying Bavar-373 had a maximum velocity of 2800 m/s. That was in fact the maximum target velocity. He did not state the missile velocity.

But it does have TVC.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> "AmirPatriot"
> IMPORTANT: In an earlier (now deleted) tweet I misquoted Brig. General Sadegh Nejad, Advisor to the Defence Minister saying Bavar-373 had a maximum velocity of 2800 m/s. That was in fact the maximum target velocity. He did not state the missile velocity.
> 
> But it does have TVC.



any important highlights?



SpiritOfPersia said:


> The Missile family of 9M96E/9M96E2 (S-350) are NOT mach 15, not even close. Where are you getting your info from?



https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/s-400-missiles.htm



yavar said:


> for all it,s worth
> we already have broken fuel and rocket moto technology and as we speak we already have up and running system equivalent Russia S-400 which much better the S-400 export version ( I mean with cold lacuch and round tube


good, very good, now lets chase the S-500
can we expect in near future potent short range AD systems similar to Pantsir/Tor?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

As the general said, TVC is difficult tech. and used for initial alignment of the missile.
So it seems what we saw tested was a Sayyad-4B with TVC and changed strakes.
They did not show clear photos of it because its the operational system and probably due to the TVC details.

It seems that the initial idea of using Sayyad-4 only for ~80km+ targets have changed and now crossing CM targets at low ranges have become a requirement.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*Analysis of Iran’s Bavar 373 SAM: Indigenous Design or S-300 Copycat?*



https://t-intell.com/2019/08/26/analysis-of-irans-bavar-373-sam-indigenous-design-or-s-300-copycat/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *Analysis of Iran’s Bavar 373 SAM: Indigenous Design or S-300 Copycat?*
> 
> 
> 
> https://t-intell.com/2019/08/26/analysis-of-irans-bavar-373-sam-indigenous-design-or-s-300-copycat/


Maybe Iran should down another RQ-4 this time using Bavar for everyone to believe it works

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Maybe Iran should down another RQ-4 this time using Bavar for everyone to believe it works



exactly, an Israeli F-35 would be way more better

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar-373 new tests it seems Bavar can shoot in different angles not just vertical launch*




        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar-373 new tests it seems Bavar can shoot in different angles not just vertical launch*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram



Literally it is firing Sayyad 2/3 missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

arashkamangir said:


> Literally it is firing Sayyad 2/3 missiles


regarding what the authorities said before;B-373 use more than 1 type missile.....maybe they mean other sayyad types

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

DoubleYouSee said:


> regarding what the authorities said before;B-373 use more than 1 type missile.....maybe they mean other sayyad types



It's supposed to be a multilayer system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> Maybe Iran should down another RQ-4 this time using Bavar for everyone to believe it works


RQ-180 please

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

AmirPatriot said:


> RQ-180 please


I wouldn't shut down this one. It needs to be hacked and brought down safely like RQ-170

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AmirPatriot

Arminkh said:


> I wouldn't shut down this one. It needs to be hacked and brought down safely like RQ-170


Another one to add to the collection.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> good, very good, now lets chase the S-500


With regards to S-500
We lak space observing, measuring capabilities



Draco.IMF said:


> can we expect in near future potent short range AD systems similar to Pantsir/Tor?


It's all depends on Iran supreme national security council, they the one which pass license what should be published, they make final decision,

Only on rare cases Leader has intervened and over ruled them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

ایران گفتگو با ر پدافند هوایی ارتش امیر سرتیپ اسماعیلی درباره پدافند هوایی / رادار سپهر ۳۰۰۰ کیلومتر / پهپاد ارش / پدافندهوایی پانزده خرداد /اموزش اس-۳۰۰ در روسیه / فرمانده نیروی هوایی روسیه ژنرال اوموارف / نفوذ جنگنده اف-۳۵ اسرایل به فضای ایران /

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

ایران رزمایش مشترک پدافند هوایی ارتش و سپاه٬ پدافند هوایی سوم خرداد٬ اس-۳۰۰ پ--إم-یو-۲ ٬ اردار کستا٬ تروپواسکتر٬ سامانه پدافند هوایی مرصاد-۲ و مرصاد جدید دیجیتال٬

Iran Joint Army & IRGC Air Defense Exercise and Third Khordad air defense system. S-300 PMU-2, Casta radar, new Mersad-2 Air digital Defense System, Man Pad AD, tropospheric scatter systems

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DoubleYouSee

yavar said:


> Iran Joint Army & IRGC Air Defense Exercise and Third Khordad air defense system. S-300 PMU-2, Casta radar, new Mersad Air digital Defense System, Man Pad AD, tropospheric scatter systems


Is that tropospheric system a part of B-373?!


----------



## skyshadow

*
all of the Bavar 373 system parts we only saw 4 parts of the system*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Good to see that the guy tracks this thread and correctly calls the Meraj-4 a battle management radar.

We see additional to the Bavar-373 open presentation:
- SD-3 lower range component of the SD-4. And maybe the "Mersad-3, Kamin-2" SAM as the third and lowest range component next to the SD-3.
- They were first careful to present only the known 2.container SD-2 TEL configuration but then probably got the go ahead to show the 4 SD-4 TEL.
- Meraj-4 with control container
- Unknown, maybe unloaded SD-3 launcher
- 15th. Khordad system with its SD-3 TEL and radar
- Mersad-3 Kavosh/PAR radar
- What should be a Mersad-3/Kamin-2 launcher vehicle
- All the rest unknown

Note: Gen. Esmaeli again mentions the Sepehr OTH radar with 3000km range to be operating. If it is, its a huge early warning asset in all of the region for Iran and its allies.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mohsen

Finally Kian multi role drone was officially introduced today:









*پهپاد جدید پدافند هوایی رونمایی شد+فیلم*


There are two variants, a long endurance version which can accurately hit it's target in more than 1000km away, and a high speed version for use as interceptor reconnaissance missions.

-----
I think the long range version is used against enemy _AWACS_.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

At least the footage shows Kian is not jet-powered, and uses a rocket booster to launch the vehicle before the propeller engine comes in charge.
Also, Arash Radar was unveiled years ago. I am not sure what’s happening there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

@PeeD

is that the *Iranian Nebo radar* that you were talking about???

In sector scan mode, *Nebo-M can track up to 20 ballistic targets *at *ranges* of up to *1,800 kilometers* (about 1,120 miles) and at an *altitude* of up to *1,200 km* (745 miles).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Myself said:


> At least the footage shows Kian is not jet-powered, and uses a rocket booster to launch the vehicle before the propeller engine comes in charge.
> Also, Arash Radar was unveiled years ago. I am not sure what’s happening there.



It’s another crappy artesh drone. Don’t get too excited.

The drones you need to care about are the ones made by IRGC.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Please look at my post in "Chill Thread" regarding the move.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> @PeeD
> 
> is that the *Iranian Nebo radar* that you were talking about???
> 
> In sector scan mode, *Nebo-M can track up to 20 ballistic targets *at *ranges* of up to *1,800 kilometers* (about 1,120 miles) and at an *altitude* of up to *1,200 km* (745 miles).
> 
> 
> View attachment 576981
> 
> View attachment 576982



That's just a normal Russian made Nebo-SVU, note the smaller array.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

DoubleYouSee said:


> Is that tropospheric system a part of B-373?!


These were developed a few years back when iran was still building up its ad infrastructure.In many ways the new sam systems were really just the final part of all of this build up.



TheImmortal said:


> It’s another crappy artesh drone. Don’t get too excited.
> 
> The drones you need to care about are the ones made by IRGC.


Yes,the lack of standardization and the rather pointless duplication of systems and capabilities among the different military services is rather wasteful of resources,tho this is not unique to iran.
Nonetheless its something that iran in todays world can ill afford to keep doing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Deputy Commander: Iran to Upgrade Bavar 373 Missile Shield
https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980611000342

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*
The Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defense is able to easily detect and intercept all targets, including F-35s far away from our borders, using active, passive and advanced radars.


http://defapress.ir/fa/news/360188/نقش-ارتش-در-انهدام-پهپاد-آمریکایی-مزایای-باور-۳۷۳-نسبت-به-اس-۳۰۰-اف-۳۵-را-از-ورای-مرز‌ها-رصد-می‌کنیم*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran says its new Bavar-373 long range air defense system can shoot down F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters*
*


https://theaviationgeekclub.com/ira...an-shoot-down-f-22-and-f-35-stealth-fighters/*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur today: We have closed *Iran*'s airspace to NATO countries and CENTCOM (US) aircrafts and may decide to attack them in a strategy of preventive defence.


IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur: *Bavar-373 can engage with 9 targets simultaneously*
*


https://www.alef.ir/news/3980612191.html?show=text*


موشک جدید سامانه مرصاد

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

Heres some interesting pics:




This one shows the original type of hawk fire control,such as the ones that iran used to use,and the us modernisation of the system.




And heres the modernised iranian fire control,whats interesting is that for the new console iran appears to have somewhat kept the layout of the old original console with its slanted circular crt screen for the other operator to view.I suspect that this would be so that crews trained on the old system will still be familiar with the layout of the system.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur today: We have closed *Iran*'s airspace to NATO countries and CENTCOM (US) aircrafts and may decide to attack them in a strategy of preventive defence.
> 
> 
> IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur: *Bavar-373 can engage with 9 targets simultaneously
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.alef.ir/news/3980612191.html?show=text*
> 
> موشک جدید سامانه مرصاد


WOW!!

If this is true thats a pretty major announcement,especially the "preventive defence" part.It`ll be very interesting to see if there are any new revised roe relating to dealing with nato/centcom aircraft in irans airspace.
Its good to see.Finally irans air defences have the sharp teeth that they`ve badly needed for so long.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> WOW!!
> 
> If this is true thats a pretty major announcement,especially the "preventive defence" part.It`ll be very interesting to see if there are any new revised roe relating to dealing with nato/centcom aircraft in irans airspace.
> Its good to see.Finally irans air defences have the sharp teeth that they`ve badly needed for so long.




yes it is true, the interesting part is when he said we are monitoring every flight in the middle east, fighters and planes and drones, every thing, from when they move until they land.

*Deputy Commander: Iran to Make Newer Versions of Bavar 373 Missile Shield*



"He added that studies for the construction of *higher-range defense shields* have started and are *in the final stages*, adding that the country aims to *make newer versions of Bavar 373 too*."


https://www.islamicinvitationturkey...e-newer-versions-of-bavar-373-missile-shield/

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> yes it is true, the interesting part is when he said we are monitoring every flight in the middle east, fighters and planes and drones, every thing, from when they move until they land.
> 
> *Deputy Commander: Iran to Make Newer Versions of Bavar 373 Missile Shield*
> 
> 
> 
> "He added that studies for the construction of *higher-range defense shields* have started and are *in the final stages*, adding that the country aims to *make newer versions of Bavar 373 too*."
> 
> 
> https://www.islamicinvitationturkey...e-newer-versions-of-bavar-373-missile-shield/


I`m not surprised that they would be working on further upgrades or modernization of the bavar 373,call it the bavar 373B model.Theres a lot of improvements that could be considered such as faster,longer ranged 2 stage sams for improved abm capability[medium and intermediate range] with possible exoatmospheric capabilities,and a dedicated abm radar to go with them,short ranged active seeker sams to deal with pop up or very close range attackers,extended range active seekers or dual seeker for targets beyond the max range of the fire control radar,plus next generation search and fire control radar designs,improved tvc using gas injection rather than vanes,mast mounting for fixed and semi fixed sites,possibly a naval variant for the larger 6000 ton boats that irans talking about building.
Thats the thing,once you`ve invented something like this you have to keep on developing and improving it in order to keep it current and up to date.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> I`m not surprised that they would be working on further upgrades or modernization of the bavar 373,call it the bavar 373B model.Theres a lot of improvements that could be considered such as faster,longer ranged 2 stage sams for improved abm capability[medium and intermediate range] with possible exoatmospheric capabilities,and a dedicated abm radar to go with them,short ranged active seeker sams to deal with pop up or very close range attackers,extended range active seekers or dual seeker for targets beyond the max range of the fire control radar,plus next generation search and fire control radar designs,improved tvc using gas injection rather than vanes,mast mounting for fixed and semi fixed sites,possibly a naval variant for the larger 6000 ton boats that irans talking about building.
> Thats the thing,once you`ve invented something like this you have to keep on developing and improving it in order to keep it current and up to date.


well by what we saw enemy will try to saturate any air-defense with overwhelming fire power , so my guess is the more urgent upgrade will be reduce the size of the missile so each launcher instead of four missile can carry 9-12 missile same upgrade as pac-2 -> pac-3



skyshadow said:


> IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur today: We have closed *Iran*'s airspace to NATO countries and CENTCOM (US) aircrafts and may decide to attack them in a strategy of preventive defence.
> 
> 
> IRGC Deputy Air Force Chief Gen. Faraj Pur: *Bavar-373 can engage with 9 targets simultaneously
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.alef.ir/news/3980612191.html?show=text*
> 
> 
> موشک جدید سامانه مرصاد


That won't be mersad any more

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hack-Hook said:


> well by what we saw enemy will try to saturate any air-defense with overwhelming fire power , so my guess is the more urgent upgrade will be reduce the size of the missile so each launcher instead of four missile can carry 9-12 missile same upgrade as pac-2 -> pac-3
> 
> 
> That won't be mersad any more


the picture is mahrab missile which is used in mersad 2 air defence...i saw a video on youtube from a drill which has held 2 years ago;they tested mehrab as part of mersad-2 ADS.if i found the address of that video i'll share it.
http://iranpress.com/en/iran-i129907-shalamcheh_missiles_successfully_launched_at_military_drills

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

I would call it Mersad 3.

The detailed photo shows interesting details, good to see them. Mersad 3 level has made the original HAWK a true modern medium range SAM system that can counter stealth assets.
As the HAWK is the backbone of the IRIADF, this is very good to see.

Mehrab was SM-1 copy/rebuild. That missile may be called Kamin-2 for now.
Fakkur-90 was a hybrid between AIM-54 and AIM-23 and this one is a hybrid between SM-1 and AIM-23 with some Sayyad-2 input.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DoubleYouSee

PeeD said:


> I would call it Mersad 3.
> 
> The detailed photo shows interesting details, good to see them. Mersad 3 level has made the original HAWK a true modern medium range SAM system that can counter stealth assets.
> As the HAWK is the backbone of the IRIADF, this is very good to see.
> 
> Mehrab was SM-1 copy/rebuild. That missile may be called Kamin-2 for now.
> Fakkur-90 was a hybrid between AIM-54 and AIM-23 and this one is a hybrid between SM-1 and AIM-23 with some Sayyad-2 input.


But regarding these videos Mersad 2 is a export version of Iranian Mersad..


----------



## DoubleYouSee

https://jangaavaran.ir/سامانه-باور-737/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WinterNights

I am not hearing much regarding what these other radar that were not with the X and s band radars when bavar was unveiled appear to be. For example:






I feel this is something that is part of the communication system of bavar? you can see it below as well:





What is that "shiny" part?


----------



## skyshadow

fake?????????????

*Iran places air defenses at base attacked in Syria*



http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/268802

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> fake?????????????
> 
> *Iran places air defenses at base attacked in Syria*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/268802


They hopefully have something capable there. Last think Iran needs is to lose its AD credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> They hopefully have something capable there. Last think Iran needs is to lose its AD credibility.




no matter how good a AD is if its not layered it's not going to work, it will simply be out numbered with missiles and bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> no matter how good a AD is if its not layered it's not going to work, it will simply be out numbered with missiles and bombs.


that's completely true but that's *if *the opponent has strategic depth, if you look at the map you will notice that a single battery of Bavar placed in Lebanon can paralyze Israeli air force. long range ADs compress the battle field to an small equivalent.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> that's completely true but that's *if *the opponent has strategic depth, if you look at the map you will notice that a single battery of Bavar placed in Lebanon can paralyze Israeli air force. long range ADs compress the battle field to an small equivalent.



yes but Israel has long range fighters that will go deep in mediterranean waters and release their long range bombs or cruise missiles out of reach of Bevar and god forbid if they manage to hit a Bavar with them that will be a kiss good bye for Bavar as no one will take the system seriously anymore unless we hit any fighters that takes off in Israel and then the system still have to protect itself from artillery and missiles and ..... so it still lose = lose for us until we make it layered AD.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Fascinating

Iranian DCA: new surprise coming?

Not long ago, Iran unveiled its Bavar 373 missile batteries, a long-range air defense system. Some sources close to the Ministry of Defense now claim that the Iranian DCA soon has a new room for short-range defense. These are Oghab (Eagle French) missile batteries, a perfectly domesticated combination of Tor and Pantsir systems.

In terms of air defense, targets at a close distance and at a low altitude are one of the greatest challenges, as various threats, ranging from some missiles to fighter planes, can fly at low altitude, making them more powerful. destruction even more important.


And the fact that the new Iranian device is inspired by the Tor-M1, a low-flying, low-altitude, fully mobile air defense system provides it with the ability to interact effectively with various air targets, including airplanes. fixed wing and unmanned helicopters, helicopters, cruise missiles among others.

Drones able to fly at a low altitude are also part of the targets of the device Oghab (Aigle). For now, this new piece of the Iranian DCA has not been unveiled, but informed sources say its range could reach 15 kilometers. Since this new piece of Iranian Air Defense was born from war experiences in Syria, the Russian experts have their points of view on this. According to Vyacheslav Kartashov, Russian liaison officer for technical-military cooperation, the Iranians "professionally exploited" the Tor-M1 missile systems in their new device.

And this source adds: "The Tor-M1 system is one of the most advanced systems in Russia, especially with regard to the compression of radar and missile systems on a chassis." The Iranian device benefits from these radar capabilities "Oghab" is able to intercept cruise missiles and all low-level air threats, initially a missile system and, in the following phases, a designed to use both artillery weapons and missiles, this system also features some of the features of Tor and Pantsir systems that may be derived from the experience of Syrian battles and the presence of Iranian military advisers in that country. Amir Elhami, deputy commander-in-chief of the Iranian Air Force, told IRIN: Iran's main goal is to equip its naval fleet with this short-range defense system. anti-Iran might have other surprises to live than it thinks it knows about the Iranian naval force.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> yes but Israel has long range fighters that will go deep in mediterranean waters and release their long range bombs or cruise missiles out of reach of Bevar and god forbid if they manage to hit a Bavar with them that will be a kiss good bye for Bavar as no one will take the system seriously anymore unless we hit any fighters that takes off in Israel and then the system still have to protect itself from artillery and missiles and ..... so it still lose = lose for us until we make it layered AD.



Iran does have a layered AD system

3rd of Khordad > Khordad 15 > Bavar 373

All that is left is SHORAD which is being developed as Oghab, inspired by TOR-M! and Pantsir system. Likely based on Iran's experience operating Rapier and Ya Zahra systems as well as Syrian experience with the Pantsir.

I don't know where other systems like Talash, Mersad, Kamin-2? and aforementioned Ya Zahra systems stand.



Mr Iran Eye said:


> Fascinating
> 
> Iranian DCA: new surprise coming?
> 
> Not long ago, Iran unveiled its Bavar 373 missile batteries, a long-range air defense system. Some sources close to the Ministry of Defense now claim that the Iranian DCA soon has a new room for short-range defense. These are Oghab (Eagle French) missile batteries, a perfectly domesticated combination of Tor and Pantsir systems.
> 
> In terms of air defense, targets at a close distance and at a low altitude are one of the greatest challenges, as various threats, ranging from some missiles to fighter planes, can fly at low altitude, making them more powerful. destruction even more important.
> 
> 
> And the fact that the new Iranian device is inspired by the Tor-M1, a low-flying, low-altitude, fully mobile air defense system provides it with the ability to interact effectively with various air targets, including airplanes. fixed wing and unmanned helicopters, helicopters, cruise missiles among others.
> 
> Drones able to fly at a low altitude are also part of the targets of the device Oghab (Aigle). For now, this new piece of the Iranian DCA has not been unveiled, but informed sources say its range could reach 15 kilometers. Since this new piece of Iranian Air Defense was born from war experiences in Syria, the Russian experts have their points of view on this. According to Vyacheslav Kartashov, Russian liaison officer for technical-military cooperation, the Iranians "professionally exploited" the Tor-M1 missile systems in their new device.
> 
> And this source adds: "The Tor-M1 system is one of the most advanced systems in Russia, especially with regard to the compression of radar and missile systems on a chassis." The Iranian device benefits from these radar capabilities "Oghab" is able to intercept cruise missiles and all low-level air threats, initially a missile system and, in the following phases, a designed to use both artillery weapons and missiles, this system also features some of the features of Tor and Pantsir systems that may be derived from the experience of Syrian battles and the presence of Iranian military advisers in that country. Amir Elhami, deputy commander-in-chief of the Iranian Air Force, told IRIN: Iran's main goal is to equip its naval fleet with this short-range defense system. anti-Iran might have other surprises to live than it thinks it knows about the Iranian naval force.



Source?

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## WinterNights

Iran has many impressive air defence systems now. However, what is equally important if not more important is development of electronic warfare and cyberwarfare systems. Iran has made great strides here too. We need to get to a point so in a potential conflict, we can create a large cyber/elerco warfare zones that will make enemy plane useless. For example over Persian gulf etc. We have heard hints of such things being in developments.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

WinterNights said:


> Iran has many impressive air defence systems now. However, what is equally important if not more important is development of electronic warfare and cyberwarfare systems. Iran has made great strides here too. We need to get to a point so in a potential conflict, we can create a large cyber/elerco warfare zones that will make enemy plane useless. For example over Persian gulf etc. We have heard hints of such things being in developments.




Bassidj trains 1,000 cyber-brigades in Iran

The President of the Bassidj organization (Iranian Mobilization Force or Rapid People's Response Force), Brigadier General Gholamreza Soleymani, reported the formation of 1,000 cyber-brigades across the country.

Asked what programs the Bassidj organization plans to counter the enemy's cyber threats, Brigadier General Soleymani said: "The presence of the revolutionary forces in cyberspace has improved and the Basij has succeeded in successfully orienting motivated, energetic and expert young people in cyberspace and launching 1,000 cyber-brigades in the country. "

The enemies have always been concerned about the well-organized presence of young Iranian revolutionaries in cyberspace, highlighting the importance of strengthening and developing our capabilities in this area.



TruthHurtz said:


> Iran does have a layered AD system
> 
> 3rd of Khordad > Khordad 15 > Bavar 373
> 
> All that is left is SHORAD which is being developed as Oghab, inspired by TOR-M! and Pantsir system. Likely based on Iran's experience operating Rapier and Ya Zahra systems as well as Syrian experience with the Pantsir.
> 
> I don't know where other systems like Talash, Mersad, Kamin-2? and aforementioned Ya Zahra systems stand.
> 
> 
> 
> Source?


Some sources close to the Ministry of Defense

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

TruthHurtz said:


> Iran does have a layered AD system
> 
> 3rd of Khordad > Khordad 15 > Bavar 373
> 
> All that is left is SHORAD which is being developed as Oghab, inspired by TOR-M! and Pantsir system. Likely based on Iran's experience operating Rapier and Ya Zahra systems as well as Syrian experience with the Pantsir.
> 
> I don't know where other systems like Talash, Mersad, Kamin-2? and aforementioned Ya Zahra systems stand.


He means create a layered AD system in Syria, not in Iran. 

Even in Syria that's virtually impossible because it takes time to set up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TruthHurtz said:


> Iran does have a layered AD system
> 
> 3rd of Khordad > Khordad 15 > Bavar 373
> 
> All that is left is SHORAD which is being developed as Oghab, inspired by TOR-M! and Pantsir system. Likely based on Iran's experience operating Rapier and Ya Zahra systems as well as Syrian experience with the Pantsir.
> 
> I don't know where other systems like Talash, Mersad, Kamin-2? and aforementioned Ya Zahra systems stand.
> 
> 
> 
> Source?



yes i know we have layered AD, but we have them in Iran, we are talking about Syria or Iraq or Lebanon which we do not have a layered AD.



Battle of Waterloo said:


> He means create a layered AD system in Syria, not in Iran.
> 
> Even in Syria that's virtually impossible because it takes time to set up.


exactly


----------



## TruthHurtz

Battle of Waterloo said:


> He means create a layered AD system in Syria, not in Iran.
> 
> Even in Syria that's virtually impossible because it takes time to set up.



You can do that you just have to wait until hostilities cease and Israel loses its cover for attacking Iranian assets in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> You can do that you just have to wait until hostilities cease and Israel loses its cover for attacking Iranian assets in Syria.



As long as Israel has US, they will always have cover. Striking Damascus is one thing, but they are now striking in Iraq and Syria/Iraq border.

And deploying any AD system is vulnerable because iran could only transport by air as ground is took risky. And even by air it is easy for intelligence to determine when big cargo planes are coming in. Hell even civilian amateurs can detect it.


----------



## hussainb72

Iran has done much greater and more complex stuff before, "smuggling" a couple air defences wont be that hard for them, they definitely have their own methods for this and they know what they are doing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> As long as Israel has US, they will always have cover. Striking Damascus is one thing, but they are now striking in Iraq and Syria/Iraq border.
> 
> And deploying any AD system is vulnerable because iran could only transport by air as ground is took risky. And even by air it is easy for intelligence to determine when big cargo planes are coming in. Hell even civilian amateurs can detect it.



Israel can get away with it due to the fog of war. Syria and Iraq are considered fair game as a result. Which is why no ones really opposed the US deploying thousands of troops to Syria. There's just to many actors/theatres to worry about.

When Syria starts rebuilding their military Iran can transfer SAMs to the Syrian military rather than operating them through proxies, then strategically place them in areas where Iran stores their missiles. Any attack would look like a state-sponsored attack on another nations military.

Instead of operating through IRGC/Hezbollah in Syria Iran should utilise the SAA and their position as a national military.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...ition-of-irans-new-air-defense-system-report/

Syria allegedly considering acquisition of Iran’s new air defense system: report

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Arminkh said:


> https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...ition-of-irans-new-air-defense-system-report/
> 
> Syria allegedly considering acquisition of Iran’s new air defense system: report



First send in two dozen or more Mesbah-1, then some Khordads, then the Bavars. Mybe some Pantsir and other ADS. The mobile Pantsir would protect the Bavars in transport.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

hussainb72 said:


> Iran has done much greater and more complex stuff before, "smuggling" a couple air defences wont be that hard for them, they definitely have their own methods for this and they know what they are doing.



Iran already has moved in Air defense systems they have been destroyed shortly after unloading.

It’s not that hard for F-16’s to fly into Mediterranean and unleash their payloads at pre determined GPS targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> Iran already has moved in Air defense systems they have been destroyed shortly after unloading.
> 
> It’s not that hard for F-16’s to fly into Mediterranean and unleash their payloads at pre determined GPS targets.



No evidence of this outside of Israeli claims.


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> No evidence of this outside of Israeli claims.



Actually they weren’t Israeli claims as Israel mostly avoids talking about the air strikes in order to allow Iran to deny they happened.

The attacks given where they occurred where even an Iranian cargo jet was slightly damaged points to credence to the claim

As we can see Iran has no deployed systems in Syria currently.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> Actually they weren’t Israeli claims as Israel mostly avoids talking about the air strikes in order to allow Iran to deny they happened.
> 
> The attacks given where they occurred where even an Iranian cargo jet was slightly damaged points to credence to the claim
> 
> As we can see Iran has no deployed systems in Syria currently.



Actually there was a claim that it an IRGC Tor-M1 was destroyed before the strike that you are referring to but no evidence has ever been produced to back up that claim.


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Actually there was a claim that it an IRGC Tor-M1 was destroyed before the strike that you are referring to but no evidence has ever been produced to back up that claim.



Unlikely Iran would move a Tor-M1 into Syria given Syria already has Pantsirs and a Tor-M1 wouldn’t really help all too much against an attack.


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

zectech said:


> First send in two dozen or more Mesbah-1, then some Khordads, then the Bavars. Mybe some Pantsir and other ADS. The mobile Pantsir would protect the Bavars in transport.


Iran doesn't have Pantsir and Syria already does.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

What Did Israelis Target in Al Bukamal?

Information about a mysterious area near Al Bukamal which was bombed and is known as Imam Ali Base.

We will provide some information regarding this incident from very well-informed sources but for security reason other info can not be published for now:

1. Destroyed buildings were not fully operational yet and were finished up to 95%.
2. There was no warehouse application in it and no place for keeping missiles or other weapons. There was only infrastructure for border passage.
3. The construction of silos started a month ago and constructed fast was supposed to be operational by today.
4. There was no warehouse here and only dormitory for troops.
5. That is the reason no more explosion happened after the initial attack, nothing was here.
6. In addition to buildings 7 to 8 bulldozers and trucks were destroyed.
7. Indeed there is human factor in this attack! Officials know better what do we mean by that.
8. No proper defensive system is in the area, the main reason is the host’s fear.
9. Nevertheless, another source said the air defense system is supposed to be installed here soon. We hope so.
10. In this area every night US and Israeli drones fly mainly from US occupied areas in north and east of Syria. If there was a defense system, every night we could hunt drones.
11. The operation of this passage is very crucial for Iran, USA and Israel know this very well and that is why they do anything to prevent it.
12. It seems in despite of all of these hindrances we will see it open soon in a few weeks. However, if Israel does not attack it again.
13. Although some sources claim people were killed or injured, it seems no one was hurt.

http://www.english.iswnews.com/7185/what-did-israelis-target-in-al-bukamal/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*








The Army Air Force Commander visited the 800km radar in the eastern region of the country.*


https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/992796/پوشش-پدافند-هوایی-شرق-با-رادار-۸۰۰-کیلومتری-نذیر


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ی-شرق-کشور-با-استقرار-رادار-800-کیلومتری-نذیر

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kastor

TheImmortal said:


> Iran already has moved in Air defense systems they have been destroyed shortly after unloading.
> 
> It’s not that hard for F-16’s to fly into Mediterranean and unleash their payloads at pre determined GPS targets.


You need to find better sources of info other than Israel......they're world renowned liars. I wouldn't trust them telling me the sky is blue.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Army Air Force Commander visited the 800km radar in the eastern region of the country.*
> 
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/992796/پوشش-پدافند-هوایی-شرق-با-رادار-۸۰۰-کیلومتری-نذیر
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/06/24/2096842/تکمیل-پوشش-پدافند-هوایی-شرق-کشور-با-استقرار-رادار-800-کیلومتری-نذیر



This radar is impressive by its configuration and especially by size. Fascinating and still a big work by Iranian scientists

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Notice I didn't say send. Listing additional ADS that are needed to protect the Bavars in transport.

I thought Syria was protecting Iranian bases in Syria with Pantsirs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I think this radar built with wind turbine towers


----------



## SubWater

I had not any evidence when I said this but now
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-206#post-11709401

But now Sardar hejazi zadeh unofficially publicized the missile hit MQ-4 w/o any details about its range and other characteristics


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173685848455426049
look at serial number

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173864382532640768

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Bavar-373 air defense system *

















































SubWater said:


> I had not any evidence when I said this but now
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-206#post-11709401
> 
> But now Sardar hejazi zadeh unofficially publicized the missile hit MQ-4 w/o any details about its range and other characteristics
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173685848455426049
> look at serial number


WOW good job bro. 

https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2110432

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SubWater

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar-373 air defense system *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW good job bro.
> 
> https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2110432


With knowing that was new missile many ambiguities will solve.
They put maquette for reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SOHEIL



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 579781


 ????



SubWater said:


> With knowing that was new missile many ambiguities will solve.
> They put maquette for reason.



hope this one get them to 130 km for 3th of Khordad

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## WinterNights

skyshadow said:


> *Bavar-373 air defense system *



Is that a proximity sensor I see there?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 579781




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173892148917362689

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

yavar said:


> for all it,s worth
> we already have broken fuel and rocket moto technology and as we speak we already have up and running system equivalent Russia S-400 which much better the S-400 export version ( I mean with cold lacuch and round tube



watch from 3:39



yavar said:


>

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WinterNights

We need to increase the range of bavar missiles as soon as possible. 200km is good, but we need to cover much more, i.e in the range of 300-400km.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> watch from 3:39



what does he say?



WinterNights said:


> We need to increase the range of bavar missiles as soon as possible. 200km is good, but we need to cover much more, i.e in the range of 300-400km.



I think short AD systems (Pantsir, Tor...) are now much more needed as we learned from todays warfare....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> what does he say?



he just says we have much more air defense system which they have not been yet published or shown which will be used as element of surprise

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## WinterNights

Draco.IMF said:


> what does he say?
> 
> 
> 
> I think short AD systems (Pantsir, Tor...) are now much more needed as we learned from todays warfare....



That is already sorted. We know oghab is coming. Obviously I know inevitably bavar will receive next gen, longer range missiles, but I want to see them coming soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

SOHEIL said:


> View attachment 579781


memorize that bald guy in green...........if we find him in Tehran;we can get some first hand info about B-373

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Great details. TVC fully confirmed. AESA TRMs visible and more...

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Is that a proximity sensor I see there?


it has that yes



WinterNights said:


> We need to increase the range of bavar missiles as soon as possible. 200km is good, but we need to cover much more, i.e in the range of 300-400km.



a better one is going through its final level of production its better than S-400 but Iran did not say new system's name yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> Great details. TVC fully confirmed. AESA TRMs visible and more...



Waiting for your in-depth analysis 



skyshadow said:


> a better one is going through its final level of production its better than S-400 but Iran did not say new system's name yet.




Have they confirmed they are in final stages of another system??!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

WinterNights said:


> Waiting for your in-depth analysis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have they confirmed they are in final stages of another system??!!


yes

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

No in depth analysis yet but an interedting detail:
A very different system is shown similar to the S-300V layout where your TEL has a mast mounted engagment radar.
This is something you would do to bring down the costs and risks. Because it is a high risk to develop a AESA engagment radar like the final Bavar-373.
So either this system was the first attempt or it is a more cost effective Bavar variant which lost to the higher capability one.
Actually this unknown variant would be a real good alternative. 4 Tears with 4 last mounted Ofogh radar variants for 4 channels instead of Bavars 6, but at much cheaper price.

Looks like ABM and counter-hypersonic performance was too important for Iran than to go with the much cheaper lower capability alternative.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## WinterNights

PeeD said:


> No in depth analysis yet but an interedting detail:
> A very different system is shown similar to the S-300V layout where your TEL has a mast mounted engagment radar.
> This is something you would do to bring down the costs and risks. Because it is a high risk to develop a AESA engagment radar like the final Bavar-373.
> So either this system was the first attempt or it is a more cost effective Bavar variant which lost to the higher capability one.
> Actually this unknown variant would be a real good alternative. 4 Tears with 4 last mounted Ofogh radar variants for 4 channels instead of Bavars 6, but at much cheaper price.
> 
> Looks like ABM and counter-hypersonic performance was too important for Iran than to go with the much cheaper lower capability alternative.



So does the existence of a seemingly AESA radar seeker in the missile removes the possibility of this system employing Track via missile (TVM) etc? If so, is that a positive or a negative?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SOHEIL

https://imgflip.com/gif-maker​

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## arashkamangir

SOHEIL said:


> ​



What a beauty.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

WinterNights said:


> So does the existence of a seemingly AESA radar seeker in the missile removes the possibility of this system employing Track via missile (TVM) etc? If so, is that a positive or a negative?



No, seeker is likely a slotted planar array like Sayyad-3.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> ????
> 
> 
> 
> hope this one get them to 130 km for 3th of Khordad


It looks like the jet vane attachment points for a thrust vectoring control system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SOHEIL

View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


>


A beast waiting to be awakened!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> A beast waiting to be awakened!



it looks like it's fully loaded and ready to go

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*

3TH of Khordad Air defense system with MQ-4C Kill Mark
















*

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *
> 3TH of Khordad Air defense system with MQ-4C Kill Mark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


And heres another close up of that Kill Mark.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

*3TH of Khordad* Air defense system and *Tabas* Air defense system
*








*

*

Bavar-373 air defense system* was there too and *15TH of Khordar air defense system* was there with all of there parts and radars.











*IRGC has upgraded its Taeer 2C missiles*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SHAHED



Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## mohsen

Hafez radar and missile launcher of Mersad-16 air defense system:

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Draco.IMF

SHAHED said:


> View attachment 580548
> View attachment 580549
> View attachment 580550
> View attachment 580551



what a beast!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Iskander

It seems that this 35 mm anti aircraft gun employs AHEAD munitions

Reactions: Like Like:
19


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## yavar

Iran long range Mobile air defense system Bavar-373, at 39th anniversary of Iraq imposed war parade 2019

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

unique info:
چهل ستون - ۳۱ شهریور ۱۳۹۸ - ویژه برنامه های دفاع مقدس شبکه افق - 31 شهریور 1398

today there are several replay in OFOGH channel.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Talash 3 air defense system





*

*
Mersad-16 Air defense system with its Hafez AESA radar

















*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*Are air defense systems ready to confront drone swarms?*


*https://www.defensenews.com/global/...fense-systems-ready-to-confront-drone-swarms/*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Najm 804 radar*
*




*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Heres one that gave me a great laugh and I definitely would recommend reading it.
Its strategypage,so be warned its rabidly pro zionist/pro us,but its also inadvertently hilarious with its mixture of outright lies,half truths and various [deliberate?] mistakes.

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20190623.aspx

Its basically commenting on irans new air defences in the aftermath of the shootdown of the global hawk.Interestingly tho theres been no new follow up in the wake of the unveiling of the Bavar 373[I wonder why?,LOL!]

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

Iskander said:


> It seems that this 35 mm anti aircraft gun employs AHEAD munitions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 580568



Main problem I see with that system is the requirement of human operators for the gun and on a vehicle that size the AAA should be remotely operated from inside a protected control room on the vehicle with advanced software, ability to network into other near by systems and various sensors that would reduce human error to an absolute minimum.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Sineva said:


> Heres one that gave me a great laugh and I definitely would recommend reading it.
> Its strategypage,so be warned its rabidly pro zionist/pro us,but its also inadvertently hilarious with its mixture of outright lies,half truths and various [deliberate?] mistakes.
> 
> https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20190623.aspx
> 
> Its basically commenting on irans new air defences in the aftermath of the shootdown of the global hawk.Interestingly tho theres been no new follow up in the wake of the unveiling of the Bavar 373[I wonder why?,LOL!]


For those ones who haven't red it....i must say the whole essay isn't worth reading....an biased essay is written with someone who doesn't know nothing about Military issues...but absolutely someone who is being paid by some enemy countries to paint a black picture of Iran's situation(All Iranian scientist immigrate,Iran doesn't have capability...........)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Taher 2000

http://www.defanews.ir/sites/default/files/bavar-l.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iskander

VEVAK said:


> Main problem I see with that system is the requirement of human operators for the gun and on a vehicle that size the AAA should be remotely operated from inside a protected control room on the vehicle with advanced software, ability to network into other near by systems and various sensors that would reduce human error to an absolute minimum.


it's an automatic radar guided AAA and doesn't require human operators except for reloading and the gunner in the local mode and this process can be made automatic like GDF-005 which reduce the crew number to one

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*what is he mean by turning off radar from time to time???????  that is a very suspicious move they are making ( shifting Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina ).*



“Our goal is deterrence,” Saltzman said, not conflict. But the lack of communication with Iran can make sending that message difficult. *The United States has to use other measures, he said, including turning off radar from time to time or planning flight routes to make it clear it does not intend to attack.*
*


Amid tension with Iran, U.S. Air Force shifts Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina



https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d93834-e216-11e9-be7f-4cc85017c36f_story.html*

*Bashier and Najm-802B AESA radars 











*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Arminkh

Iran developing mobile radar and AD that can detect, track and destroy its targets while moving:

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/99...ه-راداری-متحرک-هستیم-حفر-شبانه-روزی-تونل-برای

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


> *what is he mean by turning off radar from time to time???????  that is a very suspicious move they are making ( shifting Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina ).*
> 
> 
> 
> “Our goal is deterrence,” Saltzman said, not conflict. But the lack of communication with Iran can make sending that message difficult. *The United States has to use other measures, he said, including turning off radar from time to time or planning flight routes to make it clear it does not intend to attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Amid tension with Iran, U.S. Air Force shifts Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d93834-e216-11e9-be7f-4cc85017c36f_story.html*
> 
> *Bashier and Najm-802B AESA radars
> *


WOOW! I strongly suspect US is requesting or doing secret negotiations with Iran now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *what is he mean by turning off radar from time to time???????  that is a very suspicious move they are making ( shifting Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina ).*
> 
> 
> 
> “Our goal is deterrence,” Saltzman said, not conflict. But the lack of communication with Iran can make sending that message difficult. *The United States has to use other measures, he said, including turning off radar from time to time or planning flight routes to make it clear it does not intend to attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Amid tension with Iran, U.S. Air Force shifts Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d93834-e216-11e9-be7f-4cc85017c36f_story.html*
> 
> *Bashier and Najm-802B AESA radars
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I guess the same way that Israeli frigate had turned its radars off in war time when it was hit by Hezbollah missile??! Seem to becoming a normal practice in western armies. They want to save the planet and keep electricity bills down.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *what is he mean by turning off radar from time to time???????  that is a very suspicious move they are making ( shifting Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina ).*
> 
> 
> 
> “Our goal is deterrence,” Saltzman said, not conflict. But the lack of communication with Iran can make sending that message difficult. *The United States has to use other measures, he said, including turning off radar from time to time or planning flight routes to make it clear it does not intend to attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Amid tension with Iran, U.S. Air Force shifts Middle East command center from Qatar to South Carolina
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d93834-e216-11e9-be7f-4cc85017c36f_story.html*
> 
> *Bashier and Najm-802B AESA radars
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Active radars give off a known frequency (radiation) that the enemy can detect. For example, Iran’s OTH.

That coupled with certain actions (warplanes) in the air might mislead the enemy to think you are actually doing a mission air strike on them. Thus certain measures are taken to prevent the other side from thinking an attack is taking place.

This was common in Cold War.



Arminkh said:


> I guess the same way that Israeli frigate had turned its radars off in war time when it was hit by Hezbollah missile??! Seem to becoming a normal practice in western armies. They want to save the planet and keep electricity bills down.



Aside from that example.

No country has its land based radars ON at all times for many reasons as it allows enemy to see radar points via radiation as well as the cost.

Believe it or not high powered radars do cost high amounts of energy to operate and if it isn’t war time there is no reason for it to be on. They come online when secondary radars pick up something that is deemed threatening or if central command gives the order to maintain high alert for potential attack.

This is why western armies try to fly close to Iranian border (or enemy in general) as much as possible to force radars to turn on and allow assessment of coverage and weaknesses. Hence why it’s a chess game where Iran will deliberately not turn on radars knowing that the enemy is doing recon and instead rely on established radars that the enemy likely knows about.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Surenas

Sineva said:


> Heres one that gave me a great laugh and I definitely would recommend reading it.
> Its strategypage,so be warned its rabidly pro zionist/pro us,but its also inadvertently hilarious with its mixture of outright lies,half truths and various [deliberate?] mistakes.
> 
> https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20190623.aspx
> 
> Its basically commenting on irans new air defences in the aftermath of the shootdown of the global hawk.Interestingly tho theres been no new follow up in the wake of the unveiling of the Bavar 373[I wonder why?,LOL!]



Such a shitty article. Already a mistake in the first paragraph:



> Three weeks later Iran announced it had shot down an American Triton maritime surveillance UAV (an aircraft based on the 14 ton RQ-4 Global Hawk). There was a manned navy four engine ELINT (Electronic intelligence aircraft) nearby with 35 people on board. Iran later admitted they deliberately did not fire on the manned aircraft. Just as well for Iran because the manned aircraft have some defense against attack while the UAV does not.



The UAV that Iran shot down did have some defense against attacks:



> The RQ-4A isn't a clay pigeon. At $110 million each, the Global Hawk needs three people to remotely pilot it and its sensors. Wider in wingspan than a Boeing 737, it has a Rolls Royce engine moving it along at around 500 miles per hour as it hoovers up signals and images normally at 65,000 feet to keep out of the way of surface-to-air missiles. Even if they get too close, it has a radar-warning receiver, a jamming system and releases a decoy, towed behind it.



https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/25/middleeast/iran-drone-shooting-capabilities-npw-intl/index.html

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:

4


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>



i wish we had subtitles, any short important lines on this one? thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> i wish we had subtitles, any short important lines on this one? thanks


CEP of 5 meters and that Iran developing mobile radar and an air defense system that can detect, track and destroy its targets while moving

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> CEP of 5 meters and that Iran developing mobile radar and an air defense system that can detect, track and destroy its targets while moving



thanks @skyshadow , your translations are always very appreciated

"track and destroy its targets while moving"

here we have an tor-m2u firing during movement:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Draco.IMF said:


> thanks @skyshadow , your translations are always very appreciated
> 
> "track and destroy its targets while moving"
> 
> here we have an tor-m2u firing during movement:


is it;that much sophisticated Sardar Hajizadeh mentioned!....cuz airborne and marine radars are working in this procedure...........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> thanks @skyshadow , your translations are always very appreciated
> 
> "track and destroy its targets while moving"
> 
> here we have an tor-m2u firing during movement:



your welcome my work here is on its absolute minimum so do not even mention it, i first thought of TOR systems too well he said that system will be first in its kind sooo maybe he's talking about long range mobile system
a system that is designed to move and track and shoot especially with that mission in mind not mobile but fully fully mobile.




DoubleYouSee said:


> is it;that much sophisticated Sardar Hajizadeh mentioned!....cuz airborne and marine radars are working in this procedure...........



yes he said that planes and navies can do that but they can not usually do that on ground but we did it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*watching a AWACS plane some 85 km away from Iran border with EW camera tracking it live











*

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Arminkh said:


> I guess the same way that Israeli frigate had turned its radars off in war time when it was hit by Hezbollah missile??! Seem to becoming a normal practice in western armies. They want to save the planet and keep electricity bills down.


Or maybe in battle field you have to keep your radars continuesly on;so when your sensors sniff the radar waves,persuade the commanders that there would be a treat(maybe a surprise attack) .but in common condition radars have off time(saving cost and repairing time and etc)......so with this supposition they wanna show to us there mustn't be any worries....and everything is undercontrol.........



skyshadow said:


> *watching a AWACS plane some 85 km away from Iran border with EW camera tracking it live
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Ra'ad system?!.....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

DoubleYouSee said:


> Or maybe in battle field you have to keep your radars continuesly on;so when your sensors sniff the radar waves,persuade the commanders that there would be a treat(maybe a surprise attack) .but in common condition radars have off time(saving cost and repairing time and etc)......so with this supposition they wanna show to us there mustn't be any worries....and everything is undercontrol.........
> 
> 
> Ra'ad system?!.....


i think its Raad 2 system

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


> i think its Raad 2 system


Yea you are right......a completly passive system

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myself

DoubleYouSee said:


> Yea you are right......a completly passive system


It seems the dish is round, unlike the original Ra’ad! Also, the launcher is Ra’ad, not Sam-6! Maybe a new version

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Myself said:


> It seems the dish is round, unlike the original Ra’ad! Also, the launcher is Ra’ad, not Sam-6! Maybe a new version


the original Ra'ad serves sam-6 alike missiles as part of system.....as the system is passive the guidance system differ with sam-6 system.....and new Ra'ad uses sayyad missile(or at least new missile are similar to sayyad)........even all operational Ra'ad systems which has been shown in the drills so far have round shape antenna)..........so the system is the Ra'ad-1 which even operate sayyad missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*

do you guys think Iranian Tor like system will be like this






*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

[QUOTE = "skyshadow, post: 11808487, member: 187043"]
*
pensez-vous que le système iranien Tor sera comme ça





*[/CITATION]
The Iranian version will be a mix of Tor and Pantsir so I think it will be a little different

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Myself

Bahram Esfandiari said:


>


What is Fath-2 air defense system? I had never heard the name!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Myself said:


> What is Fath-2 air defense system? I had never heard the name!




















*Fath-14???????*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

https://www.instagram.com/iranian_defensive_power/

Good observation there on the Oghab system, which seems to be a somewhat miniaturized, truck mounted, TOR-M1.
That would be probably the most cost effective solution: Planar array search radar and low shifter-count PESA tracking radar.
These two radars should still be less expensive than a single radar AESA solution (which also exists, maybe the IRGC SHORAD project or a Navy missile CIWS).

Overall a good decision, Chinese SHORAD of their 2019 parade is also a miniaturized TOR-M1 variant.

Lets see if ready to fire missiles are still 8 or closer to the 16 of the TOR-M2.

Iran got the TOR-M1 in 2006, 13 years ago, good to see a copy of it now.
It's also kinda good news that they went for a PESA solution instead of the disclosed AESA one. A reliable PESA solution probably always beats an AESA in terms of costs and there are few benefits for an AESA in this role.

If the missile count is increased to 16, then I hope the IRGC-ASF to go for it too to allow for a large DM-run serial production like in the case of the joint Sayyad-2.

A next generation single AESA radar Morfey-like solution could be done to increase ready to fire missile count but it seems that the costs are deemed too high --> hence twin radar PESA solution. 

This makes the AESA route for the Bavar questionable too and it can only be hoped that the TRM costs for the Bavar engagement radar have somehow been pushed down significantly, maybe by the use of older but very mature GaA technology or even below that.
We know now that the early Bavar concept skipped an AESA engagement radar solution for a more simple monopulse radar. It seems the AESA group then had a breakthrough for affordable/economic X-band TRM. 
But that doesn't seems to be affordable enough to be used in the Oghab SHORAD system.
The positive aspect is that they seem to know what they are doing and not fall for a technology hype that would increase critical system cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> Iran got the TOR-M1 in 2006, 13 years ago, good to see a copy of it now.
> It's also kinda good news that they went for a PESA solution instead of the disclosed AESA one. A reliable PESA solution probably always beats an AESA in terms of costs and there are few benefits for an AESA in this role.


well you killed us with that cost effective comments of you.
an AESA is more reliable , if something happen you'll lose a complete array but in AESA you just loose a single module. also when enemy try to jam you, AESA is more resilient . also at the end if Oghab fail you'll lose a storage filled with far more expensive equipment or lose a Bavar System and then that will be really painful as it will crack your armor



PeeD said:


> The positive aspect is that they seem to know what they are doing and not fall for a technology hype that would increase critical system cost.


there is two pitfall , one is technology hype one , the other is cost effective pitfall that may result in a system that don't deliver the result

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Cost effectiveness is basically everything.

1: For what do you need the reliability of an AESA if your system just switches on for a few minutes when getting early warning alert from IADS? This is not a continuously operating system. That's why the Bavar's X-band AESA engagement radar that operates just for minutes is a waste of resources while its S-band acquisition AESA can make good use of the increased reliability.

2: You don't need highest ECCM capabilities for a system that intercepts PGMs, CM's and small UAVs, those won't come with their own jammer. Plus, any stand-off jammer would be far away to avoid being killed by MR and LR systems.

For this case PESA technology is sufficiently reliable and even will two radars almost certainly cheaper than a single AESA solution.
Iran is working on an AESA solution for the SHORAD role but at this point it seems to be a Navy or IRGC system. If the Oghab is the Iranian TOR, then it would work in a safe IADS environment.
But for highly offensive operations where the system would be online for a long period alone, without relying on early warning of upper echelon assets, an AESA solution could become worth the price. A highly off-road IRGC system to defend forward positions, yes then it may make sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

@PeeD look at the pic brother and tell me if you know the range on that radar what is it 500 - 600 km? one of them is enough to cover entire Iraq air space




*unveiling of Persian Gulf Air Defense Command Operations Center













https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/07/15/2113413/آغاز-به-کارمرکز-عملیات-فرماندهی-پدافندهوایی-خلیج-فارس*








*The IRGC air force commander announced that a new air defense system was being built that could be an IRGC prototype similar to the Tour M-2 system.


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/07/15/2110164/گزارش-تسنیم-از-یک-پروژه-جدید-موشکی-آیا-سپاه-تور-ام-2-ایرانی-را-می-سازد*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

Well Sardar Hajizadeh's statement could be any system with a advanced ESA radar, a Tor-like system, a Pantsir-like system or a Morfey-like system.
If a system is selected, we can only hope for a Ya-Zahra/Herz-9 scenario, not two entirely different systems. The Tor approach looks like the best one, together with a Pantsir-like missile, instead the original Tor missile.
China got the Tor-M1 in the late 90's and just now in their 2019 parade, they paraded it as operational PLA system.
Their missile is about identical to the original Tor missile so if Iran manages to get a more compact higher speed Pantsir layout missile for it's Tor variant, it would be a great achievement.

Those 3 radars of the IRIADF IADS are the original U.S made early warning radars. Their range is very long on the paper or against large targets. But could also be anything else that replaced them or mobile ones at the same location.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*Kihan radar has a range of well more then 3000 km that is it operational range not its ultimate range*





*is that the Kihan radar with 3000 km range? its has been deployed near Persian Gulf.*









*برد 3000 کیلومتر که برای این رادار اعلام شده تنها برای میزان مداومت کاری رادار کیهانی است درحالیکه برد این رادار بیش از 3 هزار کیلومتر است.
*

https://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/192656/برد-رادار-کیهان-ایرانی-اعلام-شد



PeeD said:


> Well Sardar Hajizadeh's statement could be any system with a advanced ESA radar, a Tor-like system, a Pantsir-like system or a Morfey-like system.
> If a system is selected, we can only hope for a Ya-Zahra/Herz-9 scenario, not two entirely different systems. The Tor approach looks like the best one, together with a Pantsir-like missile, instead the original Tor missile.
> China got the Tor-M1 in the late 90's and just now in their 2019 parade, they paraded it as operational PLA system.
> Their missile is about identical to the original Tor missile so if Iran manages to get a more compact higher speed Pantsir layout missile for it's Tor variant, it would be a great achievement.
> 
> Those 3 radars of the IRIADF IADS are the original U.S made early warning radars. Their range is very long on the paper or against large targets. But could also be anything else that replaced them or mobile ones at the same location.



well 9th of Day missile could be a nice missile for Iranian Pantsir like system add a small booster and it will get you 40-50 km

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Keyhan radar yes, while it operates in HF band like OTH radars its seems to be a unique Struna-1-like system.

9th Day would be a good add-on for the 3rd Khordad and Tabas to double the missile load to 6 for targets in the 30-40km max. range.

Back to the Oghab: 0.3m satelite imagery allows to identify specific details.
It is visible that the miniaturization of the system is like the HQ-17/FM-2000 --> narrow: overall as wide as the PESA aperture and light and small as it fits an ordinary, low footprint 6x6 truck.
This is good news, Iran already did such miniaturization with the Herz-9.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

PeeD said:


> https://www.instagram.com/iranian_defensive_power/
> 
> Good observation there on the Oghab system, which seems to be a somewhat miniaturized, truck mounted, TOR-M1.
> That would be probably the most cost effective solution: Planar array search radar and low shifter-count PESA tracking radar.
> These two radars should still be less expensive than a single radar AESA solution (which also exists, maybe the IRGC SHORAD project or a Navy missile CIWS).
> 
> Overall a good decision, Chinese SHORAD of their 2019 parade is also a miniaturized TOR-M1 variant.
> 
> Lets see if ready to fire missiles are still 8 or closer to the 16 of the TOR-M2.
> 
> Iran got the TOR-M1 in 2006, 13 years ago, good to see a copy of it now.
> It's also kinda good news that they went for a PESA solution instead of the disclosed AESA one. A reliable PESA solution probably always beats an AESA in terms of costs and there are few benefits for an AESA in this role.
> 
> If the missile count is increased to 16, then I hope the IRGC-ASF to go for it too to allow for a large DM-run serial production like in the case of the joint Sayyad-2.
> 
> A next generation single AESA radar Morfey-like solution could be done to increase ready to fire missile count but it seems that the costs are deemed too high --> hence twin radar PESA solution.
> 
> This makes the AESA route for the Bavar questionable too and it can only be hoped that the TRM costs for the Bavar engagement radar have somehow been pushed down significantly, maybe by the use of older but very mature GaA technology or even below that.
> We know now that the early Bavar concept skipped an AESA engagement radar solution for a more simple monopulse radar. It seems the AESA group then had a breakthrough for affordable/economic X-band TRM.
> But that doesn't seems to be affordable enough to be used in the Oghab SHORAD system.
> The positive aspect is that they seem to know what they are doing and not fall for a technology hype that would increase critical system cost.


In an interview with one of IRGC comanders it was said that upgrading Iranian tor m1 to tor m2 took them about 10 years.....hands to GOD that i have heard oghab missile name before and i knew(came to conclusion)that oghab is Iranian version of tor missiles.......so my idea is that in the procedure of copying missile and upgradig the system and observing its good work in syria convinced IRGC to make this system......and with adding hayel cannon(orlikon mounted on chassie)they came wigh new system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> @PeeD look at the pic brother and tell me if you know the range on that radar what is it 500 - 600 km? one of them is enough to cover entire Iraq air space
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *unveiling of Persian Gulf Air Defense Command Operations Center
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/07/15/2113413/آغاز-به-کارمرکز-عملیات-فرماندهی-پدافندهوایی-خلیج-فارس*










skyshadow said:


> *Kihan radar has a range of well more then 3000 km that is it operational range not its ultimate range*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *is that the Kihan radar with 3000 km range? its has been deployed near Persian Gulf.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *برد 3000 کیلومتر که برای این رادار اعلام شده تنها برای میزان مداومت کاری رادار کیهانی است درحالیکه برد این رادار بیش از 3 هزار کیلومتر است.
> *
> 
> https://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/192656/برد-رادار-کیهان-ایرانی-اعلام-شد

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> 2: You don't need highest ECCM capabilities for a system that intercepts PGMs, CM's and small UAVs, those won't come with their own jammer. Plus, any stand-off jammer would be far away to avoid being killed by MR and LR systems.


Just ask Syrian about how their system get jammed left and right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Hack-Hook said:


> Just ask Syrian about how their system get jammed left and right.



Their legacy systems get jammed, less so their Pantsirs, at least they kill as many as possible Israeli PGMs (which come in masses at high cost).

Speaking about this: The advantage of the Iranian AESA solution over the original TOR-M1 PESA is its multi target engagement capability.
The TOR-M1 PESA is a very cost effective large aperture, low element radar. It is significantly more cheaper than the Pantsir PESA solution. In fact the Pantsir solution was deemed so expensive by the Russians, that they switched to a horn feed PESA design in the future Pantsir-SM to make the system more economical.

The upside of the Pantsir is that it can truly target 2-4 different targets in one sector at the same time.
The TOR-M1 is designed to target a single target primarily and if necessary a second one flying close to the first one, not anywhere in the whole sector.

So this is the situation and Irans AESA solution is on-pair with the Pantsir multi target capability.

The Oghab, now known to be TOR-M1 based, thus may represent a cost effective but by now legacy solution? Here is where Sardar Hajizadehs claim become important if he was talking about the Oghab system: If it can target while moving, then the radar can't be the cost effective but limited TOR-M1 ones. To achieve that capability you need an agile beam full element array.
The required beam agility level would put it to the level of the TOR-M2. The TOR-M2 has about twice as much phase shifters than the -M1 to enable true sector multi-target capability as well as necessary beam agility levels to launch while moving. The acquisition radar would then also need to become a PESA design for angular compensation.
If Hajizadeh was talking about a yet unknown IRGC system that uses the Iranian AESA solution, there is a risk that the Oghab is just a miniaturized TOR-M1.
The Chinese FM-2000 has been upgraded to TOR-M2 level on radar side with whole sector multi-target engagement and launch while moving.
So the key to achieve that would be doubling the element count at increased cost.

The missile issue is another one: If it retains the mach 2 level TOR-M1 missile, then no more than 8 are possible. If it goes for the mach 3 level Pantsir-like missile, it would also get a smaller diameter missile that may improve ready to fire missile count to 10-12 (and creating the problem of a dangerous burned booster crashing).

I have the feeling that the IRIADF, like the Chinese opted for a more economical miniaturized copy of the TOR-M1 to be used in a battery of 4 inside IADS environment.

While the IRGC is working on a next generation system like the Morfey concept, that is still some years away. That next generation system would use a vertically launched Pantsir-like mach-3 class interceptor, reduce mechanical complexity (=improve reliability) and employ a single array AESA. If miniaturization efforts reach a certain point, this system would become a compact, low footprint front-line system that works independently, is hard to detect, multi-target capable and with a large load of ready to fire missiles (>20).
Such a system would protect 3rd Khordad systems with its continuously operating, high reliability, low power level, LPI AESA at the edge of the front-line where threat level is highest.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kastor

*Leaked news: Tel Aviv unable to intercept Iran’s new cruise missiles *

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/44...nable-to-intercept-Iran-s-new-cruise-missiles

Opps!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*Keyhan OTH radar with 3000KM range












Talash air defense system















*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

To think in 2005, Iran had one of the worst air defenses IN THE WORLD!

Amazing progresss.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> To think in 2005, Iran had one of the worst air defenses IN THE WORLD!
> 
> Amazing progresss.


Yes,who could forget Planemans infamous series of posts: "Bluffers Guide to Fortress Iran" from around that same time period.[For those who have not read it and are curious you can find it here,tho minus the aerial pics sadly.]
https://milforum.net/showthread.php/60020-Bluffer-s-Guide-Fortress-Iran-Part-1-Air-Defences

Frankly I think that the efforts that the iranians have put into the air defence modernisation programs are literally nothing short of being almost superhuman.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Some more thoughts on the Oghab system.

Like the TOR-M1 the system would be designed to work in a battery of four.
This means that the sector angle limitation of simultaneous attack becomes less important as 3 other systems can cover entirely different sectors.
So the cost effective approach of a half element array becomes attractive again in this battery concept.

Continuous operation also becomes a reliable option again because only 1-2 systems of the battery need to have their acquisition radars on and share the information with the other battery elements.

The truth is that Irans AESA solution simply has a smaller effective aperture that allows only for two simultaneous engagements. A larger AESA array would make it significantly more expensive.

The next point is whether TOR-M2 and Chinese FM-2000 have increased the element count to achieve 4 simultaneous engagements instead of two or were able to do it by optimization and increased power output.
What makes the TOR design attractive in terms of cost is its half element approach.
This may also have allowed for launch while moving where terrain is relatively flat.

Plus points of the TOR design is that it can be used safer in urban areas, as it's missile has no booster stage and that its missiles are safe in the center of the armored vehicle (secondary explosion). Technological the step from the Crotale/Sagheb Tagheb missile to the TOR-M1 and TOR-M2U missile is no issue, Iran would simply change the production line.

The new small missile for the TOR-M2 which increases load from 8 to 16 however has just entered Russian service in 2016 or so. Hence this capability might be too state of the art for Irans first true anti-PGM system. Chinese also stick to the old missiles in 2019.
Here again the 4 vehicle battery would make up for the numbers, providing 32 ready to fire missiles. If Iran has managed to come on pair to the TOR-M2U/FM-2000 level it also means that 16 simultaneous engagement are possible in 4 entirely different sectors.

The Chinese decision to go for the TOR design instead of a Pantsir imitation as their next generation PLA SHORAD system is one good sign and the Russians replacing the Pantsir back-feed PESA to a space feed in the -SM one another.
A Pantsir copy would be more capable as a stand alone system:
- Engagement of 4 targets in a 5-10 times larger sector azimuth angle.
- Janus face twin acquisition radar offering added system redundancy.
- 12 instead of 8 ready to fire missiles
- AAA system for low priority/capability targets and if missile component fails to eliminate the threat.
- Acquisition radar able to track highest angle targets independently.
- Mach 3 class missile, reducing reaction-kill time (crossing and very low flying target).
- Longer missile engagement range

These benefits over a single TOR system would not be worth it if its twice as expensive. The original TOR was not a cheap system, but as the Oghab is truck mounted it will safe costs significantly together with its FM-2000 level miniaturization. Just one last thing about miniaturization: Russians are no fools, they just have highest standards on external sourced components, especially microelectronics plus things like very cold climate requirements.

On the speculation of a next gen. IRGC AESA based system: As said the current array size/power-level only supports two simultaneous engagements. Additionally such a system with fixed launch containers would need a omni-directional nose thruster system to allow for alignment into any direction. The Chinese FM-3000 is such a system, just very large, too long ranged and bulky. I guess the FM-3000 radar is a AESA all-in-one solution too, just that given the cost, the Chinese decided to create an export MR-SAM system out of it, not just a SHORAD.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

its conformed now, Syria did say they are looking to by Bavar-373 long range Air defense system from Iran.




*"The deputy coordinator of Khatam Al-Anbiya headquarters said Syria had made a request to buy the Bavar-373 long range Air defense system from Iran, but we had not yet agreed."*



*Speed in operation, ease of preparation and maintenance, minimal accessory equipment needed, it can be stored for long periods of time and operator safety, compatible with world-class technology and the possibility of replacement and supply of spare parts and more makes Bavar-373 long range Air defense system a universal candidate.*
















https://snn.ir/fa/news/797083/درخواست-سوریه-برای-خرید-سامانه-باور-۳۷۳-از-ایران

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> its conformed now, Syria did say they are looking to by Bavar-373 long range Air defense system from Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"The deputy coordinator of Khatam Al-Anbiya headquarters said Syria had made a request to buy the Bavar-373 long range Air defense system from Iran, but we had not yet agreed."*
> 
> 
> 
> *Speed in operation, ease of preparation and maintenance, minimal accessory equipment needed, it can be stored for long periods of time and operator safety, compatible with world-class technology and the possibility of replacement and supply of spare parts and more makes Bavar-373 long range Air defense system a universal candidate.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://snn.ir/fa/news/797083/درخواست-سوریه-برای-خرید-سامانه-باور-۳۷۳-از-ایران


I really like to see it installed in Syria and kick some a......

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> I really like to see it installed in Syria and kick some a......



agreed but i'm worried too, if it gets destroyed then it will be the end of its capabilities in the eyes of others and other buyers too, with all of the enemies we have even in Iran, they are watching for a slipp if we do slipp then it's going to be broadcast all over the world, they already said Israel hit a Bavar 373 the only reason no one believed them was that it was such a big lie at the time that no one see it coming so they refused to believe but if Iran goes ahead and say yes the Bavar is in Syria then it all over even if they lie about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> agreed but i'm worried too, if it gets destroyed then it will be the end of its capabilities in the eyes of others and other buyers too, with all of the enemies we have even in Iran, they are watching for a slipp if we do slipp then it's going to be broadcast all over the world, they already said Israel hit a Bavar 373 the only reason no one believed them was that it was such a big lie at the time that no one see it coming so they refused to believe but if Iran goes ahead and say yes the Bavar is in Syria then it all over even if they lie about it.


Yes, but look at the upside too. If it is installed and it actually proves so deadly that stops all the illegal air raids at Syria. Then the whole world would line up to buy this system and nobody would ever dare to talk about Air assault on Iran. That is how super powers are born: One decisive win and you are set for a number of centuries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*US Stops U-2 Spy Planes' Flights after Iran's Missile Shield Starts Operation


*
"*The US moves in the region are monitored every hour and for instance, the flights of the US U-2 planes which took off from Cyprus and flew twice over the region stopped after Iran made and operated Bavar 373 air defense system* and after they found out that the *system can trace and destroy them* (the U-2 planes)," General Taqizadeh said, addressing a ceremony in Tehran on Saturday.

He added that Bavar 373 can intercept and destroy the most advanced US planes at the altitude of 27km and the range of 200km.

"Most US interests are within a distance of 220km from Iran and if they hit a blow to us, their interests will be attacked," General Taqizadeh said.
*



https://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13980713000959*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> Yes, but look at the upside too. If it is installed and it actually proves so deadly that stops all the illegal air raids at Syria. Then the whole world would line up to buy this system and nobody would ever dare to talk about Air assault on Iran. That is how super powers are born: One decisive win and you are set for a number of centuries.


Yes but Bavar is one of rings designed in an air defense grid against Air assault so either you gotta send other systems too like Pantiser (Oghab) or Bavar would be vulnerable and defenseless against threats that it has not designed for.. also without presence of a mighty Air force this vulnerability would even get worse .. so I disagree. I think first we should produce at least 10 of them to cover our air space ..

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Aramagedon

*Iran has reached Laser Defense Systems/Faster and easier defense against alien cruises and drones with new generation of Defense Systems *



Laser defense systems are very fast and in fact their projectiles move at the speed of light. As long as there is energy, the firing continues, and at the same time, any laser beam is cheap.

The use of direct energy systems such as lasers in weapons systems has long been considered by designers and makers of weapons systems, and especially the use of such weapons in sci-fi films has been widespread .This is especially true in the Star Wars movie series, but laser weapons or direct energy aren't limited to cinema or fantasy novels, and, after decades of constant effort, are slowly getting into the real battlefield. are.

*Read more:*
*Iran's acquisition of laser cannon weapons*
*The Islamic Republic is the fourth country in the world with the capability to independently produce long range missiles*

*While few countries in the world have been able to achieve tangible achievements in this field, it is now reported that the Islamic Republic of Iran has also launched a serious campaign on the design and manufacture of laser weapons and is currently actively operating a system.* In this regard, Amir Shahrokh Shahram, Deputy Minister of Defense and Head of Electronics Industries (SAI), said in recent days, "In addition, we are now using lasers to prepare artillery and ball and radar systems to enable the system. Tracking and targeting the target with high accuracy, we also had good gains in the subject of killing, all of which are manufactured domestically, making radar birds out of composite layers to be both radar-free, lightweight, and continuously propelled. It helps in the air. This is a composite body against the powerful Ace lasers It is affordable and *we can use these lasers to destroy them, now used in critical areas of the country, and today the world's leading laser technology in the hands of our Armed Forces specialists. Is located* . "

However, in order to better understand this topic, let's take a brief look at the history of laser weapons.

*Challenges and problems facing laser systems*

The first and one of the biggest enemies of laser systems is bad weather. Any dense fog, cloudiness, cloud cover, sandstorm or artificial smoke can easily reduce or deflect this laser beam, or deflect it, or even completely in optimum conditions. For example, several years ago, while reporting a short-range laser defense system for the US Navy to the Persian Gulf, the media reported problems with laser systems.

Now for some of our readers, the question may arise as to what the situation is for Iran. One should take into account these issues; firstly, there is no specification or specification of the Iranian laser system, but according to Amir Shahram, it can be guessed that we are a short-range defensive system. Specifically on land, the air conditions are much calmer than in offshore areas, and during the one-year days there is more storm-free weather.

*The next major issue is that in a scenario involving a ground-based laser cannon, the amount of energy available is far greater than a water-based destroyer or warship.*

For better understanding, consider this example: Suppose Iran's laser system is installed around an air base or nuclear facility near Isfahan. Specifically, power supply for a multi-megawatt laser with very high destructive power is readily available to the air defense.

*What are the Benefits of Having a Laser Defense?*

Cruise missiles, anti-radar missiles and guided bombs are among the most important threats against Iran in the event of any military conflict with the United States. US uses a large number of cruise missiles to target in the first wave of attack, particularly destroying air defense and radar systems and paving the way for a military offensive.

Laser defense systems are high speed and in fact their projectiles move at the speed of light, as long as there is energy, the firing continues, while firing any laser beam is very cheap and some of the industrial and scientific resources are expensive. Each laser beam was fired at a few cents. *Today, the US, China, Russia, and Germany (and now Iran) have been pursuing the same short-range or fixed-range lasers for short-range air defense to defend sensitive installations, and are likely to have achieved some success.* *It can now be said with some confidence that laser weapons have become an operational truth at least in the short-range air defense debate.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/99...به-سلاح-لیزری-شکسته-شد-دفاع-سریع-تر-و-راحت-تر*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Time to compare the new PLA radars of the 70. anniversary parade with what Iran is doing.

Two primary mobile early warning radars were shown by the Chinese.

1: This S-band AESA.






2: This UFH- or upper VHF-band AESA.






Both systems are mobile with the UHF-band AESA having even off-road capabilities. Chinese selected S- and lower UHF- band for their early warning combo and Iran S- and VHF-band.

Irans closest equivalent to the S-band AESA is the Najm-802.
The closest equivalent to the UHF-band AESA is Irans to be officially unveiled Nebo variant, a VHF-band AESA.

The Chinese have the financial resources to produce high power TRMs for a long range S-band AESA. That's not the case for Iran yet and the Najm series is used up to the necessary ranges for the SAM systems it is used with. This new Chinese radar has at least 50% larger aperture dimensions than the Najm-802 of similar layout. Together with expensive high power GaA TRMs, it can be used as a long range, 500-600km early warning radar that can perform continuous sector scan in support of SAM system guidance.
Iran still goes for more cost effective PESA/AESA hybrid technology for such very long range applications, with the Bavar-373's acquisition radar probably being the first exception.

On the UHF- VHF- AESA side however Iran is about to reach the same level as the new PLA system. Aperture-size-wise, TRM power-level wise, in both categories, yet to come Irans Nebo variant offers equivalent capabilities to this latest PLA asset.

The S-band AESA identified PLA system could also be a Gamma-D-like L-band AESA and the UHF-band AESA and upper VHF band AESA.

Anyway, we see that Iran is catching up to Chinese level in airdefense, both taking similar paths, like return to hot launch method for economy (HQ-22/Bavar-373) and Tor-based SHORADs (FM-2000/Oghab).

This would have been unthinkable just a decade ago.
Iran can't and won't go the Chinese "equivalent for everything" path the Chinese go but similar decisions on some paths are a good sign.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## raptor22

PeeD said:


> Time to compare the new PLA radars of the 70. anniversary parade with what Iran is doing.
> 
> Two primary mobile early warning radars were shown by the Chinese.
> 
> 1: This S-band AESA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2: This UFH- or upper VHF-band AESA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both systems are mobile with the UHF-band AESA having even off-road capabilities. Chinese selected S- and lower UHF- band for their early warning combo and Iran S- and VHF-band.
> 
> Irans closest equivalent to the S-band AESA is the Najm-802.
> The closest equivalent to the UHF-band AESA is Irans to be officially unveiled Nebo variant, a VHF-band AESA.
> 
> The Chinese have the financial resources to produce high power TRMs for a long range S-band AESA. That's not the case for Iran yet and the Najm series is used up to the necessary ranges for the SAM systems it is used with. This new Chinese radar has at least 50% larger aperture dimensions than the Najm-802 of similar layout. Together with expensive high power GaA TRMs, it can be used as a long range, 500-600km early warning radar that can perform continuous sector scan in support of SAM system guidance.
> Iran still goes for more cost effective PESA/AESA hybrid technology for such very long range applications, with the Bavar-373's acquisition radar probably being the first exception.
> 
> On the UHF- VHF- AESA side however Iran is about to reach the same level as the new PLA system. Aperture-size-wise, TRM power-level wise, in both categories, yet to come Irans Nebo variant offers equivalent capabilities to this latest PLA asset.
> 
> The S-band AESA identified PLA system could also be a Gamma-D-like L-band AESA and the UHF-band AESA and upper VHF band AESA.
> 
> Anyway, we see that Iran is catching up to Chinese level in airdefense, both taking similar paths, like return to hot launch method for economy (HQ-22/Bavar-373) and Tor-based SHORADs (FM-2000/Oghab).
> 
> This would have been unthinkable just a decade ago.
> Iran can't and won't go the Chinese "equivalent for everything" path the Chinese go but similar decisions on some paths are a good sign.


What happened to Iran 140 AWACS? as an early warning?


----------



## PeeD

A concept that didn't receive a go forward.

Basically you need air superiority to defend you AEW or tanker assets, otherwise they don't make much sense. Already now Irans F-14 are a huge threat to U.S AWACS an tankers and U.S airpower HEAVILY relies on both for their air campaigns.
So if you can't protect your vulnerable support assets very well like the case with Iran, you search for alternatives.

Furthermore we are entering the age of point strike BM proliferation and the U.S has cruise missiles since long time. These assets put the runways and airbases at risk.

Iran is reaching the technological level where it can create defensive alternatives to AEW aircraft and their strength of detecting terrain masking assets. I won't detail it.

So if your goal is not creating conventional offensive airpower, it's a wise decision to skip the AEW solution for more survivable and even economic ones. Iran is working on a very special solution to counter terrain-masking assets in a economical way.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## mohsen

PeeD said:


> Time to compare the new PLA radars of the 70. anniversary parade with what Iran is doing.
> 
> Two primary mobile early warning radars were shown by the Chinese.
> 
> 1: This S-band AESA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2: This UFH- or upper VHF-band AESA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both systems are mobile with the UHF-band AESA having even off-road capabilities. Chinese selected S- and lower UHF- band for their early warning combo and Iran S- and VHF-band.
> 
> Irans closest equivalent to the S-band AESA is the Najm-802.
> The closest equivalent to the UHF-band AESA is Irans to be officially unveiled Nebo variant, a VHF-band AESA.
> 
> The Chinese have the financial resources to produce high power TRMs for a long range S-band AESA. That's not the case for Iran yet and the Najm series is used up to the necessary ranges for the SAM systems it is used with. This new Chinese radar has at least 50% larger aperture dimensions than the Najm-802 of similar layout. Together with expensive high power GaA TRMs, it can be used as a long range, 500-600km early warning radar that can perform continuous sector scan in support of SAM system guidance.
> Iran still goes for more cost effective PESA/AESA hybrid technology for such very long range applications, with the Bavar-373's acquisition radar probably being the first exception.
> 
> On the UHF- VHF- AESA side however Iran is about to reach the same level as the new PLA system. Aperture-size-wise, TRM power-level wise, in both categories, yet to come Irans Nebo variant offers equivalent capabilities to this latest PLA asset.
> 
> The S-band AESA identified PLA system could also be a Gamma-D-like L-band AESA and the UHF-band AESA and upper VHF band AESA.
> 
> Anyway, we see that Iran is catching up to Chinese level in airdefense, both taking similar paths, like return to hot launch method for economy (HQ-22/Bavar-373) and Tor-based SHORADs (FM-2000/Oghab).
> 
> This would have been unthinkable just a decade ago.
> Iran can't and won't go the Chinese "equivalent for everything" path the Chinese go but similar decisions on some paths are a good sign.


Any info regarding their range?


----------



## Taher 2000

whats the meaning of (تک نرخی)?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

mohsen said:


> Any info regarding their range?



Goal range of the Chinese S-band AESA is certainly over 500km vs. 2m² RCS target. It would be very useful for ABM role.
The UHF-/VHF-band system likely has 600km target goal against a 2m² RCS target.

Irans closest radars S-band AESA Bavar engagement radar seems to have a range over 300km against a 2m² RCS target.
But Irans VHF-band Nebo AESA will have 600km against a 2m² target.

Irans ABM requirements and cost restrictions would not justify a high power, large array S-band like the new Chinese system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Goal range of the Chinese S-band AESA is certainly over 500km vs. 2m² RCS target. It would be very useful for ABM role.
> The UHF-/VHF-band system likely has 600km target goal against a 2m² RCS target.
> 
> Irans closest radars S-band AESA Bavar engagement radar seems to have a range over 300km against a 2m² RCS target.
> But Irans VHF-band Nebo AESA will have 600km against a 2m² target.
> 
> Irans ABM requirements and cost restrictions would not justify a high power, large array S-band like the new Chinese system.



what about Meraj 4 radar?


----------



## PeeD

Meraj-4 is in a lower class, volume search-only, 1D, no sector scan capability.
However it is much more cost effective and its role in the Bavar-373 structure is only volume search, battle management.
Not even Russians are ready to pay for such a large TRM count S-band radar yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Goal range of the Chinese S-band AESA is certainly over 500km vs. 2m² RCS target. It would be very useful for ABM role.
> The UHF-/VHF-band system likely has 600km target goal against a 2m² RCS target.
> 
> Irans closest radars S-band AESA Bavar engagement radar seems to have a range over 300km against a 2m² RCS target.
> But Irans VHF-band Nebo AESA will have 600km against a 2m² target.
> 
> Irans ABM requirements and cost restrictions would not justify a high power, large array S-band like the new Chinese system.



My main worry in the short terms is with a viable, modern & affordable SHORAD system because

1st They would have to mass produced and mass deployed in much larger numbers
2nd They have to operate at much faster speeds so they would require much faster reaction times where against more sophisticated targets you'll have less than 30 seconds to target, engage & hit your target or it will be too late.
3rd With SHORAD systems against a modern military force the vast majority of your targets are less likely to be larger manned Aircraft rather projectiles, UAV's, Cruise Missiles..... 
4th Your SHORAD systems need to be the last line of defense against targets capable of flying below radar.

And to do all that at an affordable price so it can be mass deployed across the country will be a challenge

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

PeeD said:


> Iran is reaching the technological level where it can create defensive alternatives to AEW aircraft and their strength of detecting terrain masking assets. I won't detail it.


A cost-effective approach for detecting low flying targets is Aerostat mounted radars like American Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) and Israeli EL/M-2083

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

Emad2000 said:


> View attachment 583411
> whats the meaning of (تک نرخی)?


Maybe material was bought by ارز تک نرخی

Reactions: Like Like:
 2


----------



## TheImmortal

Iskander said:


> A cost-effective approach for detecting low flying targets is Aerostat mounted radars like American Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) and Israeli EL/M-2083



That thing is gonna be literally a blimp on the Radar of any major adversary. Any major attack and a BVR missile will destroy that thing in a heartbeat.

Don’t see how it’s useful in wartime as even air defense systems will struggle to defend it from A2A.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Iskander said:


> A cost-effective approach for detecting low flying targets is Aerostat mounted radars like American Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) and Israeli EL/M-2083



well Iran has the capability from 2014 with OWJ 10 but i don't know if it's fully operational Iran said it can be mounted with radars and EW but i do not know if they did it or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

*Some of Iran's Air Defence Force Systems*


*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

Russian hack article belittling the Bavar 373s over at the Kremlin site Southfront.

*Iran’s Air Defense: In Pursuit Of S-300*

https://southfront.org/irans-air-defense-in-pursuit-of-s-300/

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

zectech said:


> Russian hack article belittling the Bavar 373s over at the Kremlin site Southfront.
> 
> *Iran’s Air Defense: In Pursuit Of S-300*
> 
> https://southfront.org/irans-air-defense-in-pursuit-of-s-300/


"Iranian military notes that the Ra’ad-2 SAMs are capable of hitting targets at distances of up to 200 kilometres" Lol?

"The latest Iranian SAMs, I think, are at least a generation behind ours, that is, they can match the models that were created in our country in the late 80s-early 90s.

Both of these complexes, according to media reports, *have a semi-active missile guidance system, which means that shooting is possible only within the radio [radar] horizon*, that is, on targets that are directly observable. The maximum range will be limited not only by the energy of missiles and radar, but also by the altitude of the targets, as well as the terrain. The Iranian military is talking about 200 and 120 kilometres, respectively. It is obvious that with this value, the “Bavar-373” is not better than our S-300PMU2, but surpasses the S-300PMU1 with its 150 kilometres. However, *this range can be fully realised only on targets going at high or medium altitudes*.

We observe that *the Iranian SAMs “Bavar-373” and “Khordad-15”, of course, are serious military-technological breakthroughs*, bringing Iran to the forefront in the development of these weapons systems. However, it is premature to say that it managed to achieve the performance of our S-300PMU2. Nevertheless, *there is reason to predict that in a decade and a half, Iran will create a SAM that meets the best world standards*, catching up with at least China in this regard."

So somewhere between pmu1 and pmu2. Seems reasonable and the criticisms were valid, I don't think this is a "hack" article at all; obviously they have a pro-Russian bias as it was written by a Russian military politician, but it certainly doesn't belittle the Bavar-373 unfairly in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> That thing is gonna be literally a blimp on the Radar of any major adversary. Any major attack and a BVR missile will destroy that thing in a heartbeat.
> 
> Don’t see how it’s useful in wartime as even air defense systems will struggle to defend it from A2A.



This goes both ways, all you said can be allied to airbases or carriers on which conventional airpower is based (just replace BVR AAMs by CMs, BMs and AGMs).

Hence in all robust scenarios there are some very high value objects that needs to be protected or protect themselves.

Iranian F-14 would be tasked to kill tankers and AWACS/E-2 to create mission-kills on U.S airpower. In contrast to U.S airpower the still have longer ranged BVR weapons and likely at kinematic advantage.
So the task of U.S airpower is to create such a dense defense layer around tankers and AWACS that no Iranian F-14 manages to land a lucky shot in a /run) hit and run scenario.

That all would apply to a static OTH radar or an aerostat system.
Airborne systems are mobile, sure but are vulnerable to mission-kill scenarios are they rely on airfields/carriers.
If you manage to protect a land target against; 
- terrain-masking assets
- atmospheric and high altitude assets
- ballistic/exo atmospheric assets
- hypersonics/trans-atmospheric assets
then you can reasonably protect a very high value object.

At the capability level Iran has reached following question arises: What's worth an airborne asset, if it relies on a static land object, an airfield for operation? Why not instead trying to protect the static land object against the whole threat spectrum, which one fruit could then be robust, survivable airpower?
Achieving that is a near impossible task due to hypersonic and ballistic missiles with point-strike capability but fortunately enough, for now, very few countries on the planet posses such a capability (now to become more after INF treaty was killed).

The U.S relies on airpower and AWACS/tankers because their warfare is almost completely offensive orientated. That’s good to make war around the globe against 3rd class militaries. Against peer-level militaries, they rely on being a nuclear power.
Irans task is not war around the globe against 3rd class militaries, but against one of the 3 superpowers on the planet.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

PeeD said:


> The U.S relies on airpower and AWACS/tankers because their warfare is almost completely offensive orientated. That’s good to make war around the globe against 3rd class militaries. *Against peer-level militaries, they rely on being a nuclear power.*
> Irans task is not war around the globe against 3rd class militaries, but against one of the 3 superpowers on the planet.


There is no peer to the US military. Nuclear weapons are essentially measures of last resort. Any country that is willing to use nuclear weapons is also committed to suffer the nuclear reprisal. Conventionally, the US military have no peer.

The US can standalone...

- Thru the inadequacies of others
- By our own prowess

There is no way for Liechtenstein to be a US peer and that would be item one. Against the Soviet Union and China, that would be item two, at least for now. JPN in WW II was not a US military peer despite the battlefield successes during the war. Component to what make a military formidable is the ability to replenish by way of national resources and that JPN did not have. At the end of WW II, the only navy that could stand on its own was the UN Navy. Allied navies depended on US for their standing.

So if we by our own efforts managed to stay ahead of most of the world, including resource wealthy like Russia and China, criticizing the US military as only good against 3rd world militaries is pointless.


----------



## PeeD

Conventional U.S military power can overwhelm 3rd class militaries.

Against second class militaries it will be defeated on the homefront. As a liberal society without any robust ideological values, U.S homefront will only stand intact if it is physically threatened.

The dimension for the homefront are as following:
- 100's deaths during the whole campaign against a 3rd class military
- 1000's of deaths within the first month against a 2nd class military
- 10.000's of deaths within the first weeks against a peer-level military
An *expedition* with few 100 deaths can be sustained and a *defensive war* against a peer-level military can be sustained. These are the two extremes.

There is the threshold adversary capability-level at which conventional U.S military power retains superiority. The threshold is crossed if facing nations like Russia, China and recently Iran.
It's true that conventional U.S military power has larger teeth than Russia in the offensive field but Russian military is build to defend against U.S level assets. Their defensive warfare effectiveness is so much higher than the U.S one that I would say the 2019 Russian military would win a conventional war against the 2019 U.S.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> There is no peer to the US military. Nuclear weapons are essentially measures of last resort. Any country that is willing to use nuclear weapons is also committed to suffer the nuclear reprisal. Conventionally, the US military have no peer.
> 
> The US can standalone...
> 
> - Thru the inadequacies of others
> - By our own prowess
> 
> There is no way for Liechtenstein to be a US peer and that would be item one. Against the Soviet Union and China, that would be item two, at least for now. JPN in WW II was not a US military peer despite the battlefield successes during the war. Component to what make a military formidable is the ability to replenish by way of national resources and that JPN did not have. At the end of WW II, the only navy that could stand on its own was the UN Navy. Allied navies depended on US for their standing.
> 
> So if we by our own efforts managed to stay ahead of most of the world, including resource wealthy like Russia and China, criticizing the US military as only good against 3rd world militaries is pointless.



Thoroughly explain how Russia and China aren't peer militaries.


----------



## Shams313

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Thoroughly explain how Russia and China aren't peer militaries.


There's no explanation, it's a philosophy people used to belief in.
Let em.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

Iskander said:


> A cost-effective approach for detecting low flying targets is Aerostat mounted radars like American Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) and Israeli EL/M-2083



During actual war time Large Balloon type radars and Surveillance are good for countries equipped with the type of Air Forces that can protect them or else modern Air Forces equipped with modern and future BVR missiles will be able to down them at the max ranges of the missiles capabilities.

During peace time sure they can be used as coms gear to surveillance gear against Terrorist, smugglers,.... and as a type of an early warning system right before an attack however due to their slow speed and rather large size they can easily be spotted even from orbit and their lack of speed and large size will make them easy targets. And I'm 100% positive that countries like the U.S. have Air to Air missiles specifically designed to take out such targets from 200-300km out (And that's not including classified airborne directed energy weapons and Lasers). 

For Iran's purposes at least in my opinion for a SHORAD systems would be to have a specific number of MALE UAV's monitoring a specific area with various types of sensors with multiple UAV's in the air at any given time conducting 24/7 search with a large number of cheaper sensors on the ground conducting surveillance across an area and a handful of towers with more expensive sensors all networked together on a closed high speed network to conduct SHORAD surveillance operations for a specific area with the threat level posed to the area determining the concentration and type of your ground sensors and the number and type of your UAV's that's also fed in info from other Iranian EWS, Radars, SAM Systems,.....
And for the defensive weapons there should be 
1.Cheap Algorithm based missiles (assisted with low cost optical sensors & and a few upgraded with higher end night sensors.)
2.Large number of command based missiles (Vertically launched out of a 20ft long container that's towed or on the back of a truck(25fter) and I would also place at least 8 short ranged (~30km ranged) land attack cruise missiles like a modified Akhgar missile to be vertically launched out of the same container to protect against any special forces operation....)
3.A Specific number (based on threat level) remotely operated AAA

And each area would have to be properly mapped and engineered to each area's specific needs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Battle of Waterloo said:


> "Iranian military notes that the Ra’ad-2 SAMs are capable of hitting targets at distances of up to 200 kilometres" Lol?
> 
> "The latest Iranian SAMs, I think, are at least a generation behind ours, that is, they can match the models that were created in our country in the late 80s-early 90s.
> 
> Both of these complexes, according to media reports, *have a semi-active missile guidance system, which means that shooting is possible only within the radio [radar] horizon*, that is, on targets that are directly observable. The maximum range will be limited not only by the energy of missiles and radar, but also by the altitude of the targets, as well as the terrain. The Iranian military is talking about 200 and 120 kilometres, respectively. It is obvious that with this value, the “Bavar-373” is not better than our S-300PMU2, but surpasses the S-300PMU1 with its 150 kilometres. However, *this range can be fully realised only on targets going at high or medium altitudes*.
> 
> We observe that *the Iranian SAMs “Bavar-373” and “Khordad-15”, of course, are serious military-technological breakthroughs*, bringing Iran to the forefront in the development of these weapons systems. However, it is premature to say that it managed to achieve the performance of our S-300PMU2. Nevertheless, *there is reason to predict that in a decade and a half, Iran will create a SAM that meets the best world standards*, catching up with at least China in this regard."
> 
> So somewhere between pmu1 and pmu2. Seems reasonable and the criticisms were valid, I don't think this is a "hack" article at all; obviously they have a pro-Russian bias as it was written by a Russian military politician, but it certainly doesn't belittle the Bavar-373 unfairly in my opinion.


Suppose that this guy make an essay on iranian UAV technology.......he will not even put Iran among top 10 countries


----------



## GWXP

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Thoroughly explain how Russia and China aren't peer militaries.


Russia has 850 old fighter jets with poorly trained pilots. China has 650 4th generation fighter aircraft. USA has 2700 fighter aircraft---that is more than China and Russia combined. Add to this the fact that US military deploys 5th generation fighters and you see the superiority. US NAVY is superior to the the next 10 Navies combined

The only peer to US military and in minds of some its superior was USSR that had standing army of 5 mln troops and 65000 tanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

GWXP said:


> Russia has 850 old fighter jets with poorly trained pilots. China has 650 4th generation fighter aircraft. USA has 2700 fighter aircraft---that is more than China and Russia combined. Add to this the fact that US military deploys 5th generation fighters and you see the superiority. US NAVY is superior to the the next 10 Navies combined
> 
> The only peer to US military and in minds of some its superior was USSR that had standing army of 5 mln troops and 65000 tanks


But there is something that you don't consider it....not you even most of the guys here.....thats initiative......in the begining of saudi war against yemenis,saudie had superiority but they couldn't conquer......and in these days whole of the world is being surprised by ability of hoothis........a part of war is luxurios tanks and fighters you have but these stufes took money and destroy your economy(what we have seen in US after war in afghanistan and iraq).....the point that hoothies got and extend their war......these days saudies are bombing targets that have been demolished years before but yemenis attack aramco....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Thoroughly explain how Russia and China aren't peer militaries.


The problem with the phrase 'peer military' or variants thereof is that they are used too casually with the users having next to zero knowledge of the contexts behind the phrase.

When I was active duty, we have Professional Military Education (PME). We -- officers and enlisted -- have our respective institutions, such as Air University and the NCO Academy, and so on. We learned about history, a little bit of politics, leadership development, training, and employment of theories.

Here is one of the exercises we had for discussions...

Let us say that...

- There are three countries: America, Canada, and Mexico
- Each country have a 1,000 man army
- America have access to the seas but Canada and Mexico are landlocked

Let us say that one day, America invented the 'boat' and eventually can travel on the waters. Then America have a 'navy'.

In *ABSOLUTE* terms, we can argue that militarily speaking America have no peers. But because Canada and Mexico are landlocked, the only branch that can wage war on either country is the army. This make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, despite having a navy, America still have two military peers.

While the exercise is simplistic, it is much more sophisticated than using sheer numbers of weaponry and manpower to compare militaries which inevitably affects national policies and foreign affairs. A false or incomplete understanding of the idea of what is a 'military peer' and how to come to such a conclusion *WILL* have disastrous consequences.

The exercise forced the student to take into consideration seemingly unrelated factors like politics, government, geography, economics, ethnic composition, societal strata, moralities and philosophies, and even lower level factors like ratio of men to women and lifespan expectancy to guesstimate the national potency of a country. This is why JPN is guesstimated to decline on the world stage because of the rising ratio of seniors to younger adults over the next 20 yrs. Like it or not, it is very much a dick measuring contest but one with serious international implications because the military is reflective of the greater society whence it came from.

Let us say that Canada is experiencing a birth boom. This mean that in 20 yrs time odds are good that Canada's economy will rise, and Canada will have a 1,500 man army which make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, Canada's military will have no peer. America's navy remains useless.

But...But...What about the other day when USAF General Joe Schmoe on CNN said something about China's PLAAF being a 'near peer'?

The problem in that scenario is that people love to jump to conclusion on what General Schmoe said. When General Schmoe said that the PLAAF is a 'near peer', he actually meant it in a very narrow context, namely, that China can make her own aircraft, formulate her own air combat doctrines, trains her own airmen, and so on, without relying on external help. In a real fight against the USAF, the PLAAF would lose. The USAF would take losses, but those losses would not pose any statistical delay on the final victory over the PLAAF. In absolute and practical terms, US airpower from all branches grossly oversized the PLA, especially in combat experience.

The US military is unique in the modern world in the sense that we trains exclusively to fight on other lands. Continental US (CONUS) is effectively immune from invasion, and we have the National Guards to defend the homeland. That leave the main army an exclusively expeditionary force. When I used the lower case 'army', I do not mean the US Army but the totality of the US military. France's expeditionary force is the Foreign Legion, an example to illustrate the difference where an army may have a unit of any size that is dedicated for overseas missions versus an entire military that is formed and trained to do so. A component that is dedicated to expeditionary missions are mainly for harassment, reconnaissance, insurgency, or preparation to a larger force. Whereas an entire military that was formed to be expeditionary is meant for conquest and it will have the resources to back up the mission.

No one like to rated lower than the US military but reality give no options, so in theory, if one strains hard enough, Burkina Faso can be a US 'near peer'.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> The problem with the phrase 'peer military' or variants thereof is that they are used too casually with the users having next to zero knowledge of the contexts behind the phrase.
> 
> When I was active duty, we have Professional Military Education (PME). We -- officers and enlisted -- have our respective institutions, such as Air University and the NCO Academy, and so on. We learned about history, a little bit of politics, leadership development, training, and employment of theories.
> 
> Here is one of the exercises we had for discussions...
> 
> Let us say that...
> 
> - There are three countries: America, Canada, and Mexico
> - Each country have a 1,000 man army
> - America have access to the seas but Canada and Mexico are landlocked
> 
> Let us say that one day, America invented the 'boat' and eventually can travel on the waters. Then America have a 'navy'.
> 
> In *ABSOLUTE* terms, we can argue that militarily speaking America have no peers. But because Canada and Mexico are landlocked, the only branch that can wage war on either country is the army. This make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, despite having a navy, America still have two military peers.
> 
> While the exercise is simplistic, it is much more sophisticated than using sheer numbers of weaponry and manpower to compare militaries which inevitably affects national policies and foreign affairs. A false or incomplete understanding of the idea of what is a 'military peer' and how to come to such a conclusion *WILL* have disastrous consequences.
> 
> The exercise forced the student to take into consideration seemingly unrelated factors like politics, government, geography, economics, ethnic composition, societal strata, moralities and philosophies, and even lower level factors like ratio of men to women and lifespan expectancy to guesstimate the national potency of a country. This is why JPN is guesstimated to decline on the world stage because of the rising ratio of seniors to younger adults over the next 20 yrs. Like it or not, it is very much a dick measuring contest but one with serious international implications because the military is reflective of the greater society whence it came from.
> 
> Let us say that Canada is experiencing a birth boom. This mean that in 20 yrs time odds are good that Canada's economy will rise, and Canada will have a 1,500 man army which make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, Canada's military will have no peer. America's navy remains useless.
> 
> But...But...What about the other day when USAF General Joe Schmoe on CNN said something about China's PLAAF being a 'near peer'?
> 
> The problem in that scenario is that people love to jump to conclusion on what General Schmoe said. When General Schmoe said that the PLAAF is a 'near peer', he actually meant it in a very narrow context, namely, that China can make her own aircraft, formulate her own air combat doctrines, trains her own airmen, and so on, without relying on external help. In a real fight against the USAF, the PLAAF would lose. The USAF would take losses, but those losses would not pose any statistical delay on the final victory over the PLAAF. In absolute and practical terms, US airpower from all branches grossly oversized the PLA, especially in combat experience.
> 
> The US military is unique in the modern world in the sense that we trains exclusively to fight on other lands. Continental US (CONUS) is effectively immune from invasion, and we have the National Guards to defend the homeland. That leave the main army an exclusively expeditionary force. When I used the lower case 'army', I do not mean the US Army but the totality of the US military. France's expeditionary force is the Foreign Legion, an example to illustrate the difference where an army may have a unit of any size that is dedicated for overseas missions versus an entire military that is formed and trained to do so. A component that is dedicated to expeditionary missions are mainly for harassment, reconnaissance, insurgency, or preparation to a larger force. Whereas an entire military that was formed to be expeditionary is meant for conquest and it will have the resources to back up the mission.
> 
> No one like to rated lower than the US military but reality give no options, so in theory, if one strains hard enough, Burkina Faso can be a US 'near peer'.



Thorough explanation, very much appreciated.


----------



## Blue In Green

gambit said:


> The problem with the phrase 'peer military' or variants thereof is that they are used too casually with the users having next to zero knowledge of the contexts behind the phrase.
> 
> When I was active duty, we have Professional Military Education (PME). We -- officers and enlisted -- have our respective institutions, such as Air University and the NCO Academy, and so on. We learned about history, a little bit of politics, leadership development, training, and employment of theories.
> 
> Here is one of the exercises we had for discussions...
> 
> Let us say that...
> 
> - There are three countries: America, Canada, and Mexico
> - Each country have a 1,000 man army
> - America have access to the seas but Canada and Mexico are landlocked
> 
> Let us say that one day, America invented the 'boat' and eventually can travel on the waters. Then America have a 'navy'.
> 
> In *ABSOLUTE* terms, we can argue that militarily speaking America have no peers. But because Canada and Mexico are landlocked, the only branch that can wage war on either country is the army. This make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, despite having a navy, America still have two military peers.
> 
> While the exercise is simplistic, it is much more sophisticated than using sheer numbers of weaponry and manpower to compare militaries which inevitably affects national policies and foreign affairs. A false or incomplete understanding of the idea of what is a 'military peer' and how to come to such a conclusion *WILL* have disastrous consequences.
> 
> The exercise forced the student to take into consideration seemingly unrelated factors like politics, government, geography, economics, ethnic composition, societal strata, moralities and philosophies, and even lower level factors like ratio of men to women and lifespan expectancy to guesstimate the national potency of a country. This is why JPN is guesstimated to decline on the world stage because of the rising ratio of seniors to younger adults over the next 20 yrs. Like it or not, it is very much a dick measuring contest but one with serious international implications because the military is reflective of the greater society whence it came from.
> 
> Let us say that Canada is experiencing a birth boom. This mean that in 20 yrs time odds are good that Canada's economy will rise, and Canada will have a 1,500 man army which make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, Canada's military will have no peer. America's navy remains useless.
> 
> But...But...What about the other day when USAF General Joe Schmoe on CNN said something about China's PLAAF being a 'near peer'?
> 
> The problem in that scenario is that people love to jump to conclusion on what General Schmoe said. When General Schmoe said that the PLAAF is a 'near peer', he actually meant it in a very narrow context, namely, that China can make her own aircraft, formulate her own air combat doctrines, trains her own airmen, and so on, without relying on external help. In a real fight against the USAF, the PLAAF would lose. The USAF would take losses, but those losses would not pose any statistical delay on the final victory over the PLAAF. In absolute and practical terms, US airpower from all branches grossly oversized the PLA, especially in combat experience.
> 
> The US military is unique in the modern world in the sense that we trains exclusively to fight on other lands. Continental US (CONUS) is effectively immune from invasion, and we have the National Guards to defend the homeland. That leave the main army an exclusively expeditionary force. When I used the lower case 'army', I do not mean the US Army but the totality of the US military. France's expeditionary force is the Foreign Legion, an example to illustrate the difference where an army may have a unit of any size that is dedicated for overseas missions versus an entire military that is formed and trained to do so. A component that is dedicated to expeditionary missions are mainly for harassment, reconnaissance, insurgency, or preparation to a larger force. Whereas an entire military that was formed to be expeditionary is meant for conquest and it will have the resources to back up the mission.
> 
> No one like to rated lower than the US military but reality give no options, so in theory, if one strains hard enough, Burkina Faso can be a US 'near peer'.



Truth be told, I'm not the best at this sort of stuff so I will admit my ignorance. That being said let me pose this question to you then.

If we take the Russians who have a very robust defense orientated military infrastructure set up in Russia that is meant to counter U.S. military in Eastern Europe and beyond. Can one say or try to say that an equally defended nations can stack up to an equally offensive nation? I guess at that point we can't use the term "peer" military since, from what I gather you're trying to say, is that a peer military must be similar enough in order for there to be an comparison in the first place.

I.E:
-Object A is an hyper offensive military with all the characteristics of one that come therein.
-Object B is an hyper defensive military with all the characteristics of one that come therein.

Can we then compare the power level of these two militaries more directly even though they are effectively polar opposites.

What overall terms and classifications, in your view, do we need to use when comparing such nations and militaries?



gambit said:


> The problem with the phrase 'peer military' or variants thereof is that they are used too casually with the users having next to zero knowledge of the contexts behind the phrase.
> 
> When I was active duty, we have Professional Military Education (PME). We -- officers and enlisted -- have our respective institutions, such as Air University and the NCO Academy, and so on. We learned about history, a little bit of politics, leadership development, training, and employment of theories.
> 
> Here is one of the exercises we had for discussions...
> 
> Let us say that...
> 
> - There are three countries: America, Canada, and Mexico
> - Each country have a 1,000 man army
> - America have access to the seas but Canada and Mexico are landlocked
> 
> Let us say that one day, America invented the 'boat' and eventually can travel on the waters. Then America have a 'navy'.
> 
> In *ABSOLUTE* terms, we can argue that militarily speaking America have no peers. But because Canada and Mexico are landlocked, the only branch that can wage war on either country is the army. This make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, despite having a navy, America still have two military peers.
> 
> While the exercise is simplistic, it is much more sophisticated than using sheer numbers of weaponry and manpower to compare militaries which inevitably affects national policies and foreign affairs. A false or incomplete understanding of the idea of what is a 'military peer' and how to come to such a conclusion *WILL* have disastrous consequences.
> 
> The exercise forced the student to take into consideration seemingly unrelated factors like politics, government, geography, economics, ethnic composition, societal strata, moralities and philosophies, and even lower level factors like ratio of men to women and lifespan expectancy to guesstimate the national potency of a country. This is why JPN is guesstimated to decline on the world stage because of the rising ratio of seniors to younger adults over the next 20 yrs. Like it or not, it is very much a dick measuring contest but one with serious international implications because the military is reflective of the greater society whence it came from.
> 
> Let us say that Canada is experiencing a birth boom. This mean that in 20 yrs time odds are good that Canada's economy will rise, and Canada will have a 1,500 man army which make it in *PRACTICAL* terms, Canada's military will have no peer. America's navy remains useless.
> 
> But...But...What about the other day when USAF General Joe Schmoe on CNN said something about China's PLAAF being a 'near peer'?
> 
> The problem in that scenario is that people love to jump to conclusion on what General Schmoe said. When General Schmoe said that the PLAAF is a 'near peer', he actually meant it in a very narrow context, namely, that China can make her own aircraft, formulate her own air combat doctrines, trains her own airmen, and so on, without relying on external help. In a real fight against the USAF, the PLAAF would lose. The USAF would take losses, but those losses would not pose any statistical delay on the final victory over the PLAAF. In absolute and practical terms, US airpower from all branches grossly oversized the PLA, especially in combat experience.
> 
> The US military is unique in the modern world in the sense that we trains exclusively to fight on other lands. Continental US (CONUS) is effectively immune from invasion, and we have the National Guards to defend the homeland. That leave the main army an exclusively expeditionary force. When I used the lower case 'army', I do not mean the US Army but the totality of the US military. France's expeditionary force is the Foreign Legion, an example to illustrate the difference where an army may have a unit of any size that is dedicated for overseas missions versus an entire military that is formed and trained to do so. A component that is dedicated to expeditionary missions are mainly for harassment, reconnaissance, insurgency, or preparation to a larger force. Whereas an entire military that was formed to be expeditionary is meant for conquest and it will have the resources to back up the mission.
> 
> No one like to rated lower than the US military but reality give no options, so in theory, if one strains hard enough, Burkina Faso can be a US 'near peer'.



So just to make sure. What I think you're saying is that for a military to be considered a peer military to another, it must be comparable in all or nearly all facets?


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> During actual war time Large Balloon type radars and Surveillance are good for countries equipped with the type of Air Forces that can protect them or else modern Air Forces equipped with modern and future BVR missiles will be able to down them at the max ranges of the missiles capabilities.
> 
> During peace time sure they can be used as coms gear to surveillance gear against Terrorist, smugglers,.... and as a type of an early warning system right before an attack however due to their slow speed and rather large size they can easily be spotted even from orbit and their lack of speed and large size will make them easy targets. And I'm 100% positive that countries like the U.S. have Air to Air missiles specifically designed to take out such targets from 200-300km out (And that's not including classified airborne directed energy weapons and Lasers).
> 
> For Iran's purposes at least in my opinion for a SHORAD systems would be to have a specific number of MALE UAV's monitoring a specific area with various types of sensors with multiple UAV's in the air at any given time conducting 24/7 search with a large number of cheaper sensors on the ground conducting surveillance across an area and a handful of towers with more expensive sensors all networked together on a closed high speed network to conduct SHORAD surveillance operations for a specific area with the threat level posed to the area determining the concentration and type of your ground sensors and the number and type of your UAV's that's also fed in info from other Iranian EWS, Radars, SAM Systems,.....
> And for the defensive weapons there should be
> 1.Cheap Algorithm based missiles (assisted with low cost optical sensors & and a few upgraded with higher end night sensors.)
> 2.Large number of command based missiles (Vertically launched out of a 20ft long container that's towed or on the back of a truck(25fter) and I would also place at least 8 short ranged (~30km ranged) land attack cruise missiles like a modified Akhgar missile to be vertically launched out of the same container to protect against any special forces operation....)
> 3.A Specific number (based on threat level) remotely operated AAA
> 
> And each area would have to be properly mapped and engineered to each area's specific needs.



I tried to make the argument based on the airfield issue, here a different approach:

Your enemy has LO/stealth cruise missiles and you need to have persistent and assured low level protection of your capital city.

Your choice is a AEW aircraft that does the detection and tracking part of the task. Your fleet is large enough to enable 24/7/365 coverage.

What is your reaction of a mission kill scenario in which adversary airpower creates a concentrated force towards the capital city, threatening your AEW assets. They force it to a sufficiently long distance, so that arriving LO cruise missile are able to reach their targets in the capital city. Detection and tracking failed by the asset that was meant to do it, it wasn't killed, used its mobility/flexibility to move to a safe area but it was effectively mission-killed. A large number of LO CM's took out high value objects throughout the capital city while your AEW asset was trying to avoid long range BVR missiles of the adversary.

Hence they situation is rather like, either you stand your ground and keep your defense intact, or you may loose it all. So the added flexibility and mobility of a AEW asset is irrelevant for this case. It is relevant for offensive operations and that's why it is of central importance to the U.S while much less important to Russia.
As gambit said, the U.S due to its geography, traditionally, emphasis on offense not defense. Russia on the other hand wants to neutralize U.S offensive capability by heavy defense.
Moscow was heavily defended in order to have the U.S wear off its offensive tooth against it. Back in those, still often analog, days where defense against LO terrain masking assets was still incredibly difficult.

Is a bulletproof defense possible? If your goal is areal defense, then you adversary can always concentrate its offensive assets on one pressure point and make your life difficult. But if your goal is point defense e.g of your capital city then your systems over each other and the adversary has no other mean than to go frontally against it.

On the defensive side things are already ugly against BMs for everyone and after INF termination will get even uglier and hypersonics will further reduce envelopes. But the terrain masking LO and atmospheric VLO threat spectrum can soon be reasonably well defended against in the case of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

I have confidence that the upcoming Oghab system does not use a copy of the original TOR-M1 missile, like the Chinese FM-2000 does but a new more compact, higher speed, longer ranger missile modeled around the new TOR-M2 9M338.

An ideal fit would be the 9th Day missile in a single square container instead a round tube as the 9M338. The 9th Day is compact enough for this layout, it needs folding fins and the nose mounted rocket reaction system for alignment. It should be able to reach 15km and speed approaching mach 3.
It could allow a load of 16 ready to fire missiles like the TOR-M2.

The wind-tunnel "Iranian Pantsir" might actually be a 9th Day missile with a booster for the 20-25km range spectrum. This could be for a future Morfey-like layout system to give the IRGC what the IRIADF now has as Mersad-16/Kamin-2.
Fact is, that the "Iranian Pantsir" is very different to the Pantsir unpowered kill-stage layout and may first have been a boostered Rapier that developed into a boostered 9th Day.

I expect the production-line and team behind the Ya-Zahra/Herz-9 to switch to the Oghab at expanded production rate to produce for both, IRGC and IRIADF.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

GWXP said:


> Russia has 850 old fighter jets with poorly trained pilots. China has 650 4th generation fighter aircraft. USA has 2700 fighter aircraft---that is more than China and Russia combined. Add to this the fact that US military deploys 5th generation fighters and you see the superiority. US NAVY is superior to the the next 10 Navies combined
> 
> The only peer to US military and in minds of some its superior was USSR that had standing army of 5 mln troops and 65000 tanks



Go see how many of those 2700 aircraft are flight worthy. I love how people claim RUSSIA and China planes are old and broken down, but suddenly every US plane is fresh off the assembly line or gets renovated every year.

Newsflash: Most of the F-22 fleet is GROUNDED due to maintenance, hell tens of them got damaged in a hurricane because they couldn’t be flown out. The wear and tear of US airforce planes is real and just like it’s peers. So no US doesn’t have 2700 combat ready planes.

And getting those planes into the region of war (China sea or Russia border) takes months if not over a year to do so. I guess China and Russia will just sit there in the meantime?

A single aircraft carrier being sunk/severely damaged takes 100-200 high combat ready planes off the table. Military air bases in the region will be struck with cluster BMs.

You forget if US goes to war with China or Russia those countries are on the defensive and have homefield advantage. While US is on the offensive having to bring its toys from far away to the battlefield. Against 3rd rate militaries that’s fine, but against Russia or China that transportation will be exposed.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> I tried to make the argument based on the airfield issue, here a different approach:
> 
> Your enemy has LO/stealth cruise missiles and you need to have persistent and assured low level protection of your capital city.
> 
> Your choice is a AEW aircraft that does the detection and tracking part of the task. Your fleet is large enough to enable 24/7/365 coverage.
> 
> What is your reaction of a mission kill scenario in which adversary airpower creates a concentrated force towards the capital city, threatening your AEW assets. They force it to a sufficiently long distance, so that arriving LO cruise missile are able to reach their targets in the capital city. Detection and tracking failed by the asset that was meant to do it, it wasn't killed, used its mobility/flexibility to move to a safe area but it was effectively mission-killed. A large number of LO CM's took out high value objects throughout the capital city while your AEW asset was trying to avoid long range BVR missiles of the adversary.
> 
> Hence they situation is rather like, either you stand your ground and keep your defense intact, or you may loose it all. So the added flexibility and mobility of a AEW asset is irrelevant for this case. It is relevant for offensive operations and that's why it is of central importance to the U.S while much less important to Russia.
> As gambit said, the U.S due to its geography, traditionally, emphasis on offense not defense. Russia on the other hand wants to neutralize U.S offensive capability by heavy defense.
> Moscow was heavily defended in order to have the U.S wear off its offensive tooth against it. Back in those, still often analog, days where defense against LO terrain masking assets was still incredibly difficult.
> 
> Is a bulletproof defense possible? If your goal is areal defense, then you adversary can always concentrate its offensive assets on one pressure point and make your life difficult. But if your goal is point defense e.g of your capital city then your systems over each other and the adversary has no other mean than to go frontally against it.
> 
> On the defensive side things are already ugly against BMs for everyone and after INF termination will get even uglier and hypersonics will further reduce envelopes. But the terrain masking LO and atmospheric VLO threat spectrum can soon be reasonably well defended against in the case of Iran.



Your right that most current Defense Systems will be defenseless against any modern high speed projectile with guidance and maneuvering capability be it hypersonic missiles or BM that's why defense systems alone will never be enough and you need to develop the offensive capability to strike as you main deterrence power however at the same time you simply can't afford to leave yourselves open to comparatively lower cost attacks and currently the vast majority of deployed American Missiles are ship launched land attack Cruise Missiles and that's the main threat in terms of Missiles Iranian SHORAD systems would need to defend against & after that it's projectiles deployed off Aircrafts & UCAV's 

I believe Iran should be developing 2 types SHORAD systems one mobile and the other fixed and the fixed version need to be designed specifically for each area based on the needs and terrain of each area and for a fixed version for our purposes since we are capable of building MALE UAV's at an affordable price and we have a rather large country with a lot of mountains and at the same time lack an Air Force as large as and as technologically advanced as our current enemies and until we can upgrade our own Air Force with highly capable domestically produced fighters I would much preferer a fleet of UAV's over a single AEW as my Air Asset backing up a large number lower cost optical sensors on the ground spread across an area + a handful of higher end radars sensors placed on towers with high speed and secure com's gear networking and sensor fusing all the data plus other data coming in from other near by air defense equipment into one SHORAD command center that will be acting as not only the last line of Defense but likely the MAIN line of defense against Cruise Missiles and other aircraft deployed projectiles.

In terms of cost a single mid to small size AEW like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDO_AEW&CS will cost Iran well over $120 Million USD with operational cost of over $2,000 per hour and at that price how many SH-129 do you think we can build and operate over an area? And yes in terms of sensors it's no comparison however if you compare the sheer number of UAV's you can build and operate at that cost and their survivability simply due to the sheer number of airborne assets and your calculations will surly shift.
Some can be equipped with SAR radars, other can act as communications and a data link hub, some with thermal, some with 100's of small HD digital cams for day time,..... at $100 Million USD we can easily build a fleet of well over 100 specially designed SH-129's and due to our terrain they can probably do a better job covering the blind spots against lower flying objects......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Go see how many of those 2700 aircraft are flight worthy. I love how people claim RUSSIA and China planes are old and broken down, but suddenly every US plane is fresh off the assembly line or gets renovated every year.
> 
> Newsflash: Most of the F-22 fleet is GROUNDED due to maintenance, hell tens of them got damaged in a hurricane because they couldn’t be flown out. The wear and tear of US airforce planes is real and just like it’s peers. So no US doesn’t have 2700 combat ready planes.
> 
> And getting those planes into the region of war (China sea or Russia border) takes months if not over a year to do so. I guess China and Russia will just sit there in the meantime?
> 
> A single aircraft carrier being sunk/severely damaged takes 100-200 high combat ready planes off the table. Military air bases in the region will be struck with cluster BMs.
> 
> You forget if US goes to war with China or Russia those countries are on the defensive and have homefield advantage. While US is on the offensive having to bring its toys from far away to the battlefield. Against 3rd rate militaries that’s fine, but against Russia or China that transportation will be exposed.


Exactly,theres a lot more to it than just numbers on paper,after all saddam hussein had the worlds fourth largest army back in 1990,however it was certainly not the worlds fourth most powerful army as we saw during desert storm and that was with a theoretical home front advantage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Truth be told, I'm not the best at this sort of stuff so I will admit my ignorance. That being said let me pose this question to you then.
> 
> If we take the Russians who have a very robust defense orientated military infrastructure set up in Russia that is meant to counter U.S. military in Eastern Europe and beyond. Can one say or try to say that an equally defended nations can stack up to an equally offensive nation? I guess at that point we can't use the term "peer" military since, from what I gather you're trying to say, is that a peer military must be similar enough in order for there to be an comparison in the first place.
> 
> I.E:
> -Object A is an hyper offensive military with all the characteristics of one that come therein.
> -Object B is an hyper defensive military with all the characteristics of one that come therein.
> 
> *Can we then compare the power level of these two militaries more directly even though they are effectively polar opposites.*
> 
> What overall terms and classifications, in your view, do we need to use when comparing such nations and militaries?


Actually, your scenario -- A v B -- was one variation from many that was discussed. It is like asking the proverbial question: What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

When you think about it, your scenario begged the question: What prompted A to be 'hyper offensive' and B to be 'hyper defensive' in the first place? So the answer to your question -- the highlighted -- is actually very easy: They are peers.

They are peers. They just directed their respective knowledge, skills, and resources towards different goals.

Let us assume that there are other countries and observers in the region. To some, the 'hyper offensive' capabilities of A would be an effective deterrence in that you do not want to anger A lest you incur the irresistible destruction. To others, the 'hyper defensive' capabilities of B would be an effective deterrence in that you understand that you would be wasting your resources in trying to conquer B. So to everyone, A and B are peers to each other and incomparable to everyone else.

In the real world, _realpolitik_ expects this kind of estimation for self and everyone. It is not only what you are but also important are why you chose to be what you are and how -- the paths -- you took to become what you are. This is why the US State Dept and the many ministries of foreign affairs employs historians and the various 'soft science' specialists. We want to understand a people's collective psychology. For example, when China's was the world's premier naval power, why did China stopped after Zheng He's journey from China all the way to Europe? In this case, it was the emperor's Confucian beliefs and nothing technology related that effectively ruined China's naval prowess. China's navy at that time was very much an irresistible force.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> So just to make sure. What I think you're saying is that for a military to be considered a peer military to another, it must be comparable in all or nearly all facets?


Should be, not must be.

Russia have access to the seas, but Russia's access to the seas are not as good as the US. That made it more difficult for the Soviet Union to compete against the US regarding on *HOW* to become a comparable naval power. So in this case, geography factored in for the Soviet Union, then when it became evident that the Soviet Navy is less than the US Navy, the Soviet Navy was estimated not a peer to the US Navy. Which is scarier to see, an aircraft carrier or a destroyer? For any country's leader, the knowledge that a US aircraft carrier is heading his way produced either hope or fear with no gradations in between. This feeling -- hope or fear -- maybe physically intangible but produces real world effects in the sense that it affects how the country's leader weighs Russia and the US, and produces matching foreign affairs policies.

You can argue that the Russian Navy have more destroyers than the US Navy, but it would have little effect, if any, in those estimations of who is peer to whom. This is why people naturally gravitates to harder metrics like manpower, number of tanks and ships, and so on. It is easy but devoid of important contexts that foreign policies demands.

National policies matters. A one million man army is no good if there is an aggressive foreign affairs policies but the navy cannot transport that one million man army anywhere. So in observers' estimations, a country that have a smaller army but a better naval transport capability to support the country's foreign affairs will be perceived as superior. In this case, one set of hard metrics outweighs another.

Estimation of who is peer to whom is actually not art but more like craft. A craft requires patience, skills, resources, and long term access to all those things. People simply do not like to use craft. It is too time consuming to do basic research and think. Some tried to be objective and when they came to the conclusion that A is not a peer to B, their disappointment compelled them to abandon objectivity and get emotional. The results are hypernationalistic language and meaningless bluster.



TheImmortal said:


> Newsflash: Most of the F-22 fleet is GROUNDED due to maintenance,...


Newsflash: You are treading into an area you know nothing about.

If I remove one fastener on a panel that have minimal exposure to aerodynamic forces, I have just grounded the aircraft based upon *CURRENT PEACETIME* standards.

Let us say that the base's logistics system ran out of that fastener. Now the aircraft is grounded for as long as it takes for the manufacturer to make that fastener and ship to the USAF. For the aircraft, no mission critical systems are affected.

Now check this out...







Make no mistake about the image above. If there is a national emergency, that one fastener would not prevent the base from launching that aircraft.

When I was active duty, I briefly taught Aircraft Battle Damage Repairs (ABDR)...

https://www.hill.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1856622/ingenuity-under-pressure/

On the F-111 with its mechanical flight controls system, I can use a broomstick and aluminum from a six pack of soda to replace a push-pull rod and authorized the jet for another mission.

You think I made up the flight control push-pull rod?

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bu...-systems/push-pull-tube-control-installations

I would empty the liquid from the cans, use a snip to shape the aluminum, cut the broomstick to length, then wrap the aluminum around the broomstick for strength. _Voila_, this battle damaged F-111 can fly the next mission.

Peacetime safety standards are not the same as wartime needs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> Go see how many of those 2700 aircraft are flight worthy. I love how people claim RUSSIA and China planes are old and broken down, but suddenly every US plane is fresh off the assembly line or gets renovated every year.
> 
> Newsflash: Most of the F-22 fleet is GROUNDED due to maintenance, hell tens of them got damaged in a hurricane because they couldn’t be flown out. The wear and tear of US airforce planes is real and just like it’s peers. So no US doesn’t have 2700 combat ready planes.
> 
> And getting those planes into the region of war (China sea or Russia border) takes months if not over a year to do so. I guess China and Russia will just sit there in the meantime?
> 
> A single aircraft carrier being sunk/severely damaged takes 100-200 high combat ready planes off the table. Military air bases in the region will be struck with cluster BMs.
> 
> You forget if US goes to war with China or Russia those countries are on the defensive and have homefield advantage. While US is on the offensive having to bring its toys from far away to the battlefield. Against 3rd rate militaries that’s fine, but against Russia or China that transportation will be exposed.



And most Russian aircraft are old Soviet jets-more than 35 years old. Poorly maintained with poorly trained pilots (compared to USA). 

The truth is that 175 US F-22s can destroy Russian air force of 850 old Soviet 4th generation jets.

Taking planes to the region of war takes weeks (unlike bringing in ground force). And US has most powerful military logistics in the world.

Of course war with Russian will result in losses to US air force. But the truth is that if not nuclear weapons, Russia will be smashed in the event of military collision with USA.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> On the F-111 with its mechanical flight controls system, I can use a broomstick and aluminum from a six pack of soda to replace a push-pull rod and authorized the jet for another mission.
> 
> You think I made up the flight control push-pull rod?
> 
> https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bu...-systems/push-pull-tube-control-installations
> 
> I would empty the liquid from the cans, use a snip to shape the aluminum, cut the broomstick to length, then wrap the aluminum around the broomstick for strength. _Voila_, this battle damaged F-111 can fly the next mission.
> 
> Peacetime safety standards are not the same as wartime needs.


 Only if you knew how many times we did such things.


----------



## PeeD

VEVAK said:


> I believe Iran should be developing 2 types SHORAD systems one mobile and the other fixed and the fixed version need to be designed specifically for each area based on the needs and terrain of each area and for a fixed version for our purposes since we are capable of building MALE UAV's at an affordable price and we have a rather large country with a lot of mountains and at the same time lack an Air Force as large as and as technologically advanced as our current enemies and until we can upgrade our own Air Force with highly capable domestically produced fighters I would much preferer a fleet of UAV's over a single AEW as my Air Asset backing up a large number lower cost optical sensors on the ground spread across an area + a handful of higher end radars sensors placed on towers with high speed and secure com's gear networking and sensor fusing all the data plus other data coming in from other near by air defense equipment into one SHORAD command center that will be acting as not only the last line of Defense but likely the MAIN line of defense against Cruise Missiles and other aircraft deployed projectiles.



Many small UAV based AEW asset can also be replaced by one aerostat AEW asset. Pro for the UAVs is that they can be used for offensive air campaigns, pro for aerostat is low operation cost and persistent coverage.

There is one approach the IRGC seems to follow on SHORADs, with the Tor based Oghab Iran will get the most cost effective electronically scanned SHORAD system in the world.

If the IRGC also uses the Oghab, it can make use of its advanced radar system to not only simplify the missile interceptor but also: develop guided AAA projectiles.
Connect one of the new truck mountet Sarir 100mm guns to each Oghab system in the battery as AAA slaved component and feed the projectile with command radio data from the Oghab PESA radar. That would mean that this guided projectile just needs a antenna at its rear to receive data, no seeker, no IMU, just a actuator steering system.
The 100mm caliber is both large enough to pack it in (Russians are doing it with 57mm) and has enough fragmentation performance to kill a large target with a single shot.
Range a coverage performance can be improved to 6-8km, increasing engagement cycle.
The elegance of this system would be: No booster propulsion system, no guidance system inside the projectile.
Cost drivers would only be high-g rated mechanical and electrical components.

Imagine a Tor/Oghab system connected to two Sarir 100mm trucks with 2 x 8 ready to fire guided rounds. 9th Day missile with 15km instead of Tor-M1 10km and 16 instead of 8 rounds. 4 guidance channels and multiply all by four for a whole Oghab battery.
This would be a highly cost effective SHORAD system that could reliably protect against the whole spectrum of atmospheric, non-hypersonic threats. Protect Ghadir radars, BMEW radars, OTH radars, aerostat radars and whole cities.

Btw. each TOR-M1 system costed Iran $ 20-25m, let see how much the Oghab will.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> Newsflash: You are treading into an area you know nothing about.
> 
> If I remove one fastener on a panel that have minimal exposure to aerodynamic forces, I have just grounded the aircraft based upon *CURRENT PEACETIME* standards.
> 
> Let us say that the base's logistics system ran out of that fastener. Now the aircraft is grounded for as long as it takes for the manufacturer to make that fastener and ship to the USAF. For the aircraft, no mission critical systems are affected.
> 
> Now check this out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make no mistake about the image above. If there is a national emergency, that one fastener would not prevent the base from launching that aircraft.
> 
> When I was active duty, I briefly taught Aircraft Battle Damage Repairs (ABDR)...
> 
> https://www.hill.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1856622/ingenuity-under-pressure/
> 
> On the F-111 with its mechanical flight controls system, I can use a broomstick and aluminum from a six pack of soda to replace a push-pull rod and authorized the jet for another mission.
> 
> You think I made up the flight control push-pull rod?
> 
> https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bu...-systems/push-pull-tube-control-installations
> 
> I would empty the liquid from the cans, use a snip to shape the aluminum, cut the broomstick to length, then wrap the aluminum around the broomstick for strength. _Voila_, this battle damaged F-111 can fly the next mission.
> 
> Peacetime safety standards are not the same as wartime needs.



Newsflash: Your post really had nothing to do with what I just said, but was another walk down memory lane of your career. Thank you for that, as I needed another daily reminder you flew an F-111 or worked on one or saw one on tv.

My point was F-22 fleet was grounded, hurricane was coming. Your baloney fastener story doesn’t hold water here, as I am sure the military would care more about getting a $200 million dollar aircraft to safety than stupid “peace time rules”. Most of that fleet stationed did not/could escape and was damaged some weren’t even secured down properly.

So yes peacetime and wartime is different. If US throws it’s not flight worthy aircraft into the air then the same point holds more true your enemy will as well. So you can’t have it both ways. Either both fleets have planes that aren’t flight worthy or both fleets will throw them in the air come hell or high water.

Sure if your flying a MIG designed to take a beating you could attempt to fly it in non ideal condition. But an f-22 that requires extensive maintenance per sortie or an F-35 with all their technological prowess flying at a disadvantage into the most guarded air defenses of the world (Russia or China) is a reciepe for disaster. But then again if it’s WW3 you gotta do what you gotta do.

Nonetheless this point is mute, even 1000 planes would require months/year of work to move and secure necessary support equipment and personnel along with proper air defenses to protect them against enemy counter strike.

So whatever numbers are on paper are just that. And I have explained why these dumb WW3 scenarios mean nothing and are a waste of internet space many times before. 

For now US military won’t even pick a fight with Iran, let alone China or Russia. But please do continue spending on these amazing money pit projects like the littoral combat ship, the Zumwalts, and Who could forget the RAH-66. 8 billion and not a single thing to show for it.

I doubt the US military will collapse before the empire itself collapses under the weight of its own hubris and nonsensical spending.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> Newsflash: Your post really had nothing to do with what I just said,...


It does. I proved you do not know what you are talking about.



TheImmortal said:


> My point was F-22 fleet was grounded,...


Anyone can say 'My point', even those who do not know what they are talking about. The hurricane was a one-off event. The 'point' that you were trying to make was that the F-22 seems to be 'grounded' for broad maintenance reasons. We do not know why those F-22s could not be evacuated. You would rather jump to conclusions. But that would be the norm for you. The ignorant needs to put on a facade.



TheImmortal said:


> So yes peacetime and wartime is different. *If US throws it’s not flight worthy aircraft into the air* then the same point holds more true your enemy will as well. So you can’t have it both ways. Either both fleets have planes that aren’t flight worthy or both fleets will throw them in the air come hell or high water.


There you go. What do you know of what is 'flight worthy'? Nothing. The F-22 flew with peeling coating. Does that mean the jet was not flight worthy? I know I am repeating myself but -- you do not know what you are talking about.



TheImmortal said:


> And I have explained...


You have 'explained' nothing because you know nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

gambit said:


> We do not know why those F-22s could not be evacuated. You would rather jump to conclusions.
> 
> There you go. What do you know of what is 'flight worthy'? Nothing. The F-22 flew with peeling coating. Does that mean the jet was not flight worthy? I know I am repeating myself but -- you do not know what you are talking about.



Uh we do know why they weren’t evacuated. So please stop talking grunt.

“As Tyler Rogoway has explained at _The Drive, _the considerable maintenance and support required for each F-22 airframe meant that a complete evacuation was implausible. Apart from the 33 fighters that were sent to Ohio, the remainder may have been in various states of hardware and software maintenance, making it impossible for them to fly away prior to the hurricane’s landfall.

The F-22 Raptor has a reputation for needing considerable maintenance and repair per flight hour. The U.S. Air Force found earlier this year that “less than half [of all F-22s] are mission-capable” at any given time.”

https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/nea...as-damaged-or-destroyed-in-hurricane-michael/

"As you finalize damage assessments of the aircraft that endured Hurricane Michael, I urge you to begin implementation of the framework laid out by Secretary Mattis starting with all Tyndall AFB fighter aircraft... Additionally, I ask you waste no time or effort in providing a supplemental funding request to Congress to repair and restore these aircraft to mission capable status as soon as possible... As Hurricane Michael approached the Florida panhandle, 31 percent of F-22 aircraft at Tyndall Air Force Base were designated non-mission capable (NMC) and were sheltered in place."

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ehind-at-tyndall-afb-during-hurricane-michael


Obviously “NMC” means that even with a major hurricane bearing straight down with ability to cause hundreds of millions in damages, they weren’t worthy to be flown to safety.

Plus you completely missed the argument m about the “flight worthy” aspect of my post and started obsessing over the definition of the word flight worthy.

So I will dumb it down for you:

If you say all 2700 combat aircraft of the USAF will be used in an all out war IRREGARDLESS of ‘condition or state’ then the SAME applies to your enemy. You cant sit there and say oh Russia has xxxx amount of fighters but only xxxx are “flight worthy”. Can’t have it both ways.

But nice job not arguing that point and instead going off on a tangent about the definition of “flight worthy”. How about “irregardless of condition” is that broad enough for you so you don’t start crying?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

TheImmortal said:


> So I will dumb it down for you:


No, I will dumb it down for you...

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-u...ndalls-raptors-ride-out-hurricane-michae.html
_While most of Tyndall’s F-22s departed to other bases before the hurricane hit, 17 Raptors were left to ride out the storm. The remaining Raptors were either undergoing *planned maintenance* or could not be safely launched on very short-notice._

See the highlighted? There are two types of 'planned maintenance': Phase and Depot.

https://www.army.mil/article/27690/phase_maintenance_ensures_aircrafts_remain_battle_ready

https://www.dau.edu/acquipedia/pages/articledetails.aspx#!504

Phase maintenance is done at the unit level. Depot maintenance is done at the manufacturer's or equivalent approved level.

With phase maintenance, the jet is put into a hangar and personnel begins to remove panels to gain access to underlying components. All components: avionics, life support, and environmental, and engine(s) are removed. For an F-16, a 'non-stealth' fighter, the strip down process takes about 2 days, then inspection another two days, reassembly takes another 2-3 days, for an average phase hangar time of about one week, give or take one day.

With depot maintenance, the aircraft, civilian or military, is actually flown off to the manufacturer or an equivalent approved facility. The F-22's depot level facility is at Hill AFB, Utah. Much more inland and in a valley. Not much hurricane there. At the depot level, the aircraft is literally stripped down to the bare airframe. Time can be up to 60 days, depending on airframe.

So for what happened at Tyndall, those F-22s that were abandoned could not have been flown out, not because of unplanned extensive maintenance but because of *SCHEDULED* maintenance. For a hurrevac, I do not need radar to fly. The F-16s in the Thunderbirds do not have radars and guns to fly. So for a hurrevac, as long as the jet is flyable under combat allowed criteria, it would fly if there is a pilot available.

The problem with ignorant and inexperience but arrogant people like you is that you do not understand the proper contexts of the language involved. The F-22 requires extensive maintenance? What does it mean in your ignorant interpretation of the word? Does it mean the jet breaks something every time it flies? Newsflash for you, O Ignorant One, give me one hour and I can write up anything that would make a jet Code Three: Grounded.

You never heard of the phrase 'Code Three'? How about 'Code One'?

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/code-one.html

In aviation, an aircraft that is 'Code One' after a flight is considered zero defects (ZD) and readied for the next day's sortie list. It does not mean the aircraft is maintenance free. Various inspections and fluid samples must be taken and each action grounded the jet. You removed a panel to take oil sample? Grounded. You unlocked the LOX bottle to refill? Grounded. But overall, the jet is considered Code One.

The F-22 requires 'extensive' maintenance is because work is required to preserve its low radar observability features, not because the jet breaks some things every time it flies. Every time a panel is opened and closed, measurement must be taken to see if its 'stealth' was raised above a certain level, so until that is done, the jet is grounded. Not because something serious was broken. For a hurrevac, that would be unnecessary and the jet would have been flown off. It would require actual time served in the air force for you to understand what I am talking about.

But the bottom line is that you do not know WTF you are talking about and is blowing thru your anus.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Many small UAV based AEW asset can also be replaced by one aerostat AEW asset. Pro for the UAVs is that they can be used for offensive air campaigns, pro for aerostat is low operation cost and persistent coverage.
> 
> There is one approach the IRGC seems to follow on SHORADs, with the Tor based Oghab Iran will get the most cost effective electronically scanned SHORAD system in the world.
> 
> If the IRGC also uses the Oghab, it can make use of its advanced radar system to not only simplify the missile interceptor but also: develop guided AAA projectiles.
> Connect one of the new truck mountet Sarir 100mm guns to each Oghab system in the battery as AAA slaved component and feed the projectile with command radio data from the Oghab PESA radar. That would mean that this guided projectile just needs a antenna at its rear to receive data, no seeker, no IMU, just a actuator steering system.
> The 100mm caliber is both large enough to pack it in (Russians are doing it with 57mm) and has enough fragmentation performance to kill a large target with a single shot.
> Range a coverage performance can be improved to 6-8km, increasing engagement cycle.
> The elegance of this system would be: No booster propulsion system, no guidance system inside the projectile.
> Cost drivers would only be high-g rated mechanical and electrical components.
> 
> Imagine a Tor/Oghab system connected to two Sarir 100mm trucks with 2 x 8 ready to fire guided rounds. 9th Day missile with 15km instead of Tor-M1 10km and 16 instead of 8 rounds. 4 guidance channels and multiply all by four for a whole Oghab battery.
> This would be a highly cost effective SHORAD system that could reliably protect against the whole spectrum of atmospheric, non-hypersonic threats. Protect Ghadir radars, BMEW radars, OTH radars, aerostat radars and whole cities.
> 
> Btw. each TOR-M1 system costed Iran $ 20-25m, let see how much the Oghab will.



Yes the exact opposite is also true multiple AEW UAV assets can be replaced by a single large AEW Aircraft however, if you do not possess the type of Air Force needed to be able to properly escort and protect that single asset & the large runway you'll need to take off from which do you think will have far greater survivability in an actual war against an adversary that possess far superior Air Force?

Of course preferably it's shouldn't be a matter of either or and Iran should have both but if you want to operate a small fleet of larger AEW then you'll also need a fleet of Air Superiority fighters & in the future Air Superiority UCAV's to protect them. Also you have to realize that a fleet of a handful of large AEW's aircraft will be high priority targets and a country like the U.S. will be able to use handful of more expensive hypersonic weapons to take them out while they are still on the ground at far greater ranges.
And no doubt the type of operations you'll be using them for(Offensive, Defensive,....) will no doubt dictate which is the more preferable option a single faster and larger aircraft with far greater range in terms of sensor capability or a fleet of smaller and slower AEW UAV assets with far less senor capability. But that factor simply can't exclude the Air assets you'll need to protect a larger more expensive AEW asset.


As for mounting AAA on top of relatively expensive truck makes them more mobile but at the same time it also makes them easier targets. Simply put if the American were going to bother with hitting every AAA in Iran then they'd run out of cruise missile long before we ran out of military assets so I personally don't see the need to build a large force of larger caliber mobile AAA systems. Yes a small specific amount for specific battlefield operation protecting mobile unites however, I still believe that vast majority of our AAA systems from the Samavat on up to the 100mm Saeer should be towed with multiple AAA systems networked, sensor fused & remotely operated with assigned fixed location protecting a site. And for mobile AAA I'm more favorable to smaller caliber shorter barrel systems capable of greater accuracy and speed at shorter engagement ranges. 

In terms of cost of the Oghab system let's hope it's not only affordable but it can be mass produced to be mass deployed. 
That said when it comes to military budget on domestic weapons accusation I personally believe as long as that money is being spent on more sophisticated defense equipment & the weapon are 100% produced in country that's from materials used in it's construction to every little component then we can even afford to outspend the Saudis because if it's truly 100% domestic then that money will not only be recycled into the economy and create jobs but will also help develop more advanced infrastructure around it with no foreign currency required that will rather quickly trickle down to the civilian sector. 
Unfortunately in Iran it's always the civilian sector that messes things up just look at Iran Khodro do you honestly think if the IRGC was in total control of that company they'd be in the mess they are in today? Especially with all the money that company has made and is capable of making.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> No, I will dumb it down for you...
> 
> https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-u...ndalls-raptors-ride-out-hurricane-michae.html
> _While most of Tyndall’s F-22s departed to other bases before the hurricane hit, 17 Raptors were left to ride out the storm. The remaining Raptors were either undergoing *planned maintenance* or could not be safely launched on very short-notice._
> 
> See the highlighted? There are two types of 'planned maintenance': Phase and Depot.
> 
> https://www.army.mil/article/27690/phase_maintenance_ensures_aircrafts_remain_battle_ready
> 
> https://www.dau.edu/acquipedia/pages/articledetails.aspx#!504
> 
> Phase maintenance is done at the unit level. Depot maintenance is done at the manufacturer's or equivalent approved level.
> 
> With phase maintenance, the jet is put into a hangar and personnel begins to remove panels to gain access to underlying components. All components: avionics, life support, and environmental, and engine(s) are removed. For an F-16, a 'non-stealth' fighter, the strip down process takes about 2 days, then inspection another two days, reassembly takes another 2-3 days, for an average phase hangar time of about one week, give or take one day.
> 
> With depot maintenance, the aircraft, civilian or military, is actually flown off to the manufacturer or an equivalent approved facility. The F-22's depot level facility is at Hill AFB, Utah. Much more inland and in a valley. Not much hurricane there. At the depot level, the aircraft is literally stripped down to the bare airframe. Time can be up to 60 days, depending on airframe.
> 
> So for what happened at Tyndall, those F-22s that were abandoned could not have been flown out, not because of unplanned extensive maintenance but because of *SCHEDULED* maintenance. For a hurrevac, I do not need radar to fly. The F-16s in the Thunderbirds do not have radars and guns to fly. So for a hurrevac, as long as the jet is flyable under combat allowed criteria, it would fly if there is a pilot available.
> 
> The problem with ignorant and inexperience but arrogant people like you is that you do not understand the proper contexts of the language involved. The F-22 requires extensive maintenance? What does it mean in your ignorant interpretation of the word? Does it mean the jet breaks something every time it flies? Newsflash for you, O Ignorant One, give me one hour and I can write up anything that would make a jet Code Three: Grounded.
> 
> You never heard of the phrase 'Code Three'? How about 'Code One'?
> 
> https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/code-one.html
> 
> In aviation, an aircraft that is 'Code One' after a flight is considered zero defects (ZD) and readied for the next day's sortie list. It does not mean the aircraft is maintenance free. Various inspections and fluid samples must be taken and each action grounded the jet. You removed a panel to take oil sample? Grounded. You unlocked the LOX bottle to refill? Grounded. But overall, the jet is considered Code One.
> 
> The F-22 requires 'extensive' maintenance is because work is required to preserve its low radar observability features, not because the jet breaks some things every time it flies. Every time a panel is opened and closed, measurement must be taken to see if its 'stealth' was raised above a certain level, so until that is done, the jet is grounded. Not because something serious was broken. For a hurrevac, that would be unnecessary and the jet would have been flown off. It would require actual time served in the air force for you to understand what I am talking about.
> 
> But the bottom line is that you do not know WTF you are talking about and is blowing thru your anus.



F-22 Ti casting style Air Frame and limited production numbers makes extensive maintenance especially when it's Air Frame related extremely time consuming & rather difficult. However, at the end of the day the F-22 remains THE MOST advanced Air Superiority Fighter ever produced on the planet & currently there isn't a single produced fighter jet to this day that could go head to head against the F-22 and the fact that it went into production 2 decades ago say's a lot. The combo of super cruise(high speed, high endurance) , Stealth(with internal weapons bay & unmatched in terms of RCS compared to size) & 2D TVC on a compact highly maneuverable and extremely hard to detect airframe makes it the most fearsome platform on the planet that can always be upgraded through time with modern avionics, sensors,..... 
So the real question is after producing an engineering marvel like the F-22 platform, after 2 decades later, rather than improving on the near perfection that is the F-22 how could you (The U.S.) go o so very wrong with the utter turkey of a platform that is the F-35? And I'm talking strictly platform NOT sensors, avionics,.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> So the real question is after producing an engineering marvel like the F-22 platform, after 2 decades later, rather than improving on the near perfection that is the F-22 how could you (The U.S.) go o so very wrong with the utter turkey of a platform that is the F-35? And I'm talking strictly platform NOT sensors, avionics,.....


Turkey of a platform? Here we go again...

First, am going to be a dick about this and ask what contribution to aviation have Iran gave for you to call the F-35 a 'turkey'? Sure as the sky is blue that the sentiment *DID NOT* came from experience, either personal or national.

Second, all the criticisms leveled at the F-35 have been laid to rest. Everything from it supposedly cannot maneuver 9g to it burning up ship decks.

Your usage of the word 'platform' is meaningless. It is too generic. Try again and try to be more specific. And if you bring up Pierre Sprey, I know you are out of touch.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

>>>>>>> However, at the end of the day the F-22 remains THE MOST advanced Air Superiority Fighter ever produced on the planet & currently there isn't a single produced fighter jet to this day that could go head to head against the F-22 <<<<<<<

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Turkey of a platform? Here we go again...
> 
> First, am going to be a dick about this and ask what contribution to aviation have Iran gave for you to call the F-35 a 'turkey'? Sure as the sky is blue that the sentiment *DID NOT* came from experience, either personal or national.
> 
> Second, all the criticisms leveled at the F-35 have been laid to rest. Everything from it supposedly cannot maneuver 9g to it burning up ship decks.
> 
> Your usage of the word 'platform' is meaningless. It is too generic. Try again and try to be more specific. And if you bring up Pierre Sprey, I know you are out of touch.



Really? You wanna excuse the absurdity of the F-35 with the fact that Iran's modern Defense industry didn't really start till nearly a century after the U.S.! That's your excuse? 

In terms of platform the F-35B may be an improvement on the Harrier so I don't have much to say about that however as a replacement to take over most of the U.S. fleet it is a platform that is SLOWER & Less Maneuverable then an F-16 (armed for air combat with 2x AiM-9 & 2x AiM-120) let alone most of it's +4th gen adversaries and competitors like the Su-35, MiG-35, Typhoon,.... let alone future 5th gen's like the Su-57 that can super cruise faster than the F-35's max speed which are the future adversaries that it would be facing and it's so called stealth capabilities where again challenged and made out to be a joke by a dinky little German Radar in Germany just recently so it would seem all the F-35 is left with is it's sensor superiority and advanced radar which is something that can be matched and out matched through future upgrades to previously mentioned platforms. And if the F-35 truly lacks the proper stealth and clearly lacks the proper maneuvering capabilities to fend off incoming SAM's and at the same time does NOT possess the speed and maneuverability to fend off and run away from modern interceptors add to an absurdly high price tag is what makes it a turkey of platform whos total reliance is on it's sensor superiority and the hope that a single scratch doesn't wipe out the aircraft stealth capabilities when in stealth mode. 

And since you brought Iran into this. As I mentioned the U.S. Defense industry is nearly 100 year's older than Iran's (and I'm talking modern weapons post industrial steel) and the main reason for that is due to one corrupt Iranian King after another over half a millennia that where either fooled by foreigners or allowed them to dictate our policies! And that's why once Iran had it's 1st Democracy the Brits and the U.S. did all they could to overthrow it and so they did and now that we have our 1st Republic you are still at it again and have been at it for 4 decades! 

Do you understand that under the previous Iranian Monarchy (Phalavi's the U.S. #1 regional so called ally) Iran had a leadership that literally begged for 40 years to get their so called western allies to sell Iran a single industrial Steel Mill? We had morons as leaders that chose begging their masters for over 4 decades to buy a freaking steel mill over actually doing the work with less money to build one themselves. And we are not talking rocket science here rather industrializing a process that's been done to build knifes and swords for centuries and something the Germans industrialized what in 18th century? 


And the filed of Aviation is ~ a century old technology that Iran only really started getting into little over 30 years ago which puts us behind 80 years in terms of overall experience and over 50 years behind the U.S. in terms of various infrastructural requirements and in some areas less and some areas maybe even more. However now unlike before where we had a leaders that begged to buy steel mills we have a leadership that is attempting to close that gap domestically and the reason the progress appears slower in Iran than countries like S.Korea or Israel is because unlike them due to sanctions no one is handing us the engine and other vital parts, materials & components. And today due to proper leadership those sanctions have failed to persuade Iran from not pursuing those fields but rather forced us to do the work ourselves and that's why it's taken us longer. However due to those very sanctions the experience, tools, and infrastructure gained puts us a step ahead of countries that only appear ahead of Iran because they got to buy the engines, buy the high end composites, rent out foreign testing facilities to test their landing gears and other vital parts, buy and import the sensors, avionics,..... 
So as long as Iran keeps putting in the work domestically in the grand scheme of history that 50 years gap the U.S. has in some areas of infrastructure will slowly dissipate but that's something that will take time and it's not something that will happen today, tomorrow or even in the next 3 decades but it will happen and in the grand scheme of history this little gap will mean nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*Talash battery deployed in Siraf air defense site near Asaluyeh*














*in larger scale satellite image there is a Kavosh early warning radar in that air defense site*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Really? You wanna excuse the absurdity of the F-35 with the fact that Iran's modern Defense industry didn't really start till nearly a century after the U.S.! That's your excuse?


Excuse? No, it is a challenge.

A military aircraft is a national asset. It requires literally everything a country is capable of producing. What make you think your criticisms of the F-35 are valid when the best your Iran have done is modified the F-5's basic platform? Why modified the vertical stabs? Regardless of platform, any jet will benefit the most from fly-by-wire upgrade, so is that ripoff of an F-5 have a fly-by-wire flight control system or not?

What I see in your criticisms of the F-35 are rehashed Pierre Sprey, which I expected coming. Using the language of the climate change believers, the science is settled, the F-35 won.



VEVAK said:


> ...made out to be a joke by a dinky little German Radar in Germany...


You mean this explanation by me...???

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/expe...ealth-jet-for-100-miles.637873/#post-11807075





VEVAK said:


> ...just recently so it would seem all the F-35 is left with is it's sensor superiority and advanced radar which is something that can be matched and out matched through future upgrades to previously mentioned platforms.


Unless and until your Iran can get those upgraded platforms, your criticisms of the F-35 are meaningless, assuming those other platforms can be upgraded in the first place.



VEVAK said:


> And if the F-35 truly lacks the proper stealth...


What does that -- proper stealth -- mean? Ignorant people like you toss out these terms without knowing their true contexts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Excuse? No, it is a challenge.
> 
> A military aircraft is a national asset. It requires literally everything a country is capable of producing. What make you think your criticisms of the F-35 are valid when the best your Iran have done is modified the F-5's basic platform? Why modified the vertical stabs? Regardless of platform, any jet will benefit the most from fly-by-wire upgrade, so is that ripoff of an F-5 have a fly-by-wire flight control system or not?
> 
> What I see in your criticisms of the F-35 are rehashed Pierre Sprey, which I expected coming. Using the language of the climate change believers, the science is settled, the F-35 won.
> 
> 
> You mean this explanation by me...???
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/expe...ealth-jet-for-100-miles.637873/#post-11807075
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless and until your Iran can get those upgraded platforms, your criticisms of the F-35 are meaningless, assuming those other platforms can be upgraded in the first place.
> 
> 
> What does that -- proper stealth -- mean? Ignorant people like you toss out these terms without knowing their true contexts.



My intention isn't to diss American tech as I said the F-22 is an engineering marvel and remains unmatched to this very day however you have yet to challenge any of the real facts about the F-35A & if we put it's stealth issues aside the aircraft is still: 
1.An overpriced single engine fighter 
2.It has a limited payload capacity in stealth mode.
3.The Platform is slower then most of it's adversaries. (Speed is life, as a pilot you should know that.) 
4.It's less maneuverable then most of it's adversaries. 

And by comparison Typhoon, Rafale, MiG-35, Su-35,... are all faster and more maneuverable which gives them the upper hand in catching or running from an F-35 and they are all more capable at dodging incoming missile due to greater maneuverability & Speed.

As for the F-35's advantages they are all mainly electronics & software related which in general are easier to upgrade than the actual platform it's self.​
I've spoken with you enough times to not have to explain my self over every little detail every single time because we both know that technically there is no such thing as a truly stealth fighter jet (At least not one that's known) we simply have low RCS that makes them harder to detect the further out they are. Yes back in the day stealth aircrafts who's signature was smaller than a birds would get filtered out as clutter which made them appear invisible to radars but those days are long gone! 
Today if your RCS (From all sides) is any larger than a 3X3inch Rubik's cube and/or if small standard scratches made by small dust particles during flight causes you to further lose your front angle low RCS characteristics ( So far the F-35 canopy issues is one example) then in layman's terms I'd say the platform doesn't have proper or sufficient stealth.

Stop using Iran as an excuse! Just look up the date of when Iran got it's 1st industrial steel plant as appose to the date the U.S. started it's 1st industrial steel plant. Because at the end of the day all the advancements U.S. has today over Iran in terms of military hardware is directly tide into the infrastructure the U.S. has been able to build and mass over time. Because today even if Iran was to create a detailed design of a fighter jet superior to anything the U.S. has in stock, the actual infrastructure needed to build the thing simply does NOT exist yet and until it does how could there actually be a challenge??? So yea it's an excuse!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Heres a pic of the sa6 and taer 1 semi mobile launchers

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> ...however you have yet to challenge any of the real facts about the F-35A & if we put it's stealth issues aside the aircraft is still:
> 1.An overpriced single engine fighter​



Overpriced compared to what and under what criteria?



VEVAK said:


> 2.It has a limited payload capacity in stealth mode.


That is the laws of physics. Real physics. Not Iranian physics. When Iran truly entered the 'stealth' arena, you can talk.



VEVAK said:


> 3.The Platform is slower then most of it's adversaries. (Speed is life, as a pilot you should know that.)


Two things I learned when I was active duty:

- In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

- Slow and low, you go. Fast and high, you die.

The second rule applies even to this day. When they said 'speed is life', they do not mean you fly at maximum all the time. What they really mean is acceleration, which is not the same as constant velocity. And when you are in a turn, you lose speed, so if your jet can provide that acceleration to cancel out that loss of *AND* gain at the same time, you increase your odds of survival. The bottom line is that when it comes to aviation, nothing is standalone. Everything works in relation and concert with each other. At certain situations, speed works, at others, not. But of course, if only you had served and/or take time to learn in-depth, you would have known that.




VEVAK said:


> 4.It's less maneuverable then most of it's adversaries.


BS. The F-35 is rated for 9g, the human limit.

But let us stay with that, shall we? Iran's pride is the F-14, correct? When I was on the F-111, we actually kept up with the F-14. The F-111 was more agile than most people thought. In fact, the F-14 and F-111 shares many DNA, notably its variable geometry wings.

The F-35 is not evolutionary like its adversaries. It is *REVOLUTIONARY*. Other countries *WILL* learn the hard way -- in exercises -- that what they got ain't gonna cut it. When I can kill you from afar without you knowing when and where, there is no need to brag about my maneuverability.



VEVAK said:


> I've spoken with you enough times to not have to explain my self over every little detail every single time because we both know that technically there is no such thing as a truly stealth fighter jet (At least not one that's known) we simply have low RCS that makes them harder to detect the further out they are.


I understand low radar observability better than you. I never said 'truly stealth fighter' or even implied such.



VEVAK said:


> Yes back in the day stealth aircrafts who's signature was smaller than a birds would get filtered out as clutter which made them appear invisible to radars but those days are long gone!


Really? Then you better tell the China and the Russians that. Come to think of it, better tell the Iranians as well about that supposedly 'stealth' fighter they tried to convinced the world they are capable of building.​

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> Heres a pic of the sa6 and taer 1 semi mobile launchers


And here is the optical fire control systems for the sa6 launcher












Heres the opposite side of the sa6 semi mobile launcher showing the large hatch for the operators compartment next to the truck cab.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> Overpriced compared to what and under what criteria?
> 
> 
> That is the laws of physics. Real physics. Not Iranian physics. When Iran truly entered the 'stealth' arena, you can talk.​




Based on the criteria of not wasting your money on stocking up a large fleet of these Aircrafts when there are so many better options and using cheaper stealth UCAV's and cruise missiles to fill gap of the F-35's stealth capabilities when it comes to strikes 



gambit said:


> Two things I learned when I was active duty:
> 
> - In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.





gambit said:


> - Slow and low, you go. Fast and high, you die.
> 
> The second rule applies even to this day. When they said 'speed is life', they do not mean you fly at maximum all the time. What they really mean is acceleration, which is not the same as constant velocity. And when you are in a turn, you lose speed, so if your jet can provide that acceleration to cancel out that loss of *AND* gain at the same time, you increase your odds of survival. The bottom line is that when it comes to aviation, nothing is standalone. Everything works in relation and concert with each other. At certain situations, speed works, at others, not. But of course, if only you had served and/or take time to learn in-depth, you would have known that.




I've told you this before, I along with most Iranians my age have served for it was NOT mandatory for us! 

As for cheating in war if your attempting to hint at the fact that selling the F-35 to other countries is an attempt at cheating then I totally agree! Having others purchase the F-35 is much like having a Trojan horse/Spy inside their Airforce. 

As for flying tactics from what I know Americans pilots usually fly at higher altitude and are trained to take the high ground in air combat and I'm guessing that's why the F-35's IRST is located underneath the nose unlike your Russian counterparts that usually go low and that's why they place their IRST over the nose.
Aircrafts built to fly low either put their optical solution at the tip of the nose like the Su-25 or like the A-10 the optical/Laser solution is put on a pod that extends low enough beneath the aircraft to ensure that the tip of the nose does not restrict your field of view when flying at low altitudes.

The Q-313 was also designed to fly low and slow and in many ways it's far better suited to do so than the F-35A however it still remain a far worse turkey of a design than the F-35 (It's like taking the flaws of the F-35A and multiplying them by 1000 and at least the F-35 has it's sensors to fall back on)  





gambit said:


> BS. The F-35 is rated for 9g, the human limit.
> 
> But let us stay with that, shall we? Iran's pride is the F-14, correct? When I was on the F-111, we actually kept up with the F-14. The F-111 was more agile than most people thought. In fact, the F-14 and F-111 shares many DNA, notably its variable geometry wings.



An Aircraft's max G's simply state it's structural integrity at high G's and NOT it's maneuvering capabilities! It's sad that I have to repeat that to you! 

And yes compared to today's fighter the F-14 is not a highly maneuverable aircraft however for it's time and compared to it's massive "size" it was still highly maneuverable fighter and of course it couldn't turn as good as an F-5 or other smaller aircrafts however it still had it's speed to fall back on and its thrust and wing design allowed it to perform a few maneuvers that gave them an edge over more maneuverable fighter jets but the F-35 does not have those characteristics 



gambit said:


> The F-35 is not evolutionary like its adversaries. It is *REVOLUTIONARY*. Other countries *WILL* learn the hard way -- in exercises -- that what they got ain't gonna cut it. When I can kill you from afar without you knowing when and where, there is no need to brag about my maneuverability.



Yea like removing the gun for radar guided missiles on fighter jets was revolutionary!!! O wait I forget that so called revolutionary move resulted in the U.S. fearing the removal of the gun to this very day! So guess some ppl never learn! 



gambit said:


> I understand low radar observability better than you. I never said 'truly stealth fighter' or even implied such.



If you truly understood it then what's up with your next statement? 


gambit said:


> Really? Then you better tell the China and the Russians that. Come to think of it, better tell the Iranians as well about that supposedly 'stealth' fighter they tried to convinced the world they are capable of building.



Again what part of my statement do you think was untrue? Back in the day stealth had far greater meaning because radars filtered them out as natural clutter where as today it more a matter of range of detection! That doesn't mean it's not useful however unlike a few decades ago it's not full on stealth.


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> Based on the criteria of not wasting your money on stocking up a large fleet of these Aircrafts when there are so many better options and using cheaper stealth UCAV's and cruise missiles to fill gap of the F-35's stealth capabilities when it comes to strikes


What has Iran contributed to military aviation regarding strategic and tactical doctrines to emboldened you to criticize US in those arenas?



VEVAK said:


> I've told you this before, I along with most Iranians my age have served...





VEVAK said:


> As for cheating in war if your attempting to hint at the fact that selling the F-35 to other countries is an attempt at cheating then I totally agree! Having others purchase the F-35 is much like having a Trojan horse/Spy inside their Airforce.


Here is what I said again...

- In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

The advice was meant for air combat, not for inter-state relations.

In air combat, any advantage you have is a rule. Simply put, no fighter is perfect. Each fighter have strengths and weaknesses. If you have a longer radar range, keep the fight, and the kills, under that advantage. If you can out turn under a certain altitude, take the fight to that altitude. If you have superior acceleration, do not engage in a turning fight. This goes back to WW I, refined in tactics in WW II, and we tries to embed some of that logic and algorithm into the hardware today. An area that your Iran do not have expertise in.

The 'cheating' I was referring to was in trickery, deception, mislead, seduction, enhancement, basically, anything an air force can do outside of the individual fighters to put the enemy fighters into inferior postures. AWACS is cheating because the AWACS platform extends the battlespace vision and gives its fighters 'unnatural' advantage. The word 'unnatural' does not mean Mother Nature but in reference to the jet's designed-in features and capabilities. In-flight refueling is another form of 'cheating' because it extends the fighter's fuel capacity in another 'unnatural' way. These two capabilities enhanced US airpower to the point that we are essentially unchallenged anywhere we fly. Another form of 'cheating' is data links and sharing, not just between manned but also with unmanned platforms. People mocks US pilots for not wanting to fight without these assets but they are wrong. Foolishly wrong. Whatever you have you must take to the fight because this is war, not a boxing match with a trophy at the end.

What you said about 'cheating' revealed your ignorance and I do not blame you for that ignorance. You may have served but I doubt you served in any meaningful way beyond your two-yrs commitment. I already knew how to fly before I joined the USAF. Instead of spending my money on cars, I spent on flight lessons after school. You did not understand the context of what I posted because you have no relevant experience in military aviation.




VEVAK said:


> As for flying tactics from what I know Americans pilots usually fly at higher altitude and are trained to take the high ground in air combat and I'm guessing that's why the F-35's IRST is located underneath the nose unlike your Russian counterparts that usually go low and that's why they place their IRST over the nose.
> Aircrafts built to fly low either put their optical solution at the tip of the nose like the Su-25 or like the A-10 the optical/Laser solution is put on a pod that extends low enough beneath the aircraft to ensure that the tip of the nose does not restrict your field of view when flying at low altitudes.


You do not know what you are talking about. When I said this...

- Low and slow, you go. Fast and high, you die.

It does not specify exact altitude/airspeed combination for every situation. When I was on the F-111, we trained for low altitude terrain following (TF) flights at near Mach. But even so, flight planning often have the F-111 at above 10k in some situations and lower in others. The advice is meant for keeping a low flight profile after the lessons learned from the XB-70 program and the U-2 shoot down incident.

Again...You have no relevant military aviation experience and your Iran do not contribute to the arts and crafts of air warfare since the beginning of aviation in general, but here you are making pronouncements against a potential opponent who have been in the lead in aviation since the first flight.



VEVAK said:


> The Q-313 was also designed to fly low and slow and in many ways it's far better suited to do so than the F-35A however it still remain a far worse turkey of a design than the F-35 (It's like taking the flaws of the F-35A and multiplying them by 1000 and at least the F-35 has it's sensors to fall back on)


I have been reserved about the Q-313 out of respect for my fellow airmen, even for Iran, but now I will opine: The Q-313 is a fake.

Just about everything of the jet seems wrong for a manned platform. If I am proven wrong in the coming days, I have no problems with it. But I doubt Iran will be able to pull it off. In Iran, maybe for public consumption. But for experienced professionals, the Q-313 is a fraud. I wait for the day when I am proven wrong.



VEVAK said:


> An Aircraft's max G's simply state it's structural integrity at high G's and NOT it's maneuvering capabilities! It's sad that I have to repeat that to you!


And it is really sad for you that you think that just because you lifted that quote somewhere in the Internet, it make valid your criticism of the F-35. I know what 9g feels like. You do not.

https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-most-critical-test-180971734/

The F-35 have been flown by experienced pilots from partner countries and your maneuvering capabilities criticism are done for, as in no longer valid. It is sad for your critical thinking skills, or lack thereof, that you do not recognize how far behind you really are. If the F-35 is as inferior as you believes, the chorus of objections from our partners' pilots would have been obvious by now, instead, the jet increasingly received affirmation even over inevitable birthing pains of a new platform. And who has not experienced such?



VEVAK said:


> And yes compared to today's fighter the F-14 is not a highly maneuverable aircraft however for it's time and compared to it's massive "size" it was still highly maneuverable fighter and of course it couldn't turn as good as an F-5 or other smaller aircrafts however it still had it's speed to fall back on and its thrust and wing design allowed it to perform a few maneuvers that gave them an edge over more maneuverable fighter jets but the F-35 does not have those characteristics


I will go out on a limb and say this: The F-35s on the USS America *WILL* decimate Iran's F-14s without the F-35 pilots breaking 6gs.



VEVAK said:


> Yea like removing the gun for radar guided missiles on fighter jets was revolutionary!!! O wait I forget that so called revolutionary move resulted in the U.S. fearing the removal of the gun to this very day! So guess some ppl never learn!


Like I said earlier -- When your Iran contribute to military aviation, you can criticize what we do on our jets. When your F-14s starts dropping out of the sky from directions unknown you will realize how revolutionary the F-35 really is. 



VEVAK said:


> If you truly understood it then what's up with your next statement?


So what is up with it? What did I said that was wrong? If it is so easy to filter out 'stealth' then why are the Russians and Chinese investing in something that is supposedly figured out?​


VEVAK said:


> Again what part of my statement do you think was untrue? Back in the day stealth had far greater meaning because radars filtered them out as natural clutter where as today it more a matter of range of detection! That doesn't mean it's not useful however unlike a few decades ago it's not full on stealth.


Your statement is complete ignorance. And I say that kindly.

If the distance is close enough, any radar will pick up the F-117 or F-22. The US never made any claim about being 'invisible'. The word 'invisible' is largely a media hype word. The technically correct phrase that the USAF used is 'low radar observable'. The operative word is 'observable'. Not 'invisible'. It means the seeking radar can 'see' the F-117 but only at very short distance. It was not 'today' like you absurdly stated but have *ALWAYS* been that way. I have used the phrase 'low radar observable' on this forum since '09. Your continuing mischaracterization of the concept is why I have no problems saying I understand the concept better than you do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*so they have AA missiles*



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189931262766649345

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189888359725965312

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

skyshadow said:


> *so they have AA missiles*
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189931262766649345
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189888359725965312



it could have been a MANPAD. I have little doubt about the presence of advanced AA in Hezbollah's possession but I doubt they would roll out big systems for a UAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

Probably MANPAD. It failed shortly after launch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Battle of Waterloo said:


> Probably MANPAD. It failed shortly after launch.


It seems the era of the manpads has gone by.........


----------



## Sina-1

gambit said:


> You have no relevant military aviation experience



Arguing credentials over the net? Come on now? For all we know you could be an overweight saudi! Personal credentials cannot serve as premises in an argument, e.g. I am a super duper professor in aviation with 50 years aviation experience from Boeing, thus everything I say is the truth.



gambit said:


> Iran do not contribute to the arts and crafts of air warfare since the beginning of aviation in general,



Anybody is free to present their hypotheses based on freely available data. What ones country has or has not done makes no difference whatsoever.



gambit said:


> but here you are making pronouncements against a potential opponent who have been in the lead in aviation since the first flight.



See above!


However I will say this. When f117 was firstly introduced; Radars in no shape or form were prepared for an aircraft with passive radar sig reduction techniques. Today the situation is different and the means for locating such low-observable crafts has had a rapid advancement. One part of it is purely due to the applied physics e.g. using different radar frequency bands, however IMO the most disruptive technology in the field is AI and machine leaning. By applying mathematical models that can efficiently plow through massive amount of data from e.g. OTH radar is what has helped the current air defence systems to close the gap with radar reduced sig crafts.

So yeah, one could really argue if the F35 is the best bang for the buck offensive weapons platform. I'm not saying that it isn't. However the question is absolutely relevant. The premises have changed in 20 years. The state-of-the-art air defences present are radically different compared to the ones in mind when ordering and designing the F35.

Also, I am an engineering fanboy and therefore an absolute fan of american engineering. BUT, putting all your eggs in the Lockheed basket doesn't seem to be the most sensible approach. Time will tell I guess...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> What has Iran contributed to military aviation regarding strategic and tactical doctrines to emboldened you to criticize US in those arenas?
> 
> 
> Here is what I said again...
> 
> - In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.
> 
> The advice was meant for air combat, not for inter-state relations.
> 
> In air combat, any advantage you have is a rule. Simply put, no fighter is perfect. Each fighter have strengths and weaknesses. If you have a longer radar range, keep the fight, and the kills, under that advantage. If you can out turn under a certain altitude, take the fight to that altitude. If you have superior acceleration, do not engage in a turning fight. This goes back to WW I, refined in tactics in WW II, and we tries to embed some of that logic and algorithm into the hardware today. An area that your Iran do not have expertise in.
> 
> The 'cheating' I was referring to was in trickery, deception, mislead, seduction, enhancement, basically, anything an air force can do outside of the individual fighters to put the enemy fighters into inferior postures. AWACS is cheating because the AWACS platform extends the battlespace vision and gives its fighters 'unnatural' advantage. The word 'unnatural' does not mean Mother Nature but in reference to the jet's designed-in features and capabilities. In-flight refueling is another form of 'cheating' because it extends the fighter's fuel capacity in another 'unnatural' way. These two capabilities enhanced US airpower to the point that we are essentially unchallenged anywhere we fly. Another form of 'cheating' is data links and sharing, not just between manned but also with unmanned platforms. People mocks US pilots for not wanting to fight without these assets but they are wrong. Foolishly wrong. Whatever you have you must take to the fight because this is war, not a boxing match with a trophy at the end.
> 
> What you said about 'cheating' revealed your ignorance and I do not blame you for that ignorance. You may have served but I doubt you served in any meaningful way beyond your two-yrs commitment. I already knew how to fly before I joined the USAF. Instead of spending my money on cars, I spent on flight lessons after school. You did not understand the context of what I posted because you have no relevant experience in military aviation.
> 
> 
> You do not know what you are talking about. When I said this...
> 
> - Low and slow, you go. Fast and high, you die.
> 
> It does not specify exact altitude/airspeed combination for every situation. When I was on the F-111, we trained for low altitude terrain following (TF) flights at near Mach. But even so, flight planning often have the F-111 at above 10k in some situations and lower in others. The advice is meant for keeping a low flight profile after the lessons learned from the XB-70 program and the U-2 shoot down incident.
> 
> Again...You have no relevant military aviation experience and your Iran do not contribute to the arts and crafts of air warfare since the beginning of aviation in general, but here you are making pronouncements against a potential opponent who have been in the lead in aviation since the first flight.
> 
> 
> I have been reserved about the Q-313 out of respect for my fellow airmen, even for Iran, but now I will opine: The Q-313 is a fake.
> 
> Just about everything of the jet seems wrong for a manned platform. If I am proven wrong in the coming days, I have no problems with it. But I doubt Iran will be able to pull it off. In Iran, maybe for public consumption. But for experienced professionals, the Q-313 is a fraud. I wait for the day when I am proven wrong.
> 
> 
> And it is really sad for you that you think that just because you lifted that quote somewhere in the Internet, it make valid your criticism of the F-35. I know what 9g feels like. You do not.
> 
> https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-most-critical-test-180971734/
> 
> The F-35 have been flown by experienced pilots from partner countries and your maneuvering capabilities criticism are done for, as in no longer valid. It is sad for your critical thinking skills, or lack thereof, that you do not recognize how far behind you really are. If the F-35 is as inferior as you believes, the chorus of objections from our partners' pilots would have been obvious by now, instead, the jet increasingly received affirmation even over inevitable birthing pains of a new platform. And who has not experienced such?
> 
> 
> I will go out on a limb and say this: The F-35s on the USS America *WILL* decimate Iran's F-14s without the F-35 pilots breaking 6gs.
> 
> 
> Like I said earlier -- When your Iran contribute to military aviation, you can criticize what we do on our jets. When your F-14s starts dropping out of the sky from directions unknown you will realize how revolutionary the F-35 really is.
> 
> 
> So what is up with it? What did I said that was wrong? If it is so easy to filter out 'stealth' then why are the Russians and Chinese investing in something that is supposedly figured out?​
> Your statement is complete ignorance. And I say that kindly.
> 
> If the distance is close enough, any radar will pick up the F-117 or F-22. The US never made any claim about being 'invisible'. The word 'invisible' is largely a media hype word. The technically correct phrase that the USAF used is 'low radar observable'. The operative word is 'observable'. Not 'invisible'. It means the seeking radar can 'see' the F-117 but only at very short distance. It was not 'today' like you absurdly stated but have *ALWAYS* been that way. I have used the phrase 'low radar observable' on this forum since '09. Your continuing mischaracterization of the concept is why I have no problems saying I understand the concept better than you do.



It's funny when faced with facts you either revert back to brining Iran in to a conversation about the F-35 or much like Trump you fall into a rather predictable narcissistic mentality of me, me, me, I know better than you......

As for the Q-313 I wouldn't disagree that the project started out as a fraud however in a sense that it was a fraudulent attempt to steal money from Iran's military budget and NOT some absurd fake project meant for public consumption. If the Iranian government wanted to build a large mockup of a fighter they never intended to produce they would have done a far better job because if the goal was a fake project for public consumption they would have simply built a fake mockup of a supersonic fighter with fake slats and all with 2 larger jet engines (~the size of J79's or larger) and if the attempt was the Iranian governments attempt to fool the public they would have grabbed an F-5 HUD from storage they would have placed one larger screen in the middle with 2 MFD on either side all of which Iran has at it's disposal. Point is if it was a fake attempt by the Iranian government to fool the public they would have done far better job then that absurd design.

And NO they haven't always been that way because back in the 80's & 90's most radars in the world depending on the country would have simply filtered out anything about the size of a bird since by the most part they lacked the processing power and software to be equipped with proper filters that could differentiate. And when you say short ranges it really depends on what you mean by short! And stealth or low rcs back then had far more value then it does today.

As for F-14's and even Iranian built F-5's going up against the F-35's it really depends on what type of Radar and missile they have been upgraded with and in whos air space this fictional battle is to take place. However if your simply talking 1 on 1 with each aircrafts standard radar and missiles then of course the F-35 would not only win but could easily achieve a far greater than 10-1 kill ratio because it be pretty sad if the F-35 couldn't even match up against America's own 70's era technology. However equip each aircraft with the same sensors, weapons system and missiles and those advantages start to go away for that is the true test of a platforms capability and NOT it's ability to be equipped with more advanced sensors then America's own 70's era technology.

As for knowing what an Aircrafts Max G means I'm pretty sure I've known that since high school which was decades ago! LOL! However It's becoming more clear to me that you obviously had to look that up after I schooled you....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> It's funny when faced with facts you either revert back to brining Iran in to a conversation about the F-35 or much like Trump you fall into a rather predictable narcissistic mentality of me, me, me, I know better than you......


The facts you presented are old and gone. A rehash of the discredited Pierre Sprey and Air Power Australia.

As for Iran and/or her agents criticizing US...

In military history, there are points where there is no return to the old ways. The bow and arrow, mobile armor, the machine gun, the airplane, etc. These are technology points. Then there are points where an army developed tactics that gave battlefield advantages for as long as it can exploit those tactics. The Roman phalanx is one example.

The US military have done more than all -- in terms of technology -- create those non-returnable points. An army that has only single shot rifles cannot conceptualize what possible combat tactics that a machine gun can create. Same with airpower. A country that is landlocked cannot imagine what it is like to fight at sea.

The Iranian Air Force is like that army with single shot rifles going up against the USAF with machine guns. Not only are you outgunned but also outnumbered and a long list of technology superiority that no amount of screaming 'Iran is not Iraq' can help. What I said you can call it narcissism if you like, but I call it as I see it -- reality. A cold bucket of cold reality to the face. With Desert Storm, I know what we can do in actual battles where people die. With two Red Flags, I know what we can do for the future. And that is a bleak future for any opposition air.



VEVAK said:


> And NO they haven't always been that way because back in the 80's & 90's most radars in the world depending on the country would have simply filtered out anything about the size of a bird since by the most part they lacked the processing power and software to be equipped with proper filters that could differentiate. And when you say short ranges it really depends on what you mean by short! And stealth or low rcs back then had far more value then it does today.


What you said revealed your ignorance about radar detection in general, let alone of 'stealth'.

The concept of the radar cross section (RCS) have been known since the invention of radar itself. An RCS is not a fixed value. It is called a 'fictitious' value. It is 'fictitious' not because we make it as we go along, but 'fictitious' in the sense that a body's RCS changes with distance. It does not matter if the body is shaped for 'stealth' or not. Close enough and the F-117 will be as large as a 747. And that is the point -- *WHERE* will the F-117 be as large as the 747?

Simply put -- you do not know what you are talking about. And I say that kindly.



VEVAK said:


> As for knowing what an Aircrafts Max G means I'm pretty sure I've known that since high school which was decades ago! LOL! However It's becoming more clear to me that you obviously had to look that up after I schooled you....




I explained the 'g' in relation to airframe, avionics, flight control concepts, and the human body long before you got on this forum, pal. You 'schooled' me? But if that make you feel good about yourself, go right ahead. You have everything to prove while I -- none.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran Army air defense downs intruding foreign drone ( UAV) over southern port city of Mahshahr
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/11/08/610687/drone-Iran-Army-Mahshahr

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> Iran Army air defense downs intruding foreign drone ( UAV) over southern port city of Mahshahr
> https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/11/08/610687/drone-Iran-Army-Mahshahr



launch of the system


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1192775560424017921
look how the mersad missile starts, its not going high but starts very low

@yavar

I remember some years ago in the old forum u mentioned this, there are 2 kinds of missile in development for mersad, one mersad missile is starting very low and one missile is going normally high

The drone allegeldy flow very low, under 100m

*"Update The UAV has been shot down before reaching sensitive petrochemical facilities. When targeted the drone was flying on altitude < 100 meters."*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Battle of Waterloo

They are assessing the wreckage apparently. Will be interesting to see if it came from Kuwait/KSA/ or over the Persian Gulf...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> .
> 
> 
> What you said revealed your ignorance about radar detection in general, let alone of 'stealth'.
> 
> The concept of the radar cross section (RCS) have been known since the invention of radar itself. An RCS is not a fixed value. It is called a 'fictitious' value. It is 'fictitious' not because we make it as we go along, but 'fictitious' in the sense that a body's RCS changes with distance. It does not matter if the body is shaped for 'stealth' or not. Close enough and the F-117 will be as large as a 747. And that is the point -- *WHERE* will the F-117 be as large as the 747?
> 
> Simply put -- you do not know what you are talking about. And I say that kindly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I explained the 'g' in relation to airframe, avionics, flight control concepts, and the human body long before you got on this forum, pal. You 'schooled' me? But if that make you feel good about yourself, go right ahead. You have everything to prove while I -- none.



I never claimed RCS was a fixed value in fact you and me have had this discussion in the past and I quite clearly remember telling YOU that RCS is not fix value! LOL! Do you honestly not remember that? 
It still doesn't change the fact that in the 80's & 90's most radars being operated across various countries in the world filtered out anything showing up smaller than a bird and that allowed low RCS aircraft aka Stealth to fly a preplanned rout (F-117 had to use a computer to practically fly that rout for them) flying at the right angel towards the radar that allowed them to remain undetected (filtered) to a point where they could get close enough to release their missiles or glide bomb PGM's from 20km out and get out without ever getting locked on. 

HOWEVER those day's are LONG GONE! And I'm sticking to my original statement....


As for Iran's Air Force let me make this very CLEAR! Iran is a country that hasn't purchased a single BVR equipped Air Superiority fighter in well over 4 decades and has made no real attempt to upgrade it's outdated fleet. 
Now do know why? 
Because Iran more than any other country on the planet knows that going up against the U.S. Air Force in the Air is a futile exercise and even if Iran was to equip it's self with a fleet of over 300 Su-30's tomorrow that fact WOULD NOT CHANGE and it would simply give the U.S. more targets to take down. And that's is why most of Iran's budget for weapons acquisition goes towards it's Missile program because by Iran's calculation the ONLY way Iran could possibly stand up to U.S. supremacy in the skies is by going after those fighters while they are on the ground using missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Damascus gave Iran advanced Israeli missile captured in Syria: Russian media


BEIRUT, LEBANON (9:10 A.M.) – The Syrian military did not give Russia the advanced Israeli surface-to-air missile that landed inside Syria in July 2018, the Russian aviation publication Avia.Pro reported on Thursday.

Instead, the Russian publication claims that Damascus transferred the Israeli missile to Iran, who, in turn, plans to reverse engineer the projectile.


“As it turned out, the missile did not go to Moscow, but to Iran, which means serious problems for Israel against the backdrop of an escalation of the situation with the Islamic Republic,” Avia.Pro reported.

“In fact, the missile did not go to Russia at all, but to Iran. <…> On this day, the Iranian cargo Il-76 was at Damascus International Airport, and could very well have delivered the Israeli missile defense system to Iran to study its capabilities,” they said, citing a military expert.

“Russia’s interest in foreign military technology is quite obvious, but for Iran, this missile allows reveals features of the Israeli missile defense system. If Tehran really took possession of such a missile, then the reliability of Israeli air defense systems is in question, even if the missile defense has been seriously damaged,” they added.

The news about Syria first capturing this Israeli missile and transferring it to the Russian military was first reported by the Chinese news service Sina.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

skyshadow said:


>



Any news on what type of UAV it was that we shot down?


----------



## zectech

VEVAK said:


> Because Iran more than any other country on the planet knows that going up against the U.S. Air Force in the Air is a futile exercise and even if Iran was to equip it's self with a fleet of over 300 Su-30's tomorrow that fact WOULD NOT CHANGE and it would simply give the U.S. more targets to take down.



Putin's role is to sell overpriced Russian second rate junk to Iran. Iran has refused to buy target practice equipment from Russia. Iraq had second rate Russian/Soviet junk in 1990 and was defeated. Air defense is vital for survival. SU-30s do not provide enough air superiority against F-22s and F-35s. Better to have ADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

zectech said:


> Putin's role is to sell overpriced Russian second rate junk to Iran. Iran has refused to buy target practice equipment from Russia. Iraq had second rate Russian/Soviet junk in 1990 and was defeated. Air defense is vital for survival. SU-30s do not provide enough air superiority against F-22s and F-35s. Better to have ADS.



Every country at the end of the day tries to do what is in their own self interest. The American's sell $100 Billion USD in junk to Arab states on a yearly bases so it's not surprising that others would wanna do the same and under normal conditions and in a relatively stable region a modernized Su-30 wouldn't necessarily be a bad platform to stock on however for Iran for as long as U.S. has this absurd obsession with Iran then the platform falls well short of being worth the cost.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> Any news on what type of UAV it was that we shot down?


no not yet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

VEVAK said:


> Any news on what type of UAV it was that we shot down?



now Iran giving a hint that it was Israeli drone took off from Bahrain


Former Iranian diplomat AmirMousawi7 to Mayadeen reports preliminary indications are that the drone (shot down by Iranian air defences earlier) was an Israeli drone that took off from Bahrain. This is still unconfirmed.

*انهدام پهپاد متجاوز با سامانه‌‌ای که به هواپیمای «U2» اخطار داده بود*


این پهپاد که برای شناسایی مراکز حساس وارد مناطقی از جنوب کشور شده و با استفاده از ترفندهای پنهان‌کاری ازجمله پرواز در ارتفاع پست در حال ادامه مسیر به سمت اهداف مورد نظر بود، توسط سامانه پدافندی مرصاد شناسایی، رهگیری شد و مورد اصابت قرار گرفت. 

سامانه مرصاد پیش از این توانسته بود هواپیمای جاسوسی آمریکا موسوم به U2 را که از بالاترین سطح تکنولوژی بهره می برد، در ارتفاع 60 هزارپایی رهگیری کند و با اخطار آنرا از حریم هوایی کشور دور کند.









https://defapress.ir/fa/news/369304...ا-سامانه‌‌ای-که-به-هواپیمای-u2-اخطار-داده-بود

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

zectech said:


> Putin's role is to sell overpriced Russian second rate junk to Iran. Iran has refused to buy target practice equipment from Russia. Iraq had second rate Russian/Soviet junk in 1990 and was defeated. Air defense is vital for survival. SU-30s do not provide enough air superiority against F-22s and F-35s. Better to have ADS.



Calling a SU-30 “second rate junk” is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

SU-30 and it’s upgraded brother SU-35 form the backbone of the Russian air fleet.

Iran could be only so lucky to have SU-30 in its fleet instead of the F-5 junk it keeps rehashing every 5 years under a new damn name.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

TheImmortal said:


> Calling a SU-30 “second rate junk” is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
> 
> SU-30 and it’s upgraded brother SU-35 form the backbone of the Russian air fleet.
> 
> Iran could be only so lucky to have SU-30 in its fleet instead of the F-5 junk it keeps rehashing every 5 years under a new damn name.


A saying says: generals always prepare for the wars of the past.

As F-35s enter service around the world and Chinese and Russian 5th generation fighters enter service----4th generation fighters like Su-30 have no future.

So if Iran buys aircraft for its air force it will be either Su-57 or Chinese J-31, so these aircraft could serve in the air force until 2050.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Any detailed news relevent to recent drone incident..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> Any detailed news relevent to recent drone incident..


*Iran Army Chief: Intruding Drone Brought Down by Homegrown System*

“What has become certain for now is that the (intruding) drone was flying at a low altitude and was targeted by the Mersad indigenous system,” the top commander noted.


https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...ruding-drone-brought-down-by-homegrown-system

*Al-Miyadin Network quoted an analyst as saying that the UAV shot down in Mahshahr by the Islamic Republic Defense Army system was a spy plane made by the Zionist regime that had flown from Bahrain.*
*

https://defapress.ir/fa/news/369364/پهپاد-سرنگون-شده-در-ماهشهر-ساخت-رژیم-صهیونیستی-بود*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

I don't know what's wrong with this "nationalinterest.org" website, everyday they are publishing an article about Iran!

and in one Iran is the winner and in another Iran is the looser, it's like they can't decide!

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## skyshadow

Just an observation; since yesterday’s reported drone downing in Iran, the area in question which I had marked up for several weeks latest imagery was 11th September 2019. This imagery has now been pulled and the latest available now is 22nd July. Well for me anyway 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1193189795385806848

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arashkamangir

mohsen said:


> I don't know what's wrong with this "nationalinterest.org" website, everyday they are publishing an article about Iran!
> 
> and in one Iran is the winner and in another Iran is the looser, it's like they can't decide!



They are paid to write bullshit. Their entire livelihood revolves around right wing non sense and they are part of the same company that owns Yahoo.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Caspian Parsi

mohsen said:


> I don't know what's wrong with this "nationalinterest.org" website, everyday they are publishing an article about Iran!
> 
> and in one Iran is the winner and in another Iran is the looser, it's like they can't decide!


Yes, I stopped reading their articles , pure nonsense

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

VEVAK said:


> I never claimed RCS was a fixed value..


The problem is you post like it is...



VEVAK said:


> It still doesn't change the fact that in the 80's & 90's most radars being operated across various countries in the world filtered out anything showing up smaller than a bird...


The reason why a body have a fictitious radar cross section (RCS) is based upon...

1- Body dimensions
2- Operating freq
3- Distance
4- Material
5- Atmospheric composition

If you put a bird under radar bombardment and the only thing you change is item 2 -- operating freq -- that bird will have a changing RCS based upon the changes of the operating freq. Now apply that to each of the five criteria, meaning you keep constant four but changes just one. Next, you make variables all five items. Precisely because of this, your bird analogy is false from the start.

So how do radar systems filter out clutter? Largely by amplitude. A bird will have a variable amplitude based upon operating freq and atmospheric composition, for a simple example. One gain setting will detect the bird at one operating freq and atmospheric composition combination, but another gain setting will dismiss the bird at a different combination. Same body but different RCS values. You dismiss the bird at one setting but chasing the bird at another setting. If you raise the gain so that you do not chase birds or ghosts, you will end up missing the F-35 completely.

Do you see the point and your error now?



VEVAK said:


> HOWEVER those day's are LONG GONE! And I'm sticking to my original statement....


Yeah...And you would still be wrong. I hope the entire Iranian military is filled with people like you.


----------



## skyshadow

this is very good 



*Mass Production of Laser Cannons Starts in Iran*


*Iran’s Defense Ministry has begun manufacturing air defense laser cannons, a deputy minister said.


Speaking to reporters on Saturday, General Qassem Taqizadeh said Iran has obtained the technical know-how to manufacture laser air defense cannons for bringing down hostile quadcopters and small aircraft.

He said the weapon has passed laboratory tests and is now being manufactured in the assembly line.



https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...ss-production-of-laser-cannons-starts-in-iran*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> this is very good
> 
> 
> 
> *Mass Production of Laser Cannons Starts in Iran*
> 
> 
> *Iran’s Defense Ministry has begun manufacturing air defense laser cannons, a deputy minister said.*
> 
> 
> *Speaking to reporters on Saturday, General Qassem Taqizadeh said Iran has obtained the technical know-how to manufacture laser air defense cannons for bringing down hostile quadcopters and small aircraft.*
> 
> *He said the weapon has passed laboratory tests and is now being manufactured in the assembly line.*
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...ss-production-of-laser-cannons-starts-in-iran*


great news. i can't wait to see them on toofan and raad MRAPs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

gambit said:


> The problem is you post like it is...
> 
> 
> The reason why a body have a fictitious radar cross section (RCS) is based upon...
> 
> 1- Body dimensions
> 2- Operating freq
> 3- Distance
> 4- Material
> 5- Atmospheric composition
> 
> If you put a bird under radar bombardment and the only thing you change is item 2 -- operating freq -- that bird will have a changing RCS based upon the changes of the operating freq. Now apply that to each of the five criteria, meaning you keep constant four but changes just one. Next, you make variables all five items. Precisely because of this, your bird analogy is false from the start.
> 
> So how do radar systems filter out clutter? Largely by amplitude. A bird will have a variable amplitude based upon operating freq and atmospheric composition, for a simple example. One gain setting will detect the bird at one operating freq and atmospheric composition combination, but another gain setting will dismiss the bird at a different combination. Same body but different RCS values. You dismiss the bird at one setting but chasing the bird at another setting. If you raise the gain so that you do not chase birds or ghosts, you will end up missing the F-35 completely.
> 
> Do you see the point and your error now?
> 
> 
> Yeah...And you would still be wrong. I hope the entire Iranian military is filled with people like you.



It's funny how you come to the same conclusions at the end yet your simply to stubborn to admit it! 
RCS pickup by radars is NOT a fixed value the Aircraft may have fixed RCS from various angles under normal dry conditions however for radars Aircraft are moving objects with a constantly shifting angle that have to travel through various atmospheric conditions and whether or not a specific radar is sophisticated enough to differentiate those changes that's whole other matter however the statement still remains true. 

Also, my comments were on how 80's and 90's era radar operators operated their radars and how that increased the value and capability of stealth Aircraft to go undetected against those systems compared to today's software backed systems and digital signals because back then the problem was never the frequency at which those radars operated rather lack of proper software backed filters and digital signals to properly differentiate.... 
In the 80's by the most part unless commanded to search for an object coming from a certain heading or unless by chance you picked up a shadow, your standard search settings wouldn't of been sufficient to pickup low RCS aircraft until it was too late and due to little known knowledge about stealth aircraft in general there would have been no reason to change your operations....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> this is very good
> 
> 
> 
> *Mass Production of Laser Cannons Starts in Iran*
> 
> 
> *Iran’s Defense Ministry has begun manufacturing air defense laser cannons, a deputy minister said.*
> 
> 
> *Speaking to reporters on Saturday, General Qassem Taqizadeh said Iran has obtained the technical know-how to manufacture laser air defense cannons for bringing down hostile quadcopters and small aircraft.*
> 
> *He said the weapon has passed laboratory tests and is now being manufactured in the assembly line.*
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...ss-production-of-laser-cannons-starts-in-iran*



Very good news...i appreciated the development... We know iranians also pioneer in laser tech...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

A good feature of the rugged and simple Matla ol Fajr series radars seem to be that it can move with the antenna array set-up.
That allows it to change position at low speed but sufficient to evade positioning for attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The new transporter erector launcher (TEL) of Iran's upgraded 'Mersad' air defense system equipped with an unknown type of missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The new transporter erector launcher (TEL) of Iran's upgraded 'Mersad' air defense system equipped with an unknown type of missile.
> 
> View attachment 590863



They should make a 6 cell version. Would be very powerful.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> They should make a 6 cell version. Would be very powerful.



I wonder what is their thought process when it comes to these things.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I often asked the question about the number 3 because often we see combinations of 3 in their things. Here is an answer that I found:

In Iranian traditions, the number three appears most often endowed with a magico-religious character. We already notice the presence of this figure in the religion of ancient Iran whose triple motto is: Good thought, good speech and good action; these three bûkht are also designated as the three saviors. Bad thought, bad word, and bad action are attributed to the Spirit of Evil. (Mazdeism)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

It has mountingpoints for a top canister, so the real deal is a 6 missile TEL, no worries.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

New picture of the Mersad-16 SAM system firing a missile

Source: https://aja.ir/Portal/home/?NEWS/73099/67557/1647222/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

So the Mersad system, based on the hawk, has missile canisters now ? 



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The new transporter erector launcher (TEL) of Iran's upgraded 'Mersad' air defense system equipped with an unknown type of missile.
> 
> View attachment 590863


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> So the Mersad system, based on the hawk, has missile canisters now ?


Yes,the new missiles airframe is based on the rim66/mehrab sam and uses a modified version of the sayyad launcher,except that this version is capable of 360 degree rotation and low angle of elevation missile shots plus it mounts 6 canisters rather than 4.
Its certainly a huge improvement over the old hawk/mersad sam,as not only has the fire control system been completely modernised but the search and fire control radars have been vehicle mounted for true shoot and scoot capability and the number of ready to fire missiles doubled.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Could the reasoning behind utilizing a 6 missile TEL Mersad be due to a recent focus by Iranian military planners wanting to combat saturation attacks more effectively?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

More pictures of the 15. Khordad and Mersad-16 SAM systems during the Velayat 98 air defense drills released by defapress:
https://dnws.ir/370902
https://dnws.ir/370905

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sineva said:


> Yes,the new missiles airframe is based on the rim66/mehrab sam and uses a modified version of the sayyad launcher,except that this version is capable of 360 degree rotation and low angle of elevation missile shots plus it mounts 6 canisters rather than 4.
> Its certainly a huge improvement over the old hawk/mersad sam,as not only has the fire control system been completely modernised but the search and fire control radars have been vehicle mounted for true shoot and scoot capability and the number of ready to fire missiles doubled.


That's what I initially thought, but upon closer inspection I actually think it's a Hawk/Salamcheh airframe, with RIM-66 style control surfaces and nosecone. The giveaway is the cable duct.

They did a similar job on Fakour. I wrote an article about that: https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2018/07/analysis-fakour-air-to-air-missile.html

Mersad-16






Hawk






SM-1

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Myself

AmirPatriot said:


> That's what I initially thought, but upon closer inspection I actually think it's a Hawk/Salamcheh airframe, with RIM-66 style control surfaces and nosecone. The giveaway is the cable duct.
> 
> They did a similar job on Fakour. I wrote an article about that: https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2018/07/analysis-fakour-air-to-air-missile.html
> 
> Mersad-16
> 
> View attachment 591228
> 
> 
> Hawk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SM-1



Standard is significantly faster than Hawk during both launch and intercept times, and its flying profile is conspicuously different from the Hawk. Mersad-16 is with no doubt using the Missile from Hawk system, clear from the footage. The question is why?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Damascus gave Iran advanced Israeli missile captured in Syria: Russian media
The Syrian military did not give Russia the advanced Israeli surface-to-air missile that landed inside Syria in July 2018, the Russian aviation publication Avia.Pro reported on Thursday.
Instead, the Russian publication claims that Damascus transferred the Israeli missile to Iran, who, in turn, plans to reverse engineer the projectile.
“As it turned out, the missile did not go to Moscow, but to Iran, which means serious problems for Israel against the backdrop of an escalation of the situation with the Islamic Republic,” Avia.Pro reported.
“In fact, the missile did not go to Russia at all, but to Iran On this day, the Iranian cargo Il-76 was at Damascus International Airport, and could very well have delivered the Israeli missile defense system to Iran to study its capabilities,” they said, citing a military expert.
“Russia’s interest in foreign military technology is quite obvious, but for Iran, this missile allows reveals features of the Israeli missile defense system. If Tehran really took possession of such a missile, then the reliability of Israeli air defense systems is in question, even if the missile defense has been seriously damaged,” they added.
https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...aeli-missile-captured-in-syria-russian-media/

http://avia.pro/news/zahvachennaya-v-sirii-sekretnaya-izrailskaya-raketa-popala-ne-v-rossiyu-v-iran

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Taher 2000



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## yavar

Iran Army air defense "Guardians of Velayat Sky-98" exercise 2019
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/11/21/611765/Iran-Air-Force-war-games-Semnan

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## arashkamangir

yavar said:


> Iran Army air defense "Guardians of Velayat Sky-98" exercise 2019
> https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/11/21/611765/Iran-Air-Force-war-games-Semnan



I wish to have seen the new point defence system (Iranian Tor)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Could the previous AD based systems using the same containers rotate? 

I think this is the first AD system using those containers that can rotate 180 degrees or minimum of 90 degrees.


----------



## HAIDER

anyone identify this SA system ?


----------



## Aryzin

HAIDER said:


> anyone identify this SA system ?



Soviet SA 8A or SA 8B

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Could the previous AD based systems using the same containers rotate?
> 
> I think this is the first AD system using those containers that can rotate 180 degrees or minimum of 90 degrees.


If you mean the sayyad 2/15th khordad launchers,then yes they could likely rotate a maximum of 270 degrees,this one however can rotate a full 360 degres thanks to the blast deflector behind the cabin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Ofoogh-3 fire control radar was finally shown.

Ofoogh-2 was still a continuous wave radar to support S-200 and Sayyad-2M engagements.

The Ofoogh-3 should be tailored for the Talash-3's Sayyad-3 and has it's closest analogue in the S-300V engagement radar. It's a pseudo continuous wave radar that supports tracking out to the maximum SD-3 range of 120km.

In that sense: The system tested during the maneuver was a 15th Khordad with Najm-804 phased array acquisition radar and (here called) Ofoogh-3, the engagement radar.
Ofoogh-3 is a byproduct of early Bavar demonstrators that came short to make it to the wining Bavar-373 design.

This system might be the most cost-efficient long range (120km) SAM systems in the world: 
- No large caliber missile
- No active seeker
- No TVC system
- No X-band phased array, whether active or passive
- No high-power S-/L-band array for acquisition radar
- Cost efficient, reliable truck
- Containerized, sealed, ready to fire missile

While it still has the benefit of high situational awareness via phased array Najm-804 radar and dual-band engagement capability.
Weak point is only the relative low kinematic performance at max. missile range. Like the Americans with the SM-2, much optimization work was done to give a relative light missile such a long range.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SubWater

https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2156338

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/11/24/611997/Iran-missile-Mersad-radar-Kavosh-drones

So according to this report the Mersad-16 SAM system uses both the Hafez and Najm-804 radars and can fire a new missile called "Shalamche-2" (the Sayyad/Hawk hybrid?).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> great news. i can't wait to see them on toofan and raad MRAPs.



hi yes it really is, i missed you guys but im back 



Shams313 said:


> Very good news...i appreciated the development... We know iranians also pioneer in laser tech...



yes it took almost 2 decades i think but just like stem cells we started early



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The new transporter erector launcher (TEL) of Iran's upgraded 'Mersad' air defense system equipped with an unknown type of missile.
> 
> View attachment 590863



the missile name for this system is Shalamche-2

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Ofoogh-3 fire control radar was finally shown.
> 
> Ofoogh-2 was still a continuous wave radar to support S-200 and Sayyad-2M engagements.
> 
> The Ofoogh-3 should be tailored for the Talash-3's Sayyad-3 and has it's closest analogue in the S-300V engagement radar. It's a pseudo continuous wave radar that supports tracking out to the maximum SD-3 range of 120km.
> 
> In that sense: The system tested during the maneuver was a 15th Khordad with Najm-804 phased array acquisition radar and (here called) Ofoogh-3, the engagement radar.
> Ofoogh-3 is a byproduct of early Bavar demonstrators that came short to make it to the wining Bavar-373 design.
> 
> This system might be the most cost-efficient long range (120km) SAM systems in the world:
> - No large caliber missile
> - No active seeker
> - No TVC system
> - No X-band phased array, whether active or passive
> - No high-power S-/L-band array for acquisition radar
> - Cost efficient, reliable truck
> - Containerized, sealed, ready to fire missile
> 
> While it still has the benefit of high situational awareness via phased array Najm-804 radar and dual-band engagement capability.
> Weak point is only the relative low kinematic performance at max. missile range. Like the Americans with the SM-2, much optimization work was done to give a relative light missile such a long range.




are you talking about this radar?

*is that the Ofoogh-3????*
*










*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

Myself said:


> Mersad-16 is with no doubt using the Missile from Hawk system, clear from the footage. The question is why?


It's much cheaper and easier to modify the Hawk design a bit than copy the SM-1, since Iran already makes the Hawk (as Salamcheh) in large numbers.


----------



## DoubleYouSee

SubWater said:


> https://www.telewebion.com/episode/2156338


regarding this interview i came to conclusion that there are lots of Mersad types....(due to mersad-16 missile system we can say lots of passive and active and other types are built)


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> It's much cheaper and easier to modify the Hawk design a bit than copy the SM-1, since Iran already makes the Hawk (as Salamcheh) in large numbers.


We also have vast experience in modifying and working with standard missile and to be honnest I think standard have far more potential than hawk .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

https://tn.ai/2144830

Article by Tasnim about Mersad-16

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

From the Tasnim article:

Mersad-16:

Uses Hafez and Najm-804 radars
Uses quadratic missile launchers similar to those used by the Patriot system
Equipped with the new Shalamcheh-2 missile
Range of new missile not known but overall the Mersad-16 is more mobile than the older Mersad systems
Shalamcheh-2 seems to be a finished version of the SM-1/Mehrab (improved SM-1)
Guidance and navigation sytems used on the Shalamcheh-1 and other idigenous SAM systems might have been applied to the Shalamcheh-2
Later in the article: Range of Shalamcheh-2 is 40 km
Other information about Mersad:

Shalamcheh-1 missile weighs 647 kg, is 503 cm long, 357 mm in diameter, flies at Mach 2.7, reaches altitudes from 60 m to 18.000 m and has a range of 40 km
During the Mohammad Rasoulallah (S) exercises in December 2014 the Mersad equipped with Shalamcheh-1 missiles proved to be effective against small UAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Heres a good vid of the Mersad 16 in operation,showing the launch and the new control room.
https://instagram.fchc1-1.fna.fbcdn...=5DEAB12C&oh=8187eab10bf082326b9fa7c0a16a75a6

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

Bad news, the U.S.N has sized a ship with some gear for the Houthis.
This includes a still unidentified missile that looks like a kind of longer ranged Qaem laser guided SAM.
Still tactical gear but something that was not unveiled up to now.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> Bad news, the U.S.N has sized a ship with some gear for the Houthis.
> This includes a still unidentified missile that looks like a kind of longer ranged Qaem laser guided SAM.
> Still tactical gear but something that was not unveiled up to now.


Can they prove it was from Iran?


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> Bad news, the U.S.N has sized a ship with some gear for the Houthis.
> This includes a still unidentified missile that looks like a kind of longer ranged Qaem laser guided SAM.
> Still tactical gear but something that was not unveiled up to now.








Sooner or later they were bound to intercept one of these shipments however I'd like to know what Iranian government has to say about it.....

Overall all Iranian administrations need to do a better job investing in our Naval capabilities and we need to increase ship building by investing in the development of the areas between Jask - Chabahar 

What they should do is 1st invest in building large Naval Bases in those areas, then large dry docks and the infrastructure needed for modern ship building & repairs and slowly develop the infrastructure needed to produce the materials and parts required locally and once a sufficient amount of jobs are created and a stable local economy is developed around ship building then they need to start investing in developing newer and more advanced specialized universities in those areas from marine biology to naval engineering to building new naval academies..... Then based on your future vision for the region you start improving and expanding on local infrastructure, roads, Ports, Airports, rail,.... Then you start investing in a proper tourism infrastructure and at the same time create policies to further encourages privet investment and domestic production in those areas across a wide range of industries.... 

Also the open seas are filled with untapped resources and if Iran wants to have any chance to properly tap into them in the future we will need a much larger blue water fleet and building larger vessels at a rate of 1 per years is far from sufficient. Iran's navy despite it's relatively limited funding has somehow managed some remarkable achievements so a true waist is failing to properly fund them to truly utilizing those achievements.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

VEVAK said:


> Sooner or later they were bound to intercept one of these shipments however I'd like to know what Iranian government has to say about it.....
> 
> Overall all Iranian administrations need to do a better job investing in our Naval capabilities and we need to increase ship building by investing in the development of the areas between Jask - Chabahar
> 
> What they should do is 1st invest in building large Naval Bases in those areas, then large dry docks and the infrastructure needed for modern ship building & repairs and slowly develop the infrastructure needed to produce the materials and parts required locally and once a sufficient amount of jobs are created and a stable local economy is developed around ship building then they need to start investing in developing newer and more advanced specialized universities in those areas from marine biology to naval engineering to building new naval academies..... Then based on your future vision for the region you start improving and expanding on local infrastructure, roads, Ports, Airports, rail,.... Then you start investing in a proper tourism infrastructure and at the same time create policies to further encourages privet investment and domestic production in those areas across a wide range of industries....
> 
> Also the open seas are filled with untapped resources and if Iran wants to have any chance to properly tap into them in the future we will need a much larger blue water fleet and building larger vessels at a rate of 1 per years is far from sufficient. Iran's navy despite it's relatively limited funding has somehow managed some remarkable achievements so a true waist is failing to properly fund them to truly utilizing those achievements.



Hey that's @maydayfire 's clip re uploaded. Whatever happened that guy, he is no longer around.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*US officials release photos of 'significant cache' of Iranian missile parts captured*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

I wonder if that unknown system, called Qaem-2 for now is a helicopter-killer with 15km range, unjammable and mobile via a team of 3 man.
It likely shot down the Saudi Apache.

Incredible potent secret system. Apaches have no means to target it at 15km and it has passive detection system via a TI automatic search and automatic track.

Hezbollah has it certainly.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> I wonder if that unknown system, called Qaem-2 for now is a helicopter-killer with 15km range, unjammable and mobile via a team of 3 man.
> It likely shot down the Saudi Apache.
> 
> Incredible potent secret system. Apaches have no means to target it at 15km and it has passive detection system via a TI automatic search and automatic track.
> 
> Hezbollah has it certainly.



i doubt Iran is that stupid to smuggle high end technology, as you have always the risk of interception
the stuff iran is smuggling (interiority, electronics...) is different (low tech), but still very effective
they wouldnt risk loosing top technology on a smuggling route

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

In the hands of the Americans, it's nothing high-tech. 
It's just a novel and very innovative, asymmetrical system.
No technology loss for Iran.
The C-801/2 seeker too is just a legacy variant, maybe even a original Chinese one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> i doubt Iran is that stupid to smuggle high end technology, as you have always the risk of interception
> the stuff iran is smuggling (interiority, electronics...) is different (low tech), but still very effective
> they wouldnt risk loosing top technology on a smuggling route



You must be living on the moon. Iran has been smuggling high tech technology to HZ for years. Yemen is no exception, it’s a battlefield to test latest gear against latest American gear(planes/tanks/APCs/Drones).

Just because US has captured something considered “high tech” doesn’t mean it’s suddenly defeat-able. If that were the case no weapon would ever be created because as soon as the enemy got it then it would be useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> You must be living on the moon. Iran has been smuggling high tech technology to HZ for years. Yemen is no exception, it’s a battlefield to test latest gear against latest American gear(planes/tanks/APCs/Drones).
> 
> Just because US has captured something considered “high tech” doesn’t mean it’s suddenly defeat-able. If that were the case no weapon would ever be created because as soon as the enemy got it then it would be useless.



im talking about sensitive technology, if falling in enemys hands that could compromise Irans capabilities
afaik some months ago and Sayyad AD missile was intercepted by Saudis, but without its sensitive missile-head (components like radar, electronics..)
this missile body part was smuggled seperately


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> In the hands of the Americans, it's nothing high-tech.
> It's just a novel and very innovative, asymmetrical system.
> No technology loss for Iran.
> The C-801/2 seeker too is just a legacy variant, maybe even a original Chinese one.






TheImmortal said:


> You must be living on the moon. Iran has been smuggling high tech technology to HZ for years. Yemen is no exception, it’s a battlefield to test latest gear against latest American gear(planes/tanks/APCs/Drones).
> 
> Just because US has captured something considered “high tech” doesn’t mean it’s suddenly defeat-able. If that were the case no weapon would ever be created because as soon as the enemy got it then it would be useless.



It's not a loss of technology nor does it necessarily make a weapon system easily defeatable however, every data regarding your enemies weapons and weapons system is relevant data when you wanna deploy or develop a weapon systems and or tactics to mount a defense against them and it doesn't matter how advanced they are. 
To give you an example, if among the sized assets there were electronic hardware for an avionics pkg of an Iranian light land attack cruise missile or the electronics pkg of a new Iranian ATGM's that gives the US the ability to test various directed energy weapons against those systems to see at what range they become susceptible to EMP's, Microwaves,... It also gives the U.S. access to information on where Iran acquires various components (transistors, processors, ram, batteries,...) that make up the electronics of Iranian built weapons system and that info would allow them to conduct various covert actions against various companies that produce the components used in those weapon systems.... and unfortunately U.S. is just obsessed enough with Iran that they would go that far and Iran knows this and has experienced it. So if as PeeD said there was a never deployed before Iranian Ghaem-2 ATGM among the weapons seized then at the very least the off the shelf electronics components that make up the electronics pkg is now at risk of being targets of US covert actions.....



​

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

VEVAK said:


> the ability to test various directed energy weapons against those systems to see at what range they become susceptible to EMP's, Microwaves,...
> 
> ​



That is why I have stated in the past that key components should be in faraday cages to prevent electronic warfare/frequency weapons used to disable incoming missiles, etc.

Electronic warfare started to get going in the 50s, and the Russians are better than the Isrealis and Amerikans. I don't want to scare the Iranians, but what is classified is enough to want to put everything in faraday cages, and leaded protective coverings. But with the downed spy drone, I have trusted the Iranians to know what they are doing.

There has to be bands/frequencies that shatter other incoming electronic jamming. Find these wave bands/frequencies and you found a treasure.

In short if you can't faraday cage a part, you have to jam the jammers. My guess is to pick up the frequency of some mystic full of love person in Iran, and test that frequency of love. The Power of Love to shatter incoming attacks. My 2 cents.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Draco.IMF said:


> im talking about sensitive technology, if falling in enemys hands that could compromise Irans capabilities
> afaik some months ago and Sayyad AD missile was intercepted by Saudis, but without its sensitive missile-head (components like radar, electronics..)
> this missile body part was smuggled seperately


Now that you mentioned it, I remembered how the same Sayyad missile took out latest Global hawk and none of their super duper toys in either that drone or the P-8 beside it could break the lock.

P.S
I'm suspicious about the timing of these incidents, Europeans letter about Iranian missiles, reports of Iranian missiles in Iraq, and now sudden discovery of Iranian missiles en rout to Yemen.

Yemenis haven't even used their previous arsenal of anti ship missiles, so why bother sending new ones. to me it's more like US wants to blame Iran for another anonymous attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> im talking about sensitive technology, if falling in enemys hands that could compromise Irans capabilities
> afaik some months ago and Sayyad AD missile was intercepted by Saudis, but without its sensitive missile-head (components like radar, electronics..)
> this missile body part was smuggled seperately



US intelligence already has pretty good idea what materials Iran uses in its missiles and seekers.


mohsen said:


> Now that you mentioned it, I remembered how the same Sayyad missile took out latest Global hawk and none of their super duper toys in either that drone or the P-8 beside it could break the lock.
> 
> P.S
> I'm suspicious about the timing of these incidents, Europeans letter about Iranian missiles, reports of Iranian missiles in Iraq, and now sudden discovery of Iranian missiles en rout to Yemen.
> 
> Yemenis haven't even used their previous arsenal of anti ship missiles, so why bother sending new ones. to me it's more like US wants to blame Iran for another anonymous attack.



Not sure where you get anti ship missiles?

According to @PeeD the missile was anti-air SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Not sure where you get anti ship missiles?
> 
> According to @PeeD the missile was anti-air SAM.


You sure?!
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/page-248#post-11925527


----------



## skyshadow

*Israel say this was Bavar-373 Air defense system*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Surveys show that the government has increased the Defense Department's budget in the Budget of year 1399 compared to the Defense Department's budget of year 1398 








*

*budget increase for General Staff of the Armed Forces*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dexon

skyshadow said:


> *Surveys show that the government has increased the Defense Department's budget in the Budget of year 1399 compared to the Defense Department's budget of year 1398
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *budget increase for General Staff of the Armed Forces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


If you consider inflation. In fact, it has decreased sharply ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

skyshadow said:


> *Israel say this was Bavar-373 Air defense system*


According to this article by the pro-Syrian government website Al-Masdar News, Russian Avia.pro reported about the deployment of Bavar-373 ADS to the T-4 airbase: https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...nside-syria-to-protect-against-attacks-photo/

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Dexon said:


> If you consider inflation. In fact, it has decreased sharply ...



well we have to see if budget for research will increase or decrease, as you know alot of those monies will go to personals paycheck and maintaining equipment's, we have to see how mach of it will go to research and development for new technologies and weapons



Messerschmitt said:


> According to this article by the pro-Syrian government website Al-Masdar News, Russian Avia.pro reported about the deployment of Bavar-373 ADS to the T-4 airbase: https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...nside-syria-to-protect-against-attacks-photo/



its huge risky move by Iran if it gets confirmed and the word is as soon as that cargo plane left, Russian SU-35 intercepted Israeli jets moving toward T-4 airbase


https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...ز-اسرائیلی-توسط-جنگنده-های-روسی-در-جنوب-سوریه

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

skyshadow said:


> its huge risky move by Iran if it gets confirmed and the word is as soon as that cargo plane left, Russian SU-35 intercepted Israeli jets moving toward T-4 airbase


But the biggest risk was Russia remotely keeping Syri'a's S300s OFF. Do you see how much damage Iran and Syria already took from that? OK, next point then..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

skyshadow said:


> its huge risky move by Iran if it gets confirmed and the word is as soon as that cargo plane left, Russian SU-35 intercepted Israeli jets moving toward T-4 airbase
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/09/18/2156177/تعقیب-هواپیماهای-متجاوز-اسرائیلی-توسط-جنگنده-های-روسی-در-جنوب-سوریه



Zionists want the ADS to launch a SAM missile over Isreali skies to test the wreckage for weakness. They need either hypersonic cruise missiles or know any weakness of the Bavar 373s for a war or strike.

I would have sent the 3 Khordad, or even same lesser ADS to Syria.

Putting out your best is a risk for helping your friend Assad. Definitely don't send any to Yemen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dexon

Messerschmitt said:


> According to this article by the pro-Syrian government website Al-Masdar News, Russian Avia.pro reported about the deployment of Bavar-373 ADS to the T-4 airbase: https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...nside-syria-to-protect-against-attacks-photo/


 Fk it!!. lets test it!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

925boy said:


> But the biggest risk was Russia remotely keeping Syri'a's S300s OFF. Do you see how much damage Iran and Syria already took from that? OK, next point then..





zectech said:


> Zionists want the ADS to launch a SAM missile over Isreali skies to test the wreckage for weakness. They need either hypersonic cruise missiles or know any weakness of the Bavar 373s for a war or strike.
> 
> I would have sent the 3 Khordad, or even same lesser ADS to Syria.
> 
> Putting out your best is a risk for helping your friend Assad. Definitely don't send any to Yemen.




be it S-300 or Bavar-373 with out a layered air defense protection it will be destroyed Undoubtedly, i mean Iran's own defense doctrine is to destroy large targets with cheap weapons but in other hand Syria already has some shorter range systems to protect it, i said it before i say it again if Iran is going to do that they must be ready to shot down every Israeli jet that takes of if one of those go to Mediterranean sea and releases cruise missiles its big risk and that is the lest Iran have to do

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

Messerschmitt said:


> According to this article by the pro-Syrian government website Al-Masdar News, Russian Avia.pro reported about the deployment of Bavar-373 ADS to the T-4 airbase: https://www.almasdarnews.com/articl...nside-syria-to-protect-against-attacks-photo/


Ok! Now let's see what this thing is really made of! Hopefully will make us all proud.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

Israel will use F-35 so Bavar 373 will be useless


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Israel say this was Bavar-373 Air defense system*



Do you guys understand how Bavar-373 works? It is compromised of a Battalion of launchers. Meaning high number of support vehicles and launchers to build the area defense circle.

Use some common sense people.



GWXP said:


> Israel will use F-35 so Bavar 373 will be useless



All stealth planes are detectable. Question is at what distance. And F-35 is lowest RCS from the frontal quadrant. If radar hits it from different angles it’s RCS is not as low as advertised. If it is carrying munitions on its hardpoints it’s RCS is even higher.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

Guys, it's not Bavar.

For a start Bavar is not an IRGC system for them to be using it in Syria, but also the vehicles look nothing like Bavar's vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Do you guys understand how Bavar-373 works? It is compromised of a Battalion of launchers. Meaning high number of support vehicles and launchers to build the area defense circle.
> 
> Use some common sense people.
> 
> 
> 
> All stealth planes are detectable. Question is at what distance. And F-35 is lowest RCS from the frontal quadrant. If radar hits it from different angles it’s RCS is not as low as advertised. If it is carrying munitions on its hardpoints it’s RCS is even higher.


what did i say that was not common sense, Israel news is the one reporting that this is Bavar not me

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> well we have to see if budget for research will increase or decrease, as you know alot of those monies will go to personals paycheck and maintaining equipment's, we have to see how mach of it will go to research and development for new technologies and weapons
> 
> 
> 
> its huge risky move by Iran if it gets confirmed and the word is as soon as that cargo plane left, Russian SU-35 intercepted Israeli jets moving toward T-4 airbase
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1398/09/18/2156177/تعقیب-هواپیماهای-متجاوز-اسرائیلی-توسط-جنگنده-های-روسی-در-جنوب-سوریه




1)
since when is an israeli source reliable?
"Israel says its B-373", I stopped at "Israel says..", its not worth the toilet paper what they say

2)
Iran is legally in Syria, they have every right to defend their bases against every aggression

3)
Maybe it was B-373, maybe not, who knows, maybe it was Mersad, 3rd Khordad or whatever
In my opinion B-373 is a bit of an overkill, 3rd Khordad would do the job very effectively, also against F-35

4)
Why do you think russian S-35 intercepted Israel jets? To protect Iranians? maybe..
But I think they wanted to prevented an escalation.
What do you think would be the outcome if they had attacked the T-4 base?
Last time the zionists did it they got an very harsh respond, F-16 were falling from the sky..

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 925boy

GWXP said:


> Israel will use F-35 so Bavar 373 will be useless


those F-35s will crash then. I dont believe western pilots know how to fly that plan in realistic, complex environments as safely as other older fighter jets like F15s, F16s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

AmirPatriot said:


> Guys, it's not Bavar.
> 
> For a start Bavar is not an IRGC system for them to be using it in Syria, but also the vehicles look nothing like Bavar's vehicles.



I wonder if we ever going to see Sadid 630 in public demo... Also i tend to agree, unless Syrian military has purchased B373, IRGC is not likely to use it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> what did i say that was not common sense, Israel news is the one reporting that this is Bavar not me



how about you actually look at the picture.

It’s literally 3 arms transport convoys and smaller support vehicles. There is not a single Bavar launcher, not a single radar, not a single targeting system, etc.

I mean if Israel said Iran is building a ICBM and showed you a picture of a banana would you also believe it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> how about you actually look at the picture.
> 
> It’s literally 3 arms transport convoys and smaller support vehicles. There is not a single Bavar launcher, not a single radar, not a single targeting system, etc.
> 
> I mean if Israel said Iran is building a ICBM and showed you a picture of a banana would you also believe it?



agreed that is not Bavar, no i will not believe that but it doesn't make the accusation disappear too, it should be addressed, we have been silent for too long every body believed Israelis word on that no matter how many times you or me tell them its not an Bavar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Defense industry showed a Misagh MANPAD with a simple and quite cheap eye display system and a gyro orientation system. For probably a few hundert dollars extra (likely less), each Misagh can be linked to a Seraj/Sefat/modernized-Skyguard optical system of a AAA system and add a missile component, even at distance to it.

This system would then give the operator the exact target position to orient the seeker and more importantly the exact launch timing to achieve kill (as those tracking systems have laser range finder).

So inside the IADS a all-weather MANPAD component is added, possibly even at forward positions.

The previous thermal sight systems for Misagh series are good for independent operations outside the IADS. More expensive to the thermal camera and with lower PK due to lack of exact range and computed launch timing.

Critical AAA positions can now improve their reach and overall firepower via a cheap upgrade.

Lets see whether IRGCASF or IRIADF buy this DM product.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sineva

It looks like the Tabbas has been fitted with a back up optronic system








It was basically staring me in the face but I didnt notice it.
I think Its possible that we`ll see one for the 3rd of khordad as well

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## arashkamangir

man, these family of systems are just full of surprises when it comes to robustness.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

*
It appears that Iran is building a new Nazir Radar behind Bandar Abbas on Kuh-e Genu. Iran claims it has a range of up to 800 km and integrates directly with the Bavar-373. construction finished in Sept. Image date July, 2019.*

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *It appears that Iran is building a new Nazir Radar behind Bandar Abbas on Kuh-e Genu. Iran claims it has a range of up to 800 km and integrates directly with the Bavar-373. construction finished in Sept. Image date July, 2019.*


lol look at little spartan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Iskander

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1212579879675453441

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*

B-373's missile*

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## OldTwilight

Well , look like USA want start war and finish Iran before we manage to complete our defensive ring and make a war with us more costly for them ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

OldTwilight said:


> Well , look like USA want start war and finish Iran before we manage to complete our defensive ring and make a war with us more costly for them ...


Bluff.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

mohsen said:


> Bluff.



They commit act of war ... we should avenge our Sepahbod ...


----------



## mohsen

OldTwilight said:


> They commit act of war ... we should avenge our Sepahbod ...


We will. but Americans are bluffing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## OldTwilight

mohsen said:


> We will. but Americans are bluffing.



I don't underestimate them and I won't downplay Sepahbod Soleimani death by trying to paint Americans as weak and cowards ....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> Bluff.


Very possibly,however one should never underestimate the stupidity or recklessness of neo fascists like chump.
None the less despite any risk of war this assassination must be answered in kind,as any failure to do so would cause the collapse of the system of regional deterrence that iran has spent the last 30 years constructing and which its national security rests upon.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zectech

They knew Iran would want to retaliate, they want conflict because they are being chased out of Syria and Iraq by Iranians. And 2020 was going to be the year the US troops leave Iraq. To prevent that, US wanted to stage chaos in Iraq.

First Syria, then Iraq and then Iran. That is the idea. And anybody who attacks Israhell, gets nuked.

The goal was to bring democracy to Iraq and have US bases in Iraq. The fact that the Parliament chose anti-Americanism is the victory, the US loses the whole 2003 war with this. They want a re-do, this time, the Iraqi people are going to be the enemy. Anything that moves in Iraq is going to be shot at when the Amerikan draft army arrives.

This is too risky for Iran to retaliate if the US leaves.

You have to divide the base of trump for the 2020 election, you get them to revolt against trump by demanding US to leave and trump time and again refusing to leave. 25% of trump's base are young pro-Putin end the wars voters. They are beginning to hate trump now. trump can't win in 2020 if trump stays, and Iran and Iraq stay hot demanding US troops to leave.

How can US attack Iran if Washington can't attack through Iraq. Everyplace else is guarded by AShM. Iran is safe with a free Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

All AD sites should be hot and ready. Lets just hope that the initial barrage of ballistic missiles on airbases degrades US airpower enough for AD systems to mop up the rest.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> All AD sites should be hot and ready. Lets just hope that the initial barrage of ballistic missiles on airbases degrades US airpower enough for AD systems to mop up the rest.



Spent all that money playing around with F-5 clones instead of buying some decent interceptors in the 90’s or building one with a massive national focus like Bavar-373 project


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> Spent all that money playing around with F-5 clones instead of buying some decent interceptors in the 90’s or building one with a massive national focus like Bavar-373 project



F-5 clones were baby projects that barely absorbed much of the defence industry budget. Apart from a SHORAD system which is under development, Iran's AD shield is basically complete. Let's just hope that enough were mass produced to cover enough surface area in Iran to defend their assets. And I think Mesbah systems can fulfill the SHORAD role against cruise missiles.


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> F-5 clones were baby projects that barely absorbed much of the defence industry budget. Apart from a SHORAD system which is under development, Iran's AD shield is basically complete. Let's just hope that enough were mass produced to cover enough surface area in Iran to defend their assets. And I think Mesbah systems can fulfill the SHORAD role against cruise missiles.



Need tons of automatic skyguard rings, if I were Iran I would have built skyguard rings progressively from the border all the way to central Iran.

In the end it becomes a game of “tower defense strategy”.

skyguard AAs are relatively lower tech, but automation make them Able to intercept a lot of cannon fodder anything that gets through Would be picked up by the next ring and anything that gets through that by the next ring until finally reaching the more capable AD missile rings.


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> Need tons of automatic skyguard rings, if I were Iran I would have built skyguard rings progressively from the border all the way to central Iran.
> 
> In the end it becomes a game of “tower defense strategy”.
> 
> skyguard AAs are relatively lower tech, but automation make them Able to intercept a lot of cannon fodder anything that gets through Would be picked up by the next ring and anything that gets through that by the next ring until finally reaching the more capable AD missile rings.



I remember @AmirPatriot review of Iran AD coverage over a yr ago, there were a lot of domestically produced systems deployed. I don't know how it looks now and I don't want to find out for obvious reasons but I hope tensions since the nuclear deal pull out they increased production to address concerns. Iran does appear to operate and manufacture/upgrade Skyguard systems.

Ideally Iran should have

12 battalions of Bavar-373

12 battalions of Khordad-15

12 battalions of 3rd of Khordad

Hundreds of Iranian "Pantsir/Tor" equivalent to defend critical infrastructure against cruise missile strikes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Nomad40

IRAN wont do anything with these equipment


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mirage Battle Commander said:


> IRAN wont do anything with these equipment



More worthless comments fvck off.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Nomad40

TruthHurtz said:


> More worthless comments fvck off.


hi


----------



## skyshadow

Iran* has reportedly dispersed naval and air defense units, ballistic missiles are prepared to move and could do so within 24 hours. Next 24-36 hours could reveal whether or not they plan to actually retaliate, as they vowed to do.*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1214294479504576518

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

TheImmortal said:


> Spent all that money playing around with F-5 clones instead of buying some decent interceptors in the 90’s or building one with a massive national focus like Bavar-373 project



Jet's won't make much of too much of a difference if the US decides to go to war with Iran. Even if Iran had bought the best Russian / Chinese jets last year, in the end export versions can't compare with the weapons that a superpower like the US possesses. Iran's best bet is their defensive weapons, missiles, ballistic, cruise, supersonic anti ship missiles, etc Realistically though in a full scale war Iran would suffer more than the US. Iran can't really win a conventional war against the US face to face

The US presidential re-election is nearing and I highly doubt Trump would start a war with Iran during that time. Most likely Trump is bluffing about attacking Iran directly, but who knows, he doesn't seem to have a consistent strategy or even principles to stick to. 

Iran's best bet right now is to bog America down in a terrible quagmire in the middle east. Iran could do this by giving proxy forces advanced weapons, even arming the Taliban with missiles, rockets, ATGM's, manpads, sniper rifles with armor piercing rounds. 

After 20 yrs the taliban with a bunch of rusty weapons and sandals currently control 25% to 1/3rd of Afghanistan. Iran could even send in some tactical sniper units dressed in Ghillie suits. The Americans would get wrecked and before long would have to send in re-enforcements. 

Iran can do the same thing in Iraq. I'm sure Iran has tunnels going into Iraq. My guess is that they're currently at a stage where they're planning things out and moving, transporting weapons into place

Another option would be to do what the Chinese do and pump drugs into the USA. Think about it, the US is sanctioning Iran and despite this Iran is responsible for 70% of the worlds Opium seizures and Iran's population suffers extensively from the illegal drug trade in Afghanistan. Instead of burning the seized Opium, Heroine, etc Iran could make a massive profit, re-direct some of these drugs to the EU and then US. That would be very immoral but desperate times call for desperate measures. 

I'm not advocating any of this but I can guarantee that these are options which the Iranian leadership is considering.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

People don't understand how a Tor system in Tehran region could have believed that an U.S asset made it all the way undetected to that critical region.

The truth is that this was a realistic scenario.
First: The U.S admitted that they had an ESM satellite that picked up radio emissions of the Tor's radar.
So they have a good electronic map of Iran.
Electronic maps combined with stealth are the bread and butter of highest tier U.S airpower.
Based on this and Iran's vast and rugged terrain, this in combination with a line of sight map allows to draw a path at which a special asset at strict altitude and emission control, can come as far as Tehran.
This asset would not be a normal one such as a F-22, but a black project asset with very high range performance.
So the threat was realistic even if there would not exist many of such black assets.

Best practice to confront such threats would be to set up kill spheres, where everything is attacked with the shortest possible reaction time to avoid losing track.

It is was very unwise to allow civilian flights with the background knowledge of these things...

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Ich

PeeD said:


> It is was very unwise to allow civilian flights with the background knowledge of these things...



Yes. For me the question is: Were there more starts of civilian flights at that time at that airport? 

Maybe there was a no fly and then hours later some at the airport allow the start cause of business and maybe the pilot pressure the tower und urged the start.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> People don't understand how a Tor system in Tehran region could have believed that an U.S asset made it all the way undetected to that critical region.
> 
> The truth is that this was a realistic scenario.
> First: The U.S admitted that they had an ESM satellite that picked up radio emissions of the Tor's radar.
> So they have a good electronic map of Iran.
> Electronic maps combined with stealth are the bread and butter of highest tier U.S airpower.
> Based on this and Iran's vast and rugged terrain, this in combination with a line of sight map allows to draw a path at which a special asset at strict altitude and emission control, can come as far as Tehran.
> This asset would not be a normal one such as a F-22, but a black project asset with very high range performance.
> So the threat was realistic even if there would not exist many of such black assets.
> 
> Best practice to confront such threats would be to set up kill spheres, where everything is attacked with the shortest possible reaction time to avoid losing track.
> 
> It is was very unwise to allow civilian flights with the background knowledge of these things...



Thank you. That was my point in the first post of the thread "Did we just shoot down our own passenger plane?


Here is a new footage (first part of this video):
https://www.aparat.com/v/HchVg

This doesn't look like Tor M1 to me. @PeeD
What is your take on this?


----------



## striver44

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216006173230583808

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1215944903978557440
LOL where are those who denied this yesterday??????? Iran IRGC officer had admitted responsibility

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1215678704195600386


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> People don't understand how a Tor system in Tehran region could have believed that an U.S asset made it all the way undetected to that critical region.
> 
> The truth is that this was a realistic scenario.
> First: The U.S admitted that they had an ESM satellite that picked up radio emissions of the Tor's radar.
> So they have a good electronic map of Iran.
> Electronic maps combined with stealth are the bread and butter of highest tier U.S airpower.
> Based on this and Iran's vast and rugged terrain, this in combination with a line of sight map allows to draw a path at which a special asset at strict altitude and emission control, can come as far as Tehran.
> This asset would not be a normal one such as a F-22, but a black project asset with very high range performance.
> So the threat was realistic even if there would not exist many of such black assets.
> 
> Best practice to confront such threats would be to set up kill spheres, where everything is attacked with the shortest possible reaction time to avoid losing track.
> 
> It is was very unwise to allow civilian flights with the background knowledge of these things...



So a super secret Black project made it all the way to Tehran, but then SUDDENDLY its RCS went from that of a mosquito to a damn blimp? LOL

The mental gymnastics some of you guys are performing to justify this accident is absurd.

This officer was grossly incompetent and sitting next to a massive international airport and mistook a passenger plane for a threat without communicating with the plane. It would have taken less than 30 seconds for operator to say

Operator: “Unknown threat you approaching IRGC military zone identify yourself immediately or risk being shot down”

Pilot: “IRGC this is a damn passenger plane please learn to read your radar better”

You see how easy that was?

There is a reason why one of the heads of IRGC already accepted to take whatever punishment the government bestows. This was a reckless and amateur action. No justification.



Iskander said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1215678704195600386



Looks like Iranian air defense crews have a history of being borderline retarded.

All these mishaps and no risk management protocol? IRGC should be severely punished

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> So a super secret Black project made it all the way to Tehran, but then SUDDENDLY its RCS went from that of a mosquito to a damn blimp? LOL
> 
> The mental gymnastics some of you guys are performing to justify this accident is absurd.
> 
> This officer was grossly incompetent and sitting next to a massive international airport and mistook a passenger plane for a threat without communicating with the plane. It would have taken less than 30 seconds for operator to say



Tor-M1 is at its core a early to mid-80's system even lacking digital Monitors. What makes you think it has a RCS - range comparison algorithm?

CMs, more so stealth ones would be the most likely threat but high altitude could potentially have been a unknown kind of black asset.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Tor-M1 is at its core a early to mid-80's system even lacking digital Monitors. What makes you think it has a RCS - range comparison algorithm?
> 
> CMs, more so stealth ones would be the most likely threat but high altitude could potentially have been a unknown kind of black asset.



So your telling me a TOR-M1 cannot distinguish between a passenger plane and a cruise missile because it Possibly lacks “digital monitors”

Come on, that TOR-M1 is tied to a command and control unit and other radars. At the very least the operator would double check and triple check before firing.

But based on Pentagon report, Iranian air defense units have a history of reckless action.


----------



## Stryker1982

None of this would've happened if flights were grounded as per standard international protocal in war time

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Myself

PeeD said:


> Tor-M1 is at its core a early to mid-80's system even lacking digital Monitors. What makes you think it has a RCS - range comparison algorithm?
> 
> CMs, more so stealth ones would be the most likely threat but high altitude could potentially have been a unknown kind of black asset.


So, when it’s comes to propaganda Iran can upgrade its Tor-M1 units to higher standards than the original manufacturer, but when it comes to responsibility they cannot differentiate between a passenger plane and a cruise missile? As usual, the U.S. version of story should be the most accurate one, meaning that the plane was hit by two missiles, not only one.



Stryker1982 said:


> None of this would've happened if flights were grounded as per standard international protocal in war time


Please don’t be naive. If they had grounded all the flights, they wouldn’t be able to target one of them, and their plot would have been failed before born! The issue with these dishonest morons was that they were thinking the U.S. would retaliate by firing multiple cruise missiles. Iranian officials knew better than anybody else that they could not withstand a prolonged war with the U.S., and one of the very few options to stop such war was to engage the U.S. in a human-related tragedy.


----------



## arashkamangir

Guys, I don't think this was a Tor M1 system. The launch is inconsistent in my eyes but please provide feedback.

https://www.aparat.com/v/HchVg

@PeeD what do you think?


----------



## Ich

arashkamangir said:


> Guys, I don't think this was a Tor M1 system. The launch is inconsistent in my eyes but please provide feedback.
> 
> https://www.aparat.com/v/HchVg
> 
> @PeeD what do you think?



You think about manpad?


----------



## Myself

Ich said:


> You think about manpad?


It seems to be Ra’ad system.


----------



## Arminkh

Myself said:


> It seems to be Ra’ad system.


It probably was a smaller system. If the picture we saw from part of the missile really belongs to this event the could be Ya Zahra or something similar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Guess all these fancy radars all over the country are useless because if you can’t even tell a passenger plane taking off RIGHT next to you from an enemy object that lord help Iran in a war.

I think our own F-14s, F-5s, and other jets will be shot down leaving military airfields by our air defense teams located on those SAME airfields.

As the Farsi saying goes “Vaghean turki”
Maybe in this case Iranian air defense crews “shayad lor hastan”.


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Guess all these fancy radars all over the country are useless because if you can’t even tell a passenger plane taking off RIGHT next to you from an enemy object that lord help Iran in a war.
> 
> I think our own F-14s, F-5s, and other jets will be shot down leaving military airfields by our air defense teams located on those SAME airfields.
> 
> As the Farsi saying goes “Vaghean turki”
> Maybe in this case Iranian air defense crews “shayad lor hastan”.


Enough body! No one can claim their radars are so robust that something like this will never happen. That is why US declared NOTAM in the area because they don't trust their systems to be able to tell the difference in war situation. Iran's AD did exactly what it was supposed to do. 

They should have grounded all civilian flights and they didn't. That's the problem. And that is a big oversight and negligence.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Guess all these fancy radars all over the country are useless because if you can’t even tell a passenger plane taking off RIGHT next to you from an enemy object that lord help Iran in a war.
> 
> I think our own F-14s, F-5s, and other jets will be shot down leaving military airfields by our air defense teams located on those SAME airfields.
> 
> As the Farsi saying goes “Vaghean turki”
> Maybe in this case Iranian air defense crews “shayad lor hastan”.


Instead of getting emotional maybe do some research on the system in question.....and its limitations,just a thought.
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K331-Tor.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

It was human error, one operator panicking, perhaps not following protocol, not attempting to communicate with the passenger plane and firing prematurely. The fact of the matter is that all civilian passenger planes should have been grounded for at least 24-48 hrs following the missile strike. 



Sineva said:


> Instead of getting emotional maybe do some research on the system in question.....and its limitations,just a thought.
> https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K331-Tor.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Instead of getting emotional maybe do some research on the system in question.....and its limitations,just a thought.
> https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K331-Tor.html



Oh let’s now blame the system. Let’s not blame the PERSONEL let’s blame the machine! Grow up!

In 2007 Tor-M1 fired on Civilian airliner
In 2008 a F-14 was targeted and fired upon
Another incident AA engaged Iranian airliner and drone

Go read pentagon report and don’t get “emotional”. There is a track record of incompetence here. It was only a matter of time before that incompetence led to a disaster.

If you look at IRGC that is how they operate, one only needs to google how many “accidents” IRGC has had in various fields since 1990.

I guess US should blame its “destroyer” and it’s “limitations” for shooting an Iranian airliner in 1988


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Oh let’s now blame the system. Let’s not blame the PERSONEL let’s blame the machine! Grow up!


Not at all,however ranting about incompetence while failing to acknowledge the limitations of the sam system itself,ie old soviet technology,short raged radar,even shorter ranged interceptor,very little reaction time for the operator to make a shoot/no shoot decision in.
So maybe you should grow up or failing that at least try to keep an open mind.


TheImmortal said:


> In 2007 Tor-M1 fired on Civilian airliner
> In 2008 a F-14 was targeted and fired upon
> Another incident AA engaged Iranian airliner and drone


3 in the last 12 years,certainly not great but not too terrible either and 2 of these events occurred when iran was still in the process of building its new air defence network back in the 2000s so was still having to rely on a lot of older or plain outdated equipment.
The question of course is were these all tor related?,if they were then this points the finger at either the system,its type of deployments,the training of the operators[this includes both the training syllabus itself and the quality of the training] or ALL of these factors combined.
Without knowing ALL of the relevant factors in each of these events its impossible to come to ANY conclusions one way or the other


TheImmortal said:


> I guess US should blame its “destroyer” and it’s “limitations” for shooting an Iranian airliner in 1988


No,that was pure criminal negligence on the part of the ships captain followed up by a botched cover up by the us government.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> Guys, I don't think this was a Tor M1 system. The launch is inconsistent in my eyes but please provide feedback.
> 
> https://www.aparat.com/v/HchVg
> 
> @PeeD what do you think?



That looks like a Tor.

Only a Tor is prone to such a mistake: With the later Pantsir, it is the fastest reacting SHORAD system in the world.
It can operate independently on its own.

Design criteria back in the 80's was the capability to reliably intercept HARM type ARM approaching at up to mach 2.

As a system made to protect armored divisions, IFF was also not a very important concern. It kills anything that comes close to it if it looses contact to its command post. It has its own search and track radar to be able to work without command post.

Checking RCS is not part of the normal process of such a system of this vintage, role and computerized signal analysis capabilities. Reaction times are too low. Only a experienced operator may would have been able to classify the intensity of the blimp on the tube and tell a 737 apart from a CM.
This is a last dish system, if something reaches it, upper echelon systems normally have failed.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> That looks like a Tor.
> 
> Only a Tor is prone to such a mistake: With the later Pantsir, it is the fastest reacting SHORAD system in the world.
> It can operate independently on its own.
> 
> Design criteria back in the 80's was the capability to reliably intercept HARM type ARM approaching at up to mach 2.
> 
> As a system made to protect armored divisions, IFF was also not a very important concern. It kills anything that comes close to it if it looses contact to its command post. It has its own search and track radar to be able to work without command post.
> 
> Checking RCS is not part of the normal process of such a system of this vintage, role and computerized signal analysis capabilities. Reaction times are too low. Only a experienced operator may would have been able to classify the intensity of the blimp on the tube and tell a 737 apart from a CM.
> This is a last dish system, if something reaches it, upper echelon systems normally have failed.



@PeeD in the Aparat video, the security camera footage of the launch, the missile launch mechanism is more similar to a launch at angle. The missile acceleration seems to be lower than what we have seen from Tor M1.

What you are describing about Tor M1 can be more or less be said about systems of similar generation. In my opinion, what else do we have around Tehran that is operated by Sepah that lacks in IFF and advanced signal processing. Could it have been variants of Herz 9? Older SA-6?


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD in the Aparat video, the security camera footage of the launch, the missile launch mechanism is more similar to a launch at angle. The missile acceleration seems to be lower than what we have seen from Tor M1.
> 
> What you are describing about Tor M1 can be more or less be said about systems of similar generation. In my opinion, what else do we have around Tehran that is operated by Sepah that lacks in IFF and advanced signal processing. Could it have been variants of Herz 9? Older SA-6?



IRGC already said the missile exploded NEAR the plane. It is possible operator fired then realized his mistake and attempted to detonate.

If SA-6 a missile truly hit that plane it would explode in mid air like in Ukraine civil war incident.

Looks like a near aircraft explosion launched shrapnel into the engines causing failure.


----------



## Myself

TheImmortal said:


> I *think* our own F-14s, F-5s, and other jets will be shot down leaving military airfields by our air defense teams located on those SAME airfields.



No need to think, it will surely happen. 
In reality the situation was not even close to a real war, and this is the outcome! Just imagine what would happen under the real war circumstances with countries like U.S. or Israeli.
*Peed* is a respectful and respective member, but with no offense his fake empire of a Capable Iran Air Defense Force collapsed after this sad tragedy on Wednesday.


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD in the Aparat video, the security camera footage of the launch, the missile launch mechanism is more similar to a launch at angle. The missile acceleration seems to be lower than what we have seen from Tor M1.
> 
> What you are describing about Tor M1 can be more or less be said about systems of similar generation. In my opinion, what else do we have around Tehran that is operated by Sepah that lacks in IFF and advanced signal processing. Could it have been variants of Herz 9? Older SA-6?



The key issue is that a single Tor vehicle is a complete independend air defense system.
It was ordered to move to that position and cover it.
Well likely that this was outside the 4 system battery layout. This severely reduces your situational awarnes but also let you to send a Tor to a place when needed and get to job done.

A Crotale or Herz-9 for exaple, has normally a Skyguard radar or Sefat to assign a target for it. Skyguard has longer range and is better integrated into Iran's IADS.

Such an accident would be a typical one for a Tor outside it's battery structure.
But then, as said, if a Tor kill-sphere is present all friendly assets must be aware of it.

You mentioned the IRGC-ASF SA-6. This system would also be prone to such a mistake if it is forced to work with it's legacy search radar and without IADS input. If not upgraded the SA-6 would also lack a signal processing analysis system that can classify targets.
However at least the SA-6 radar has much longer range than that of the Tor to allow for plausibility checks and so on.

In any wartime situation, IRGC would tell the IRIAF where it has kill-zones and altitudes which must be avoided.
This approach simplifies the situation and a possible failure of the IFF system.
Lessons must be learned for the Tor based Oghab system.

Tor-M1 is performance wise still a state of the art system with few comparable potent systems existing. But it lacks features that would allow a safe operation in peacetime, especially if a vehicle operates completely independent...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sha ah

The biggest mistake was not closing off the airspace. After Iran launched the missiles several nations forbid their planes from flying over Iranian and Iraqi airspace. If nothing else, at that point someone at Iran's high command should have realized their mistake and ordered the airspace closed for 24-48 hrs. 

The plane was following a typical flight path, heading away from the airport, not towards it. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it true that passenger planes give off a radar signature, like a signal of some sort identifying them as a civilian airliner ? Also wouldn't the direction, speed of the plane, size of the radar signature also be a clear give away that the "target" was actually a civilian plane, not a cruise missile ? I mean honestly if an air defense system cannot differentiate between a cruise missile headed towards the airport and a civilian airliner headed away from the airport, then what good is that system ? 

I've also heard rumors that the accident took place as a result of human error ? Aside from not closing off the airspace are they implying that one of the operators panicked and made a mistake ? Don't two operators have to verify before deciding to launch a missile towards a target ? There are so many questions and so few answers. 

In my opinion, at the very least, there has to be a thorough, unbiased inquiry where the entire event is dissected and analyzed. Even if this inquiry is not shared with the west or outside world, people with decision making power must punish everyone and anyone who played a role in the negligence and incompetence which led to this disaster. Whether it's demotions, dishonorable discharge or even jail time or in the extreme unlikely case an execution. The latter is unlikely however there has to be a shakeup at the very least.

The Canadian PM and his demands are ridiculous to say the least. Demanding that the people responsible be punished. This when the USA ended up giving medals to the crew of the Vinnecennes who shot down Iran Air Flight 655. In terms of Canadians being involved in the investigation to the point where they can interrogate Iranians, that's not only outrageous but ridiculous. Now on the subject of compensation, yes indeed Iran should compensate the families of those who were killed however the US banking sanctions will make that very difficult. Perhaps Canada could send a private jet and Iran could give them a set amount of currency or metal in exchange for Canada compensating the victims who live in Canada ? I'm not sure how that would work. Canada also ripped off Iran a few years back by selling its embassy properties in Canada and giving them to Jewish victims of Hezbollah ? 





PeeD said:


> The key issue is that a single Tor vehicle is a complete independend air defense system.
> It was ordered to move to that position and cover it.
> Well likely that this was outside the 4 system battery layout. This severely reduces your situational awarnes but also let you to send a Tor to a place when needed and get to job done.
> 
> A Crotale or Herz-9 for exaple, has normally a Skyguard radar or Sefat to assign a target for it. Skyguard has longer range and is better integrated into Iran's IADS.
> 
> Such an accident would be a typical one for a Tor outside it's battery structure.
> But then, as said, if a Tor kill-sphere is present all friendly assets must be aware of it.
> 
> You mentioned the IRGC-ASF SA-6. This system would also be prone to such a mistake if it is forced to work with it's legacy search radar and without IADS input. If not upgraded the SA-6 would also lack a signal processing analysis system that can classify targets.
> However at least the SA-6 radar has much longer range than that of the Tor to allow for plausibility checks and so on.
> 
> In any wartime situation, IRGC would tell the IRIAF where it has kill-zones and altitudes which must be avoided.
> This approach simplifies the situation and a possible failure of the IFF system.
> Lessons must be learned for the Tor based Oghab system.
> 
> Tor-M1 is performance wise still a state of the art system with few comparable potent systems existing. But it lacks features that would allow a safe operation in peacetime, especially if a vehicle operates completely independent...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

@sha ha

As explained in detail, this generation system computer systems don't do signal analysis, at least not in army short range systems that normally never come in such situations.

It's IFF system is Soviet military IFF. Not 2000s civilian IFF.

Again a Tor outside IADS, on it's own, should never be operated outside a no flight zone for civilian and own forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iran purchased the Tor SAMs in the mid 2000's so comparing them to Tor systems from the 70's/80's isn't really fair is it ? I very much doubt if the hardware and software wasn't somewhat up to date to the standards of the time when Iran made the purchase. 

Even outside of an IADS, any missile defense system has to be able to tell the difference between a passenger plane leaving an airport and an incoming cruise missile, otherwise that SAM system would be absolutely useless as a weapon.

I mean what are you saying that Iran purchased TORs that were exact copies of what was produced in the 80's ? That's pretty much impossible. I mean any weapons system constantly goes through upgrades. Look at the T-72's Iran purchased in the early 2000's. They're T-72's but you comparing them to T-72's from the mid 80's isn't fair is it ?

Furthermore even missile defense systems from the 70/80's,, whether integrated into a command center or not, seem to be able to differentiate between civilian airliners, friendly jets and enemy targets / incoming cruise missiles. I mean, if you think about it, they have to be able to otherwise we would have seen countless civilian passenger planes getting shot down one after another throughout the last few decades.

Wouldn't the Tor system receive constant upgrades as well ? Wouldn't any weapons system receive some sort of upgrades over time ? Otherwise an iphone 3 cpu would be 1000x more powerful than an 80's Tor CPU. Iran seems to have upgraded their Hawk SAMs if I'm not mistaken and Iran tends to be good at upgrading older gear.

I still don't understand how any SAM system can't differentiate between a civilian airliner, a friendly jet / drone and an enemy jet/ drone /cruise missile. I mean during peace time but especially during war time a SAM would be useless if it couldn't differentiate between friendly and enemy jets/cruise missiles. It just doesn't make sense.

If what you're saying is true then the Tor system stationed near the airport or any Iranian airfield would be shooting down civilian planes, Iranian jets, left and right, all the time. The factg that they don't shoot down planes by mistake all the time proves that there's some identification system or some protocol that prevents mistakes from constantly occurring. 

In my opinion, it is extremely likely that the operators were on high alert, expecting an attack, perhaps they were overexcited ? over worked ? over anxious ? and/or they simply panicked ?

In any case I want a full investigation, even if its not made public and I want a shakeup of the higher ups and those responsible. Something has to be done. This should have been avoided but now it has to be prevented and those who were negligent and incompetent have to be demoted, dishonorably discharged or worse. 



PeeD said:


> @sha ha
> 
> As explained in detail, this generation system computer systems don't do signal analysis, at least not in army short range systems that normally never come in such situations.
> 
> It's IFF system is Soviet military IFF. Not 2000s civilian IFF.
> 
> Again a Tor outside IADS, on it's own, should never be operated outside a no flight zone for civilian and own forces.


----------



## PeeD

sha ah said:


> Iran purchased the Tor SAMs in the mid 2000's so comparing them to Tor systems from the 70's/80's isn't really fair is it ? I very much doubt if the hardware and software wasn't somewhat up to date to the standards of the time when Iran made the purchase.
> 
> Even outside of an IADS, any missile defense system has to be able to tell the difference between a passenger plane leaving an airport and an incoming cruise missile, otherwise that SAM system would be absolutely useless as a weapon.



The design is from the mid 80's, still state of the art but lacking computing power to do complex signal analysis, today standard in all Iranian systems.
Under 90% of the conditions it would not need it anyway. Longer range systems and the IADS would do that.
If something enters Tor kill envelope it almost certainly a valid target.
And no Russia would not update the Tor-M1 sold to Iran in the mid 2000's. They like Greek ones are the same: M1 export standard from the late 80's which in turn is a minor modification of the original Tor of the mid-80's.

Tor is made to move with tank divisions protect them and avoid killing aircraft and helicopters with Soviet military IFF system. In no scenario airliners would start close to Tor's envelope. Only in peacetime situations where it is directly under IADS control a safe operation could be established. Unfortunately on that night it had lost contact to IADS and apparently believed a war has started and it needs to protect its assigned objects at all cost. This would be standard practice: for some reason the enemy has been successful to immediately degrade the IADS, hence independent operation in worst case situation starts... only that it was no emergency situation, enemy spoofed and deceived only... and civilian flights were allowed to be done...



sha ah said:


> I mean what are you saying that Iran purchased TORs that were exact copies of what was produced in the 80's ? That's pretty much impossible. I mean any weapons system constantly goes through upgrades. Look at the T-72's Iran purchased in the early 2000's. They're T-72's but you comparing them to T-72's from the mid 80's isn't fair is it ?



Nice example: Yes mid-90's Iranian T-72S are the same as the mid-80's T-72B, the strongest T-72 variant. Changing a working model is a difficult task, sometimes its not needed. Computerized signal analysis may be even regarded as something unnecessary today for a system with the original role of the Tor.




sha ah said:


> Wouldn't the Tor system receive constant upgrades as well ? Wouldn't any weapons system receive some sort of upgrades over time ? Otherwise an iphone 3 cpu would be 1000x more powerful than an 80's Tor CPU. Iran seems to have upgraded their Hawk SAMs if I'm not mistaken and Iran tends to be good at upgrading older gear.



No need to upgrade a working system. Only if it is necessary to add a capability to it. Tor-M1 is a great system today for it's role, even 35 years after it was made.



sha ah said:


> I still don't understand how any SAM system can't differentiate between a civilian airliner, a friendly jet / drone and an enemy jet/ drone /cruise missile. I mean during peace time but especially during war time a SAM would be useless if it couldn't differentiate between friendly and enemy jets/cruise missiles. It just doesn't make sense.



Civilian aircraft normally soon climb outside the altitude envelope of the Tor-M1 into safe and fix corridors.
Pantsir-S1 for example is an Russian airforce system, designed to operate near airports and air bases. Tor-M1 on the other hand is a army system made to move with tank divisions with only Soviet/Russian aircraft and helicopters close to it.
Btw. the alleged Buk kill in Ukraine: Buk is also a army system with Soviet military IFF...



sha ah said:


> If what you're saying is true then the Tor system stationed near the airport or any Iranian airfield would be shooting down civilian planes, Iranian jets, left and right, all the time. The factg that they don't shoot down planes by mistake all the time proves that there's some identification system or some protocol that prevents mistakes from constantly occurring.



1: Alert 3 normally would have all civilian airports closed at least, or even all air corridors closed
2: Activating Tor-M1 for a given area is a dangerous step given the details of the system
3: Tor-M1 operating on its own, outside IADS will just kill anything that enters its assigned sector in alter 3 conditions.

So this is why things like that didn't happen in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

sha ah said:


> Iran purchased the Tor SAMs in the mid 2000's so comparing them to Tor systems from the 70's/80's isn't really fair is it ? I very much doubt if the hardware and software wasn't somewhat up to date to the standards of the time when Iran made the purchase.
> 
> Even outside of an IADS, any missile defense system has to be able to tell the difference between a passenger plane leaving an airport and an incoming cruise missile, otherwise that SAM system would be absolutely useless as a weapon.
> 
> I mean what are you saying that Iran purchased TORs that were exact copies of what was produced in the 80's ? That's pretty much impossible. I mean any weapons system constantly goes through upgrades. Look at the T-72's Iran purchased in the early 2000's. They're T-72's but you comparing them to T-72's from the mid 80's isn't fair is it ?
> 
> Furthermore even missile defense systems from the 70/80's,, whether integrated into a command center or not, seem to be able to differentiate between civilian airliners, friendly jets and enemy targets / incoming cruise missiles. I mean, if you think about it, they have to be able to otherwise we would have seen countless civilian passenger planes getting shot down one after another throughout the last few decades.
> 
> Wouldn't the Tor system receive constant upgrades as well ? Wouldn't any weapons system receive some sort of upgrades over time ? Otherwise an iphone 3 cpu would be 1000x more powerful than an 80's Tor CPU. Iran seems to have upgraded their Hawk SAMs if I'm not mistaken and Iran tends to be good at upgrading older gear.
> 
> I still don't understand how any SAM system can't differentiate between a civilian airliner, a friendly jet / drone and an enemy jet/ drone /cruise missile. I mean during peace time but especially during war time a SAM would be useless if it couldn't differentiate between friendly and enemy jets/cruise missiles. It just doesn't make sense.
> 
> If what you're saying is true then the Tor system stationed near the airport or any Iranian airfield would be shooting down civilian planes, Iranian jets, left and right, all the time. The factg that they don't shoot down planes by mistake all the time proves that there's some identification system or some protocol that prevents mistakes from constantly occurring.
> 
> In my opinion, it is extremely likely that the operators were on high alert, expecting an attack, perhaps they were overexcited ? over worked ? over anxious ? and/or they simply panicked ?
> 
> In any case I want a full investigation, even if its not made public and I want a shakeup of the higher ups and those responsible. Something has to be done. This should have been avoided but now it has to be prevented and those who were negligent and incompetent have to be demoted, dishonorably discharged or worse.


The Tor M1 that iran purchased only had fairly basic upgrades over the original baseline Tor M.In many respects this is still a 1980s level system,tho a pretty advanced one for the time,it wasnt until the M2 that the system received a deep modernisation.
If you`re interested this is probably one of the best sites on the subject.
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K331-Tor.html


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216042965157720065

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

The camera man who was filming the scene even before it happens was arrested.

فیلم‌بردار صحنه اصابت موشک به هواپیمای اوکراینی دستگیر شد | خبرگزاری فارس

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> The camera man who was filming the scene even before it happens was arrested.
> 
> فیلم‌بردار صحنه اصابت موشک به هواپیمای اوکراینی دستگیر شد | خبرگزاری فارس



This is what the Republic does...pathetic 

How is this any different than the Shah’s secret police?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> This is what the Republic does...pathetic
> 
> How is this any different than the Shah’s secret police?


Pathetic are the US troll army in this forum.

This guy has to answer what he was doing in that part of the town, and why at a freezing night he was filming at a *clear sky* to supposedly accidentally capture the hit moment.

Was Iranian Missile Operator Tricked Into Shooting Down The Ukrainian Airlines Plane Over Tehran? | SOTN: Alternative News, Analysis & Commentary

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

TheImmortal said:


> This is what the Republic does...pathetic
> 
> How is this any different than the Shah’s secret police?



If they didn't think there was a reason to arrest the cameraman, they wouldn't have announced it on media for the world to see.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Pathetic are the US troll army in this forum.
> 
> This guy has to answer what he was doing in that part of the town, and why at a freezing night he was filming at a *clear sky* to supposedly accidentally capture the hit moment.
> 
> Was Iranian Missile Operator Tricked Into Shooting Down The Ukrainian Airlines Plane Over Tehran? | SOTN: Alternative News, Analysis & Commentary



Bro have you even been to Tehran? So now a cameraman is to blame for gross incompetence of IRGC?

There are people in the streets going to work starting at 5 AM. And this incident supposedly took place near dawn. 

Nothing strange that ONE person with a smart phone was walking in the streets near dawn. 

Not everyone has access to cars and South Tehran is known as the poorer districts of Tehran.



TruthHurtz said:


> If they didn't think there was a reason to arrest the cameraman, they wouldn't have announced it on media for the world to see.



Yeah they arrested because he leaked the embarrassing video that prevented the IRGC security apparatus from deflecting blame.
That video is what sealed the deal.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216351800103706624
Pilots were killed instantly as the missile shot
Gun blasted the cockpit from outside with Shrapnel.


I swear government shills come up with anything to justify Incompetence. If Iran was honest from the start this wouldn’t have happened. It’s the 21st century you cannot cover up things with satellite imagery everywhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> Bro have you even been to Tehran? So now a cameraman is to blame for gross incompetence of IRGC?
> 
> There are people in the streets going to work starting at 5 AM. And this incident supposedly took place near dawn.
> 
> Nothing strange that ONE person with a smart phone was walking in the streets near dawn.
> 
> Not everyone has access to cars and South Tehran is known as the poorer districts of Tehran.


So what if he lives in other side of Tehran?!
and yeah, poor people walk in the streets 5AM while filming random sides of sky!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raghfarm007

TheImmortal said:


> If Iran was honest from the start this wouldn’t have happened. It’s the 21st century you cannot cover up things with satellite imagery everywhere.



What do you mean this wouldnt have hapenned????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Raghfarm007 said:


> What do you mean this wouldnt have hapenned????



The anger and loss of credibility would be a lot less against IRI. But from the start everyone denied they had anything to do with it.

Then more and more countries began saying they have evidence and Iran STILL denied it and was going to do shady stuff like decode the black box themselves (which they ended up not being able to do).




mohsen said:


> So what if he lives in other side of Tehran?!
> and yeah, poor people walk in the streets 5AM while filming random sides of sky!!



You sir are nothing, but a government propagandist. I mean the fact you have F-313 the biggest propaganda story as your avatar says it all.

Tehran has tons of people in the streets at 5AM, it’s a city of 10M plus people! And the person started recording likely when he heard the sound of missiles/explosion. Given the geopolitical environment knowing Iran had attacked US, the person probably thought something was happening.

But again a typical propagandist like yourself was adamant Iran had nothing to do with it. Then when the news came out you disappeared along with your 200 dead US soldiers from the Al-Assad airbase incident.

So typical that a delusional individual like you would be focused on a citizen filming a strange event rather than why IRGC shot down a damn passenger plane 8KM from the airport. Or better yet why IRGC leadership had FAULTY INTELLIGENCE and told its air defense operators that cruise missiles were coming. But let’s focus on the cameraman because that clearly is a matter of national security....utter delusional human being.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> So a super secret Black project made it all the way to Tehran, but then SUDDENDLY its RCS went from that of a mosquito to a damn blimp? LOL
> 
> The mental gymnastics some of you guys are performing to justify this accident is absurd.
> 
> This officer was grossly incompetent and sitting next to a massive international airport and mistook a passenger plane for a threat without communicating with the plane. It would have taken less than 30 seconds for operator to say
> 
> Operator: “Unknown threat you approaching IRGC military zone identify yourself immediately or risk being shot down”
> 
> Pilot: “IRGC this is a damn passenger plane please learn to read your radar better”
> 
> You see how easy that was?
> 
> There is a reason why one of the heads of IRGC already accepted to take whatever punishment the government bestows. This was a reckless and amateur action. No justification.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Iranian air defense crews have a history of being borderline retarded.
> 
> All these mishaps and no risk management protocol? IRGC should be severely punished


are you live in liberty
میگم اگه میتونی بیا گوه سپاه بخور باشه بی هویت بدبخت معلومه که این سازمانی های نجس همه جا ریختن دور نیست که همتون تو لیبرتی به درک واصل میکنیم چرا نمیگی اربابت که پرچمش زدی و هواپیمای مسافری میزنه انم تو فضای یک کشور دیگه و مدال هم میده نباید مجازات بشه خوب بالاخره جیره خور جیره خوره با ان پرچم نکبتی خیلی کیف میکنی یه پرچمی گذاشتی که کلا از پیدایشش با خون بوده تا حالا بابا صد رحمت به بی هویت



TheImmortal said:


> Oh let’s now blame the system. Let’s not blame the PERSONEL let’s blame the machine! Grow up!
> 
> In 2007 Tor-M1 fired on Civilian airliner
> In 2008 a F-14 was targeted and fired upon
> Another incident AA engaged Iranian airliner and drone
> 
> Go read pentagon report and don’t get “emotional”. There is a track record of incompetence here. It was only a matter of time before that incompetence led to a disaster.
> 
> If you look at IRGC that is how they operate, one only needs to google how many “accidents” IRGC has had in various fields since 1990.
> 
> I guess US should blame its “destroyer” and it’s “limitations” for shooting an Iranian airliner in 1988


lets blame someone like you without identity who only know how to bow and kiss ,,, where are you from are you iranian if you think you are . i dont think so maybe some of that people in qajar left alone of those english creature in our land
میگن بادمجون به تخمش میبره حسنی به باباش
how bad sepah burening u to show your face like this no problem go buy ,,ss painkiller maybe works are you in operator room you know how they are look like.who many traitor and enemy this holy land iran have but the iran always show in history win in final

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> You sir are nothing, but a government propagandist. I mean the fact you have F-313 the biggest propaganda story as your avatar says it all.
> 
> Tehran has tons of people in the streets at 5AM, it’s a city of 10M plus people! And the person started recording likely when he heard the sound of missiles/explosion. Given the geopolitical environment knowing Iran had attacked US, the person probably thought something was happening.
> 
> But again a typical propagandist like yourself was adamant Iran had nothing to do with it. Then when the news came out you disappeared along with your 200 dead US soldiers from the Al-Assad airbase incident.
> 
> So typical that a delusional individual like you would be focused on a citizen filming a strange event rather than why IRGC shot down a damn passenger plane 8KM from the airport. Or better yet why IRGC leadership had FAULTY INTELLIGENCE and told its air defense operators that cruise missiles were coming. But let’s focus on the cameraman because that clearly is a matter of national security....utter delusional human being.


Go back to your CIA nest and keep your BS to yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

I urge my hamvatans to take a moment and read through this tweet. Even if you don’t agree with the conclusion, the hardware depiction is very informative.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217221181029474306
ps. @PeeD is this by any chance your Twitter account?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## viewer

mohsen said:


> So what if he lives in other side of Tehran?!
> and yeah, poor people walk in the streets 5AM while filming random sides of sky!!


there were two missiles. and he filmed second one after 30 sec ( it was ordinary when you saw first missile and knew about conflict occurred between iran and us you filming the sky for other missiles ) . the question is why they arrested him because of filming ?????? ( when they know the truth !!! )
now they had to arrest this cctv ( why this cctv filmed our mistake ??? ) 
https://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/951837/لحظه-شلیک-هر-دو-موشک-به-بوئینگ-737

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

viewer said:


> there were two missiles. and he filmed second one after 30 sec ( it was ordinary when you saw first missile and knew about conflict occurred between iran and us you filming the sky for other missiles ) . the question is why they arrested him because of filming ?????? ( when they know the truth !!! )
> now they had to arrest this cctv ( why this cctv filmed our mistake ??? )
> https://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/951837/لحظه-شلیک-هر-دو-موشک-به-بوئینگ-737


No, it's the first missile.
by second missile, aircrafts fuel on the wing catches fire.

Sabotage is one theory and naturally they have to investigate it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Sina-1 said:


> I urge my hamvatans to take a moment and read through this tweet. Even if you don’t agree with the conclusion, the hardware depiction is very informative.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217221181029474306
> ps. @PeeD is this by any chance your Twitter account?


Agreed,I think that this post does an extremely concise job of pointing out the potential problems and weaknesses with this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## viewer

mohsen said:


> No, it's the first missile.
> by second missile, aircrafts fuel on the wing catches fire.
> 
> Sabotage is one theory and naturally they have to investigate it.


if that is first missile ( i don't know how you detect it as first missile ) then they should investigate.
in the cctv video you can see that there is no fire. nor in first and second


----------



## ashool

viewer said:


> f that is first missile ( i don't know how you detect it as first missile ) then they should investigate.


why you say that its about our national security why he must send it to enemy .are we shut down the plane most of them iranian if yes for what reason 2 why the hell doing there in desert in 6am .do you no dont let any one getting near 10km from site. 3 who the hell he can get the missile movie with that speed are you the ones saying it is iq 40 or some ones in island in albania for example and why you get mad of this mistake


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> No, it's the first missile.
> by second missile, aircrafts fuel on the wing catches fire.
> 
> Sabotage is one theory and naturally they have to investigate it.


the film clearly show two missile and by the time of explosions I say the aircraft was flying toward the air-defense site . then after some time from the second hit we have the engine explosion .
first hit took 16sec second hit around 12 sec and engine explosion 50sec later .
I wonder why the pilot didn't ask for any help in that time .

by the way @TheImmortal in which picture you say the sign of any shrapnel on cockpit ? i only see one who showed something similar on the wings

by the way does anybody can explain to me why the CCTV is so shaky ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> the film clearly show two missile and by the time of explosions I say the aircraft was flying toward the air-defense site . then after some time from the second hit we have the engine explosion .
> first hit took 16sec second hit around 12 sec and engine explosion 50sec later .
> I wonder why the pilot didn't ask for any help in that time .
> 
> by the way @TheImmortal in which picture you say the sign of any shrapnel on cockpit ? i only see one who showed something similar on the wings
> 
> by the way does anybody can explain to me why the CCTV is so shaky ?




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216351800103706624
Look at cockpit front windshield. Looks like one of the missiles detonated from the front shooting the shrapnel into the aircraft.

It would explain why there was no communication as the aircraft went down.


----------



## sha ah

I still don't understand how any air defense system cannot differentiate between an outbound passenger plane and an incoming cruise missile. Even systems from the 80's and perhaps even earlier could tell the difference. 

Iran bought the Tor M-1 in the 2000's. I have a hard time believing that the CPU and other vital hardware of the early 2000's Tor was unchanged since the 80's. Like I said, in that case, the first iphone would have more processing power. 

The Tor M1 unit cost is approx $20 million. If the CPU/processors of the Tor's produced and sold to Iran in the 2000's were from the 80's then why not just buy a PS3 and use its CPU ? Also software upgrades are pretty common with such weapons systems no ?

So every single time a passenger plane takes off the Tor M1 operators see an incoming cruise missile ? I'm sorry but that's impossible!

If the Tor system was that terrible and useless then nobody would want to purchase it and also, why place it near an airport ?

What it boils down to is that the Tor M1 system must have had the capability to differentiate between outbound planes and incoming cruise missiles or at the very least there must have been some sort of protocol in place, otherwise countless passenger planes would have been shot down over the years.

If the Tor M1 truly can't tell the difference between any flying object then it couldn't even protect tank divisions or infantry either because if a friendly jet or drone were to fly overhead to provide close air support it would get shot down.

There was another incident a few years back where tensions were high and an Iranian SAM shot down a jet ? I'm not sure about the specific details but the fact that this doesn't happen all the time proves that the specific operators were at fault, not the system itself.

In regards to the T-72's Iran purchased, I'm pretty sure Iran bought them in the early 2000's, not the 90's and yes they're more advanced than versions from the 80's, like the ones Saddam tried to use against the USA, which couldn't even fire on the move.

Another example, to make my point. The C-130 Hercules, American military transport plane was first produced in the early 50's, but they're still being produced to this day. In 2020 they're still being produced but obviously the technology has changed. Sure it may look the same from the outside, with the same "shell" essentially however the ones produced this year are using modern technology up to the days standards.

Even the "shell" the airframe is most likely made of modern, lighter/synthetic materials today. The F-15 is another example. An F-15 from the 70's looks similar to an F-15 made today. The average person probably wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference but in reality its a completely different machine.

Anyways, at the end of the day, a thorough investigation has to take place and those people who were criminally negligent and acted incompetently have to pay for their crimes. I don't think Iranians will rest until that happens.







PeeD said:


> The design is from the mid 80's, still state of the art but lacking computing power to do complex signal analysis, today standard in all Iranian systems.
> Under 90% of the conditions it would not need it anyway. Longer range systems and the IADS would do that.
> If something enters Tor kill envelope it almost certainly a valid target.
> 
> And no Russia would not update the Tor-M1 sold to Iran in the mid 2000's. They like Greek ones are the same: M1 export standard from the late 80's which in turn is a minor modification of the original Tor of the mid-80's.
> 
> Tor is made to move with tank divisions protect them and avoid killing aircraft and helicopters with Soviet military IFF system. In no scenario airliners would start close to Tor's envelope. Only in peacetime situations where it is directly under IADS control a safe operation could be established. Unfortunately on that night it had lost contact to IADS and apparently believed a war has started and it needs to protect its assigned objects at all cost. This would be standard practice: for some reason the enemy has been successful to immediately degrade the IADS, hence independent operation in worst case situation starts... only that it was no emergency situation, enemy spoofed and deceived only... and civilian flights were allowed to be done...
> 
> 
> 
> Nice example: Yes mid-90's Iranian T-72S are the same as the mid-80's T-72B, the strongest T-72 variant. Changing a working model is a difficult task, sometimes its not needed. Computerized signal analysis may be even regarded as something unnecessary today for a system with the original role of the Tor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need to upgrade a working system. Only if it is necessary to add a capability to it. Tor-M1 is a great system today for it's role, even 35 years after it was made.
> 
> 
> 
> Civilian aircraft normally soon climb outside the altitude envelope of the Tor-M1 into safe and fix corridors.
> Pantsir-S1 for example is an Russian airforce system, designed to operate near airports and air bases. Tor-M1 on the other hand is a army system made to move with tank divisions with only Soviet/Russian aircraft and helicopters close to it.
> Btw. the alleged Buk kill in Ukraine: Buk is also a army system with Soviet military IFF...
> 
> 
> 
> 1: Alert 3 normally would have all civilian airports closed at least, or even all air corridors closed
> 2: Activating Tor-M1 for a given area is a dangerous step given the details of the system
> 3: Tor-M1 operating on its own, outside IADS will just kill anything that enters its assigned sector in alter 3 conditions.
> 
> So this is why things like that didn't happen in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Iran worked so hard in the past few years to develop a good air defence industry and outsiders were even impressed by it. It's sad isn't it how just with a single incident, all that publicity Iran's air defence had is now worth little. Until Iranian air defence now proves itself in a proper incident such as shooting down an F-35 or F-22 etc, then I don't see this damage being improved anytime soon. Obviously this incident does not change the reality of Iran's air defence capabilities, but as we know, the world is run mostly by perception.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Mr Robot said:


> Iran worked so hard in the past few years to develop a good air defence industry and outsiders were even impressed by it. It's sad isn't it how just with a single incident, all that publicity Iran's air defence had is now worth little. Until Iranian air defence now proves itself in a proper incident such as shooting down an F-35 or F-22 etc, then I don't see this damage being improved anytime soon. Obviously this incident does not change the reality of Iran's air defence capabilities, but as we know, the world is run mostly by perception.


As per your statement, this is mainly damaging from publicity point of view. Iran’s real AD capabilities will not be affected substantially from this event. The main difference is now that US fanboys and Iran haters are having fun on our expense and at this tragic accident. Let’s keep our heads down and focus on the real issues. Let the pathetic internet clowns have their fun.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216351800103706624
> Look at cockpit front windshield. Looks like one of the missiles detonated from the front shooting the shrapnel into the aircraft.
> 
> It would explain why there was no communication as the aircraft went down.


It won't say why the airplane managed to make a u-turn.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> It won't say why the airplane managed to make a u-turn.



Gravity & Physics

If the controls are destroyed and pilots are dead then natural physics take over guiding the plane ( especially with damage to engines/wing) will determine flight path.

When you throw a paper airplane in the air what determines its flight path? 

Answer: Wind/Gravity/physics/structure of paper airplane

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Gravity & Physics
> 
> If the controls are destroyed and pilots are dead then natural physics take over guiding the plane ( especially with damage to engines/wing) will determine flight path.
> 
> When you throw a paper airplane in the air what determines its flight path?
> 
> Answer: Wind/Gravity/physics/structure of paper airplane


There also is an inertia law in physics .
And the flight plane of a paper airplane is determined by how is the wind . where is the center of gravity how much symetrical you built it and how you throw it And many more things.


----------



## Arminkh

@PeeD and @yavar , have you heard this:

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1031644/ادعای-جنجالی-افسر-ارشد-اطلاعات-مصر-درباره-هواپیمای-اوکراینی

Do you think it is plausible?


----------



## mohsen

Arminkh said:


> @PeeD and @yavar , have you heard this:
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1031644/ادعای-جنجالی-افسر-ارشد-اطلاعات-مصر-درباره-هواپیمای-اوکراینی
> 
> Do you think it is plausible?


Nothing from our side. Raefi's theory is more plausible:
« توضیحات استاد رائفی پور درباره سقوط هواپیما اوکراینی »

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeeD

Arminkh said:


> @PeeD and @yavar , have you heard this:
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1031644/ادعای-جنجالی-افسر-ارشد-اطلاعات-مصر-درباره-هواپیمای-اوکراینی
> 
> Do you think it is plausible?



No.
But Raefipours rouge IFF signal or data-link jamming of the Tor systems could have been enemy actions that could have caused this disaster.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

Will Russia provide missiles to 'close the entire sky' over Iran? Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/01/russia-iran-us-military-deals.html


----------



## Ich

Messerschmitt said:


> Will Russia provide missiles to 'close the entire sky' over Iran? Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/01/russia-iran-us-military-deals.html



I cant see why Iran should switch back to foreign ad-systems. Not their own ad-systems were involved in the accident, the foreign systems were. And beside that there was no nofly (what me still think it was the main reason), there still is the question of the possibility of compromiseing the Tor1 system. Or all other foreign systems which were not upgraded with iranian technic. So me think it would be not the best idea to invest lot of money in more foreign systems like S-400 (slimmed version) what is already "inspected" and "tested" by lots of countries, even the US. Better invest the money in homegrown systems to reach the same level but with the advantage to not can be easy compromised cause of the big questionmark for enemys of how is the system working.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

Ich said:


> I cant see why Iran should switch back to foreign ad-systems. Not their own ad-systems were involved in the accident, the foreign systems were. And beside that there was no nofly (what me still think it was the main reason), there still is the question of the possibility of compromiseing the Tor1 system. Or all other foreign systems which were not upgraded with iranian technic. So me think it would be not the best idea to invest lot of money in more foreign systems like S-400 (slimmed version) what is already "inspected" and "tested" by lots of countries, even the US. Better invest the money in homegrown systems to reach the same level but with the advantage to not can be easy compromised cause of the big questionmark for enemys of how is the system working.


I agree. If Iran can effectively produce the Bavar-373, the yet-to-be-revealed Oghab and IRGC SHORAD systems in sufficient quantities, then the chances of Iran opting to purchase foreign SAM systems are likely slim.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Blue In Green

Messerschmitt said:


> I agree. If Iran can effectively produce the Bavar-373, the yet-to-be-revealed Oghab and IRGC SHORAD systems in sufficient quantities, then the chances of Iran opting to purchase foreign SAM systems are likely slim.



https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/01/russia-iran-us-military-deals.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

BlueInGreen2 said:


> https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/01/russia-iran-us-military-deals.html



I am sure the US fear Iranian defenses more than Russian. I am saying this because there is a Chinese military saying that if you know the weapon of your enemy you've won half of the battle. The US know Russian weapons very well. Iranian weapons confuses them. Iran should not give $billions to Russia to buy ad that may be inferior to their own systems. These so called supper powers will always sell you inferior versions of their weapons or leave a door way that they can always compromise the system. Iran should only buy if they want to study, copy and improve upon it.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## TheImmortal

IAm said:


> I am sure the US fear Iranian defenses more than Russian. I am saying this because there is a Chinese military saying that if you know the weapon of your enemy you've won half of the battle. The US know Russian weapons very well. Iranian weapons confuses them. Iran should not give $billions to Russia to buy ad that may be inferior to their own systems. These so called supper powers will always sell you inferior versions of their weapons or leave a door way that they can always compromise the system. Iran should only buy if they want to study, copy and improve upon it.



There is also a famous Chinese saying “copy copy copy”.

What an absurd comment. China’s entire military was built on reverse engineering Soviet and Russian weapons systems. And China was one of the first countries to buy S-400 when it was available and will probably buy S-500 too because Russia is #1 in the world in air defense technology far ahead Of China. 

China once again buys a Russian weapon system then attempts to reverse engineer it when it can’t do itself. This got to the point of making Russia mad and resulted in concessions by China in Russian purchases.

Only recently have we seen indigenous Chinese weapons, backbone of the military is still reverse engineered designs.


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> There is also a famous Chinese saying “copy copy copy”.
> 
> What an absurd comment. China’s entire military was built on reverse engineering Soviet and Russian weapons systems. And China was one of the first countries to buy S-400 when it was available and will probably buy S-500 too because Russia is #1 in the world in air defense technology far ahead Of China.
> 
> China once again buys a Russian weapon system then attempts to reverse engineer it when it can’t do itself. This got to the point of making Russia mad and resulted in concessions by China in Russian purchases.
> 
> Only recently have we seen indigenous Chinese weapons, backbone of the military is still reverse engineered designs.



I am sure my comment is not absurd at all, it is better for Iran to rely on it technology more than to buy. The neocon hawks and zionist regimes would have destroyed Iran by now had it not been their self reliance.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## mangekyo

How can they know who it was that filmed the video? He doesn't show his face, or make any noice.


----------



## TheImmortal

IAm said:


> I am sure my comment is not absurd at all, it is better for Iran to rely on it technology more than to buy. The neocon hawks and zionist regimes would have destroyed Iran by now had it not been their self reliance.



You completely missed my point. Don’t call Russian or Soviet tech “compromised” when Chinese military is built entirely on Russian/Soviet technology. That is what is absurd.

Bavar 373 is a completely domestic platform with no direct similarity to any western or eastern platform. Now if Iran had literally copied a S-300 system and slapped a new name on it like Bavar-300 then it would be China. 

Also I agree an unknown tech (like Bavar) has its advantages as the enemy does not directly known all capabilities (but likely has intelligence on it). However, Bavar is only going to be as good as its EW/ECW rating. If it is not better than export S-300 version than West EW/ECW methods will work on it.

So again don’t think because you develop. A weapons system in Iranian or Chinese domestic code it is suddenly impenetrable to EW/ECW. US is #1 in military power in cyber warfare, it’s best to not underestimate your enemy.

There is a fallacy on this board of getting to comfortable against your enemies capabilities. 

Iran is far away from being able to “relax” as the murder of General Solemani and attempted murder of Quds Force General of Yemen operations demonstrated. Iran has been poking the US thinking that It would never reset the rules of warfare and it got a shocking wake up call.

Some will blame this on Trump, but’s let be real. The deep state apparatus of biggest empire to exist on this planet does not make its security decisions based on one man. Regardless of what the MSM want people to believe. 

So yes domestic development is great way forward, but advanced weapons purchases and ToT is needed to boost domestic development. If China didn’t have ToT of Soviet Union tech in 70’s and 80’s or reverse engineer the latest in Russian tech then It wouldn’t be the military power it is today.

Case in point, Iran’s Air Force is still stuck in 1970’s. With no technological purchases/reverse engineering or ToT transfer it has not been able to advance the Air Force one iota.


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> Case in point, Iran’s Air Force is still stuck in 1970’s. With no technological purchases/reverse engineering or ToT transfer it has not been able to advance the Air Force one iota.



Yes Iran air force cannot carry out effective combat but this is compensated by it missiles program. I think powerful SAMs and long range precision BMs and CMs are equally effective. Using SAMs against enemy jets and pounding enemy airbases with BMs & CMs will neutralize the attack. I think it is easier to take the enemy airbase out of service and neutralize the attack than trying to match jet for jet. Once you put your enemy airbase within your strike envelope, saturation attack on the base will be more effective. In this case US stealth jets may attack Iran but may not return to meet the tarmac from which they came.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PeeD

Construction of Irans surface wave OTH radar has started a few months ago. Ships are one detection goal but low flying CM or aircraft are added to that.

Also a key capability for Irans future AshBM's for targets in the Indian Ocean.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Cthulhu

mangekyousharingan said:


> How can they know who it was that filmed the video? He doesn't show his face, or make any noice.


What video you're talking about?


----------



## IAm

G


PeeD said:


> Construction of Irans surface wave OTH radar has started a few months ago. Ships are one detection goal but low flying CM or aircraft are added to that.



Great to hear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> Construction of Irans surface wave OTH radar has started a few months ago. Ships are one detection goal but low flying CM or aircraft are added to that.
> 
> Also a key capability for Irans future AshBM's for targets in the Indian Ocean.


@PeeD would you please explain the main technical difference between this OTH radar and the current ones Iran posses. What makes this one more appropriate for surface vehicles and CM.
Also, why is this one built near the coast, basically at the beach? Is it a requirement for it to function properly and how can they protect in the first strike wave since it is such a high value target.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Maybe costal othr can detect submarines too cause the waves are not reflected hard but soft on water and so some waves maybe can penetrate some meters below waterline.

Edit:

Ah, i see, in seawaters it works in the MHz range of an OTHR, but only for some hundred meters away from the sender . Better using around 1 GHz, but then the wave would not follow the surface over the horizon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

@Sina-1 

All static and large strategic radar assets face the problem to be destroyed in the first wave, but whats important is that they allow you to be aware of the first wave and counter it in the best way possible.

Iran has never shown any OTH radar up until now. Very long wavelenght VHF radars yes, HF band radars yes, but no OTH radar.

The function is not new and there are several main Russian and Chinese OTH-SW systems in operation. Mastering a state of the art OTH-B radar like the Russian Container is a more difficult task.
Basically it needs to be at the coast and is good to detect low and surface targets because its waves traval along the rather plain sea surface.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> @Sina-1
> Iran has never shown any OTH radar up until now. Very long wavelenght VHF radars yes, HF band radars yes, but no OTH radar.









Ghadir is OTH Radar no? Unveiled back in 2014

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

No, wavelenght too short for backscatter. Russia would never export a strategic item such as a OTH-B radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Ghadir is OTH Radar no? Unveiled back in 2014



Maybe OTH-B and the new one at the coast is OTH-SW.

OTH-B mostly have frequency of 5-50 MHz. OTH-SW mostly have frequency of 1-20 MHz.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

@PeeD could you outline why it needs to be near coast because of clearance? I have basic understanding but isn’t the whole point with OTH-B that the signals bounce on the ionosphere?


----------



## PeeD

Sina-1 said:


> @PeeD could you outline why it needs to be near coast because of clearance? I have basic understanding but isn’t the whole point with OTH-B that the signals bounce on the ionosphere?



OTH-B use ionospheric backscatter yes, but OTH-SW uses surface wave and the more even the surface is, the better. That's why they are only used at coasts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

PeeD said:


> OTH-B use ionospheric backscatter yes, but OTH-SW uses surface wave and the more even the surface is, the better. That's why they are only used at coasts.


What about earth curvature? Does it follow the curve?


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran first OTH-SW radar under construction ( the location is already been compromised thats why we are sharing it with everyone here )*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Sineva

Heres a pdf with some pics and details about existing oth-sw radars that are in operation globally.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/36697003.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *Iran first OTH-SW radar under construction ( the location is already been compromised thats why we are sharing it with everyone here )*


Any idea how long the antenna is?


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Iran first OTH-SW radar under construction ( the location is already been compromised thats why we are sharing it with everyone here )*



Well I figured through SIGNIT intelligence or U2 spy plane could use radiation methods to find its location or follow the strength of the radar wave.

OTH and long range early warning radars are pretty hard to “hide”.

This might explain why so many US recon planes fly as close to Iranian coast as possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> OTH and long range early warning radars are pretty hard to “hide”.



It is good to give the enemy his first target and these radars are likely to be their first target. But they still give you the warning before their destruction. And this early warning is their job and they will still do their job though the enemy target them first.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Any idea how long the antenna is?


~1 KM wide and about ~10 M long i think.



TheImmortal said:


> Well I figured through SIGNIT intelligence or U2 spy plane could use radiation methods to find its location or follow the strength of the radar wave.
> 
> OTH and long range early warning radars are pretty hard to “hide”.
> 
> This might explain why so many US recon planes fly as close to Iranian coast as possible.



that is correct if there were only one OTH radars but they are many radars in Iran and if U-2 is found by one of them then that radar will give this radar the location and this OTH-SW can zoom in and find the U-2



PeeD said:


> OTH-B use ionospheric backscatter yes, but OTH-SW uses surface wave and the more even the surface is, the better. That's why they are only used at coasts.


what do you think the rage is for it? 2000-3000 KM?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> what do you think the rage is for it? 2000-3000 KM?



400km against big targets. If you realize that a normal radar can only cover 30-40km from the coast into the see, you realize that even 150km against tactical targets is a 5x advantage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

IAm said:


> It is good to give the enemy his first target and these radars are likely to be their first target. But they still give you the warning before their destruction. And this early warning is their job and they will still do their job though the enemy target them first.


Surely they would be protected like any other military sites & facilities ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

raptor22 said:


> Surely they would be protected like any other military sites & facilities ...



They are likely under Bavar-373 and S-300 envelope for double protection as well as stand alone system (Short and mid range systems).

But in a swarm radiation and cruises missile attack it will be hard to protect it. All it takes is one missile to get through and the damage will be enough to take it offline.

So if US launches 100 low flying cruise missiles at the OTH due to being high value target, hard to see any system being able to intercept/jam 100% of the objects. 

Being on the coast means the reaction time is even less versus other long range radars that are deeper in Iran.

Without skyguard or future Oghab around it, it is vulnerable to cruise missiles especially the stealth profile ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

@PeeD and everyone else

I would like to know what your thoughts are on this: An Iranian SAM system in a similar dedicated role as the S-350 - let's just call it 'Bavar-313' - to counter swarms of low flying targets such as cruise missiles and drones over medium ranges. To be able to effectively handle potential saturation attacks of cruise missiles and drones, it should preferably be equipped with smaller surface-to-air missiles similar to the 9M96 missiles used in the S-350 and S-400 which would allow for a higher missile count per TEL (12 for the S-350/Bavar-313 as opposed to 4 for the S-400/Bavar-373). For instance, 3 TELs with 12 missiles each would enable 36 ready-to-fire missiles per battery. 
Cruise missile saturation attacks as witnessed in Syria in 2017 and 2018 and drone swarm attacks as witnessed in Abqaiq last year are difficult-to-counter threats. This 'Bavar-313' may be redundant, however, if systems like the IRGC's Sayyad and/or the 15th Khordad already and sufficiently address these threats. Cost could also be an issue, for example, if we incorporate an entirely new missile (9M96 equivalent) in this system instead of the already mass-produced and cost-effective Sayyad-2 SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Cost is always the key issue when it comes to saturation attacks:
AHR seeker equipped missiles are great to counter CM': Forward deploy a cheap and effective radar like the Kasta-2/Kavosh and shot one into that direction...
However this is only a approach if you are ready to sped the necessary money.
Iran is working on a different counter to that threat about which I don't feel ready to talk, although it's OSINT.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Ich

Me still like the Saeer when it comes to defend against CM saturation attack. A battery of 6 Saeer, automatic and remote controlled, can build a real wall of metal in the flightpath of a CM. If the ammunition is also programable when to explode (time fuse)due to induction while leaving the barrel, then this battery would even be able to paint a NO out of metal into the flightpath of the cm.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TruthHurtz

Within the next year or so Iran needs to mass produce as many SAMs as it can. At least 12 battalions each of Bavar-373, Khordad-15 and Khordad-3 would be good coverage.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

TruthHurtz said:


> Within the next year or so Iran needs to mass produce as many SAMs as it can. At least 12 battalions each of Bavar-373, Khordad-15 and Khordad-3 would be good coverage.



Bavar-373 is not a “cheap” system. Maybe @PeeD can shine more light on the cost. But 12 battalions of B-373 seems to be pretty expensive. Yes, Iran gets the benefit of cheaper production due to being Iranian system, lower cost of labor, etc. but still the technology used in B-373 is top of the line.

Just look at how little of S-300 Iran bought. Not nearly enough to cover the entire country and provide double envelops and retardation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Necessary industrial management, coordination for such a monumental weapon system like the Bavar-373 may be the most difficult issue for Iran. We talk about hundreds of different subsystems for every Bavar battery.

So no, I don't see Iran doing the same it did with BM's here. BM's are difficult to develop, have tight tolerances and exotic materials, but their subsystems are 10's. One large factory can produce it with 1-2 supplying factories, not so for the Bavar.
One battery every quarter of the year, would be realistic for now. Let's see when serial production starts.

100mm Sadid is a great asset against CM's but is point defence in nature. The goal is a affordable area defence against CM's (city scale).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

PeeD said:


> 100mm Sadid is a great asset against CM's but is point defence in nature. The goal is a affordable area defence against CM's (city scale).



Sure one need a lot of Saeer and they all have to be integrated into greater fire control system and ammunition have to be time fused AHEAD/KETF ammunition. With effective range of 20-40 km of each one can secure a greater area if the range radius of each Saeer overlap with the radius of all neighbor Saeer systems.


Due to CM are programmable to different flightpath and also do flying low, best use of such a variant of Saeer is to put them in Blocks of 20 at strategic places in Iran. Every radius overlap lets say 50% with the radius of the neighbor Saeer and formation is 3-4 rows. An such blocks can stay somewhere in Iran at flat places like desserts, e.g. between Birdschand and Kerman. 10 of that Saeer blocks there and then a lot of CM comming from US-bases in Afghanistan will die there. And so one can draw lines with such blocks everywhere in Iran to make the flightpath for the CMs to their aim very difficult if not end them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> @PeeD and everyone else
> 
> I would like to know what your thoughts are on this: An Iranian SAM system in a similar dedicated role as the S-350 - let's just call it 'Bavar-313' - to counter swarms of low flying targets such as cruise missiles and drones over medium ranges. To be able to effectively handle potential saturation attacks of cruise missiles and drones, it should preferably be equipped with smaller surface-to-air missiles similar to the 9M96 missiles used in the S-350 and S-400 which would allow for a higher missile count per TEL (12 for the S-350/Bavar-313 as opposed to 4 for the S-400/Bavar-373). For instance, 3 TELs with 12 missiles each would enable 36 ready-to-fire missiles per battery.
> Cruise missile saturation attacks as witnessed in Syria in 2017 and 2018 and drone swarm attacks as witnessed in Abqaiq last year are difficult-to-counter threats. This 'Bavar-313' may be redundant, however, if systems like the IRGC's Sayyad and/or the 15th Khordad already and sufficiently address these threats. Cost could also be an issue, for example, if we incorporate an entirely new missile (9M96 equivalent) in this system instead of the already mass-produced and cost-effective Sayyad-2 SAM.



I don’t know who told you S-350 is an dedicated CM AD, it is more along the lines of a dedicated ABM system. 

S-300 and S-400 will never be economical to engage CM swarms as Russia systems typically launch 2 missiles for every one target to achieve high PK



Ich said:


> Sure one need a lot of Saeer and they all have to be integrated into greater fire control system and ammunition have to be time fused AHEAD/KETF ammunition. With effective range of 20-40 km of each one can secure a greater area if the range radius of each Saeer overlap with the radius of all neighbor Saeer systems.
> 
> 
> Due to CM are programmable to different flightpath and also do flying low, best use of such a variant of Saeer is to put them in Blocks of 20 at strategic places in Iran. Every radius overlap lets say 50% with the radius of the neighbor Saeer and formation is 3-4 rows. An such blocks can stay somewhere in Iran at flat places like desserts, e.g. between Birdschand and Kerman. 10 of that Saeer blocks there and then a lot of CM comming from US-bases in Afghanistan will die there. And so one can draw lines with such blocks everywhere in Iran to make the flightpath for the CMs to their aim very difficult if not end them.



You can have 100 of those systems, but if they don’t have high EW/ECW rating then they will all be jammed or disrupted and if even 25% CMs get through and hit the high value target (TEL, OTH, nuclear facility, command center, etc) then it’s over.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> You can have 100 of those systems, but if they don’t have high EW/ECW rating then they will all be jammed or disrupted and if even 25% CMs get through and hit the high value target (TEL, OTH, nuclear facility, command center, etc) then it’s over.



Jamming against Saeer? How does it look like? Also If only 25% CM would go through as you said ,it would be wonderful. But 25% is unrealistic. Me think about 50-65% of CM goes through. And thats a good qoute for that cheap layer of defence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> Iran is working on a different counter to that threat about which I don't feel ready to talk, although it's OSINT.



electronic countermeasures?


----------



## mohsen

Background?!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> Background?!
> View attachment 602702


@PeeD 
Oghab?


----------



## PeeD

Sina-1 said:


> @PeeD
> Oghab?



No, Syrian Pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Sina-1 said:


> @PeeD
> Oghab?


roland air defence system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

DoubleYouSee said:


> roland air defence system


I had a clear photo of that..wait lemme search...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

credits to Persian_boy

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Messerschmitt

Draco.IMF said:


> credits to Persian_boy


Link to the same documentary on doctv.ir: http://www.doctv.ir/programs/894384-باور-373

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

If Iran deploys Bavar-373 in southern Syria---it will cover entire Israeli air space paralyzing Israeli air force.

In Israel 6 power plants with 26 production units supply 51% of electricity.
5 desalination plants supply 50% of drinking water.
If Iran deploys Fateh-313 in Northen Iraq and Eastern Syria---it can target Israeli hardened aircraft shelters and Israeli strategic infrastructure with high precision.

Bavar-373, Fateh-313, Ya Ali cruise missile deployed in Syria will put Israel in a complex strategic situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> They are likely under Bavar-373 and S-300 envelope for double protection as well as stand alone system (Short and mid range systems).
> 
> But in a swarm radiation and cruises missile attack it will be hard to protect it. All it takes is one missile to get through and the damage will be enough to take it offline.
> 
> So if US launches 100 low flying cruise missiles at the OTH due to being high value target, hard to see any system being able to intercept/jam 100% of the objects.
> 
> Being on the coast means the reaction time is even less versus other long range radars that are deeper in Iran.
> 
> Without skyguard or future Oghab around it, it is vulnerable to cruise missiles especially the stealth profile ones.



Any air defense has a limited number of missiles it can engage at a time and if the enemy fire more than the limit even 100% performance will not safe you. Iran may not be able to save its assets against such saturation attacks. The same applies US and its allies. Since Iran has well advance BMs & CMs all that is left is numbers. Should the US bring all their destroyers near Iran, saturation attacks will sink them one by one no matter the performance of their interceptors. If a destroyer can engage 30 missiles at once fire 35 it cannot engage the the remaining 5 and only one is needed to sink it or put it out of service.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

IAm said:


> Any air defense has a limited number of missiles it can engage at a time and if the enemy fire more than the limit even 100% performance will not safe you. Iran may not be able to save its assets against such saturation attacks. The same applies US and its allies. Since Iran has well advance BMs & CMs all that is left is numbers. Should the US bring all their destroyers near Iran, saturation attacks will sink them one by one no matter the performance of their interceptors. If a destroyer can engage 30 missiles at once fire 35 it cannot engage the the remaining 5 and only one is needed to sink it or put it out of service.



That is why medium/shortrange AD has to be upgraded to LASER. LASER can fire as long as there is energy for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

Ich said:


> Jamming against Saeer? How does it look like? Also If only 25% CM would go through as you said ,it would be wonderful. But 25% is unrealistic. Me think about 50-65% of CM goes through. And thats a good qoute for that cheap layer of defence.



No matter what defenses Iran develop US can penetrate those defenses in war, no doubt. The only way for Iran to be safe is it offensive capabilities. Last attack on US air base in Iraq made me happy. Show the enemy there is a heavy cost of attack you and that he cannot have the comfort of attack. Iran should show to US helpers that that there is cost in doing so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

IAm said:


> No matter what defenses Iran develop US can penetrate those defenses in war, no doubt. The only way for Iran to be safe is it offensive capabilities. Last attack on US air base in Iraq made me happy. Show the enemy there is a heavy cost of attack you and that he cannot have the comfort of attack. Iran should show to US helpers that that there is cost in doing so.



Offensive alone does not defend your country if your country isnt an island or on an continent and have mostly ocean around it. Defence is also needed. Not only to safe your citizens, but also to safe your offensive capabilities. And having good defence capabilities in great numbers cant be just taken out by US with snip. 

Whereas still my question isnt answered: How to jam Saeer?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

Ich said:


> That is why medium/shortrange AD has to be upgraded to LASER. LASER can fire as long as there is energy for them.



Wow! So mounting 1megawatt generator with 1500litres reserve tank on a heavy truck with laser can ensure 24/7 continuous firing?



Ich said:


> Offensive alone does not defend your country if your country isnt an island or on an continent and have mostly ocean around it. Defence is also needed. Not only to safe your citizens, but also to safe your offensive capabilities. And having good defence capabilities in great numbers cant be just taken out by US with snip.
> 
> Whereas still my question isnt answered: How to jam Saeer?



I didn't intend to downplay the importance of defenses at all but if the enemy have the comfort of attack he will find a way to penetrate your defenses. But if you take the battle to the enemy and put him on the defensive he will not have time and change to do trial -and-error with you defenses.


----------



## Ich

IAm said:


> Wow! So mounting 1megawatt generator with 1500litres reserve tank on a heavy truck with laser can ensure 24/7 continuous firing?



1. The power of the LASER isnt equal the power one have to provide to let the LASER function.
2. The LASER only needs seconds on target to fulfill its job, so only the power for this seconds is needed.
3. LASER are already provided in container size.



IAm said:


> I didn't intend to downplay the importance of defenses at all but if the enemy have the comfort of attack he will find a way to penetrate your defenses. But if you take the battle to the enemy and put him on the defensive he will not have time and change to do trial -and-error with you defenses.



Putting the enemy into defensive with own offensive so that enemy wouldnt have possibility to also act offensive ... is a dream. It is always everything at same time if both countries have offensive and defensiv capabilities. If a country do not have defensiv capabilities, then its offensive capabilities wont last long.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Classic air defences are quickly becoming less effective in my opinion. With the arrival of hypersonic systems which will also be fired in mass (saturation attack) things are getting much more difficult.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> Classic air defences are quickly becoming less effective in my opinion. With the arrival of hypersonic systems which will also be fired in mass (saturation attack) things are getting much more difficult.



Who told you hypersonic missiles can be fired in mass? At its current cost they are expensive both hypersonic CM and BM that Russia has deployed.


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> Who told you hypersonic missiles can be fired in mass? At its current cost they are expensive both hypersonic CM and BM that Russia has deployed.



It is open information that the US plans to employ hypersonic cruise missiles in situation attacks. Current cost means nothing but the US has not yet fully started mass production of any such systems yet. Once it does, then the game has changed considerably. The only question then is, how much range would such systems have, if they can make them in longer ranges then you can imagine a threat of tomohawk like saturation attacks but at hypersonic speeds.


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> It is open information that the US plans to employ hypersonic cruise missiles in situation attacks. Current cost means nothing but the US has not yet fully started mass production of any such systems yet. Once it does, then the game has changed considerably. The only question then is, how much range would such systems have, if they can make them in longer ranges then you can imagine a threat of tomohawk like saturation attacks but at hypersonic speeds.



I don’t think you understand how Hypersonic missiles work.

At sea level for a missile to reach hypersonic levels it will never match the speed of hypersonic BMs due to friction and a host of other problems. Furthermore, like supersonic CMs they will burn through any fuel rather quickly thus the range will be very limited.

Hypersonic BMs are similar to regular BMs except that instead of exiting the atmosphere they release an arrow shaped warhead in upper atmosphere where friction is at its lowest point (or else the warhead risks burning up as it gains higher and higher speeds). It then “skips” on the upper atmosphere Much like a rock thrown across a lake surface.

This purgatory between space and earths atmosphere is where ADs struggle for interception. Add the high speeds and no fixed trajectory and you pose a nightmare for modern ADs.

So that is why hYpersonic BMs will not be so cheaply mass produced. And hypersonic CMs would have a small range due to fuel and special engine needed to boost speeds beyond supersonic level. But since CM will be much lower in atmosphere the friction will
Be much higher and speeds attained will not be close to hypersonic BMs that Skip in the thin upper atmosphere.


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> I don’t think you understand how Hypersonic missiles work.



I don't need you to explain to me how they work.



> And hypersonic CMs would have a small range due to fuel and special engine needed to boost speeds beyond supersonic level. But since CM will be much lower in atmosphere the friction will
> Be much higher and speeds attained will not be close to hypersonic BMs that Skip in the thin upper atmosphere.



None-sense. The Russians are already working on a version of the Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles with 1000km range. These are still beginning stages, ranges will go even longer.

Furthermore, you're obviously not paying attention. Once the US starts mass production, the prices will go even lower. If country like the US is planning to produce 2500+ F-35, you think they could not afford to mass produce hypersonic cruise missiles, which they are seeing as an extremely important strategic asset in the future?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Lasers are not perfect they certainly have their disadvantages. When based as a ground air defense asset they can become useless if you have a stormy weather i.e. sand storm or rain storm, foggy days and nights where it becomes hopeless to use them and enemy can take advantage on that. For the airborne lasers mounted on fighter jets defending against the incoming missiles are limited to short range (lack of proper power units that can energize the beam at much longer distances in comparison to ground ones). Again prone to become almost useless when weather conditions are poor. I would never relinquish old traditional methods such as missiles, kinetic rounds but take lasers only as back up unit that can complement other air defense assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Philosopher. said:


> It is open information that the US plans to employ hypersonic cruise missiles in situation attacks. Current cost means nothing but the US has not yet fully started mass production of any such systems yet. Once it does, then the game has changed considerably. The only question then is, how much range would such systems have, if they can make them in longer ranges then you can imagine a threat of tomohawk like saturation attacks but at hypersonic speeds.


You talk all this futuristic talk but Ignore the fact that US soldiers currently in Iraq have no good AD protecting them in their bases. You only want to talk about how US can attack in future but ignore what US cant defend in the future..smh

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

925boy said:


> You talk all this futuristic talk but Ignore the fact that US soldiers currently in Iraq have no good AD protecting them in their bases. You only want to talk about how US can attack in future but ignore what US cant defend in the future..smh



The Russians can also wipe the US off the map, it does not mean they are not investing in new ways to protect their own air space. My comment had little/nothing to do with Iran's ability to counter attack but its ability to defend its airspace in a conflict with the US. Todays kinetic attack in the form of missiles are likes of tomohawk, tomorrow they'll be hypersonic CMs and gliders. In my opinion, the only way for Iran to economically defence against such hypersonic threat is not to invest heavily in next gen anti-hypersonic (glide vehicle etc) air defences that even the US does not have the capability to make yet but to make its own hypersonic systems on top of what it has now. Iran priority should be able to quickly detect and dismantle launch platforms where such attacks will come from. Currently Iran access denial capability is still not large enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1224407592807608321

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

The actual physics of these designs has existed for decades. I think the major hurdle is the material science?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> I don't need you to explain to me how they work.
> 
> 
> 
> None-sense. The Russians are already working on a version of the Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles with 1000km range. These are still beginning stages, ranges will go even longer.
> 
> Furthermore, you're obviously not paying attention. Once the US starts mass production, the prices will go even lower. If country like the US is planning to produce 2500+ F-35, you think they could not afford to mass produce hypersonic cruise missiles, which they are seeing as an extremely important strategic asset in the future?



let’s say that US makes a long range supersonic CM in similar performance to Tomahawk. Let’s say it cost $2-3M per missile (tomahawk cost 1.4M) For US to fire 100 cruise missiles with a standard failure rate of 10-20% means that it would cost US 200-300 million dollars basically the cost of an F-35 fighter jet. US fired that 20 cruise missiles when it attacked Syrian air base. Simply not economical. And the results were underwhelming.

Russia can say what it wants, last I checked they don’t even have 12 SU-57s. Russia may build something, but can’t afford it in large numbers. It’s hypersonic CMs/BMs are strategic weapons likely to be nuclear.

Saturation attacks by hypersonic missiles is unrealistic unless you can get price of missile below 500K per missile. And since SUB-SONIC Tomahawk has been around for DECADES and the price is still north of 1M what makes you think a similar range hypersonic missiles would be anywhere close to that price or cheaper?

like I said you don’t know what you are talking about and sitting in the Hollywood movies.



Sina-1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1224407592807608321



This dude doesn’t even make sense. 

If it is boosted by a BM, it is a HYPERSONIC BM. No CM can stand at 20,000/H at sea level, that speed is glide vehicle in upper atmosphere. It would evaporate at sea level at that speed. Go tell me what material can withstand that heat and friction.

Hence why it’s terminal phase (going to strike target as it descends in altitude is less than Mach 6). Which is nothing out of ordinary as Iranian BMs reach that speed and higher.

Glide vehicles just allow the warhead to move extremely fast to the target in upper atmosphere and not have fixed trajectory. At the end of the day when it comes to strike its speed becomes no different than a BM.


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> let’s say that US makes a long range supersonic CM in similar performance to Tomahawk. Let’s say it cost $2-3M per missile (tomahawk cost 1.4M) For US to fire 100 cruise missiles with a standard failure rate of 10-20% means that it would cost US 200-300 million dollars basically the cost of an F-35 fighter jet. US fired that 20 cruise missiles when it attacked Syrian air base. Simply not economical. And the results were underwhelming.



And yet, the US still produces these systems like tomahawk in the 1000's. Like I said, Hypersonic systems will provide the US with a great strategic capability. The cost difference between them and tomohawk will not be so substantial that the US would avoid mass procurement.




> Russia can say what it wants, last I checked they don’t even have 12 SU-57s. Russia may build something, but can’t afford it in large numbers. It’s hypersonic CMs/BMs are strategic weapons likely to be nuclear.



I was referring to range here. I showed you that these systems in longer ranges are being developed. In the context of Russia, I am not interested how many they'll produce. Russia is not the US.



> Saturation attacks by hypersonic missiles is unrealistic unless you can get price of missile below 500K per missile. And since SUB-SONIC Tomahawk has been around for DECADES and the price is still north of 1M what makes you think a similar range hypersonic missiles would be anywhere close to that price or cheaper?



Right, because the US has not been using the tomahawk in saturation attacks? Is the price of tomohawk below 500k?



> like I said you don’t know what you are talking about and sitting in the Hollywood movies.



Like you said, despite the price of tomohawks, the US is producing them in 1000's. So either show me some actual claims US will not mass produce the next gen hypersonic system or stop pretending as if you know what you're talking about.

The US has more than the financial capability to back the mass procurement of these system in enough numbers. At least go read around the topic a little and then you'll get the sense how seriously US takes this idea of saturation attack via these next gen hypersonic systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

scimitar19 said:


> Lasers are not perfect they certainly have their disadvantages. When based as a ground air defense asset they can become useless if you have a stormy weather i.e. sand storm or rain storm, foggy days and nights where it becomes hopeless to use them and enemy can take advantage on that.



This is not correct in total. Yes, the LASER is weakened if there are aerosols in the way of the laser. But since years there are formulars to calculate the loss in different air/wether conditions. The programm MODTRAN is mostly used to calculate the air/wether conditions and based on that then the calculated loss of the LASER. In the follow pic you can see some of the math







Edit:

In this example you can see the atmospheric calculations if an air born LASER would take out a BM from some hundreds kilometers away

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Ich said:


> This is not correct in total. Yes, the LASER is weakened if there are aerosols in the way of the laser. But since years there are formulars to calculate the loss in different air/wether conditions. The programm MODTRAN is mostly used to calculate the air/wether conditions and based on that then the calculated loss of the LASER. In the follow pic you can see some of the math
> 
> View attachment 603287
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> In this example you can see the atmospheric calculations if an air born LASER would take out a BM from some hundreds kilometers away
> 
> View attachment 603288



Hmm.. The last image favors more airborne directed energy weapons and yes figures do show that in the near exospheric and above conditions, lasers will shine but yet again questions do rise when you have a passenger plane retrofitted with a laser which can be a huge blimp on the radar screens. One of the things you can have is to retrofit B2 stealth bombers with directed energy weapons loitering close enough the enemy airspace and shooting down everything that flies under the assumption you are able to detect missiles or even planes (the higher the altitude the better). My humble two cents is to build huge balloon aerostats and sentinels with lasers onbaord over important centers under the assumption that you are able to protect them against armed satellites with DEW which can shoot them down where satellite killers are playing an important role if they are able reach for the kill.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these satellites have to be in LEO otherwise the response time will be too long.

Edit.

Lasers do work both ways if you can target from above someone can target you from the ground as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher. said:


> And yet, the US still produces these systems like tomahawk in the 1000's. Like I said, Hypersonic systems will provide the US with a great strategic capability. The cost difference between them and tomohawk will not be so substantial that the US would avoid mass procurement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to range here. I showed you that these systems in longer ranges are being developed. In the context of Russia, I am not interested how many they'll produce. Russia is not the US.
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because the US has not been using the tomahawk in saturation attacks? Is the price of tomohawk below 500k?
> 
> 
> 
> Like you said, despite the price of tomohawks, the US is producing them in 1000's. So either show me some actual claims US will not mass produce the next gen hypersonic system or stop pretending as if you know what you're talking about.
> 
> The US has more than the financial capability to back the mass procurement of these system in enough numbers. At least go read around the topic a little and then you'll get the sense how seriously US takes this idea of saturation attack via these next gen hypersonic systems.



Like I said more nonsense. You have no proof that US is planning to use HGVs in saturation attacks. Furthermore, how do you plan on launching hypersonic missiles from a VLS genius? Right now almost any prototype HGV is either BM boosted to outerspace or air launched at high altitude. Neither of these are “saturation attack methods” but strategic weapons.

To even begin to give you a cost of these missiles see below:


The Army's Space and Missile Defense Command, based in Huntsville, Ala., has conceived of an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon that could boost into space aboard a two-stage rocket, separate and glide to a target up to 6,000 kilometers away in less than 35 minutes. 

Proponents of the advanced weapon say it could be fielded as early as 2009 for the Defense Department's "prompt global strike" mission, under which the United States seeks the ability to attack a small number of fleeting targets at long range. 

To accomplish that today, the only weapons in the U.S. arsenal with sufficient range and speed are nuclear arms, Pentagon leaders have said. In an effort to expand targeting options for a U.S. president seeking to avoid nuclear war, the military has proposed developing a new set of conventionally armed, prompt global strike weapons.

With terrorist hideouts or rogue nations as its primary targets, an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon could carry a 900-pound penetrator warhead or 900 pounds of rods to impact at Mach 4 speed, according to the system's advocates. 

However, critics have said the Army weapon faces some daunting technological challenges that would require a heavy investment of dollars and time to resolve. Chief among them is the development of a thermal protection technology capable of withstanding atmospheric flight at extremely high speeds, according to defense experts.

The missile defense command has estimated that the Pentagon would spend *nearly $390 million* on the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon over a five-year period beginning in this fiscal year, during which during which just *two missiles* would be built.

Alternatively, with a *55 percent funding boost, the Army could build 16 missiles in the same time frame*, military officials told _Global Security Newswire_. Under this option, the Pentagon would *spend roughly $600 million* on the effort through 2012, officials said.

https://www.nti.org/gsn/article/price-tag-for-fast-missile-might-top-600-million/

HGVs threat is between Russia, China, And US circumventing the others second strike nuclear capability. The reason why US cares about HGVs is for DEFENSE in case Russia or China try to attempt a nuclear first strike.

For you to sit here and say “bro US is going to have 1000’s of HGVs” is not rooted in reality. You have no proof even though I have cited evidence of the extreme cost to fielding just a strategic arsenal. Your rebuttal is not in the realm of reality as US has cancelled many projects due to high cost (Zumwaltt, F-22, next gen Supercarrier, etc). 

Just because the US has a massive military budget doesn’t mean they have a blank check to buy whatever. A simple history lesson would show you that.

Like I said Tomahawks and next gen stealth cruise missiles being fielded as a conventional attack force do the job at a fraction of the cost. 

Almost the entire tomahawk arsenal is aboard destroyers and cruisers in form of VLS. I have already explained to you to get to Mach 15+ you have to be upper stages of atmosphere. Mach 3-4 at sea level isn’t going to fool anybody versus a supersonic missile (Brahmos 1&2) going Mach 1.5-2


----------



## Ich

scimitar19 said:


> Hmm.. The last image favors more airborne directed energy weapons and yes figures do show that in the near exospheric and above conditions, lasers will shine but yet again questions do rise when you have a passenger plane retrofitted with a laser which can be a huge blimp on the radar screens. One of the things you can have is to retrofit B2 stealth bombers with directed energy weapons loitering close enough the enemy airspace and shooting down everything that flies under the assumption you are able to detect missiles or even planes (the higher the altitude the better). My humble two cents is to build huge balloon aerostats and sentinels with lasers onbaord over important centers under the assumption that you are able to protect them against armed satellites with DEW which can shoot them down where satellite killers are playing an important role if they are able reach for the kill.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong but these satellites have to be in LEO otherwise the response time will be too long.
> 
> Edit.
> 
> Lasers do work both ways if you can target from above someone can target you from the ground as well.



Yes, air born LASER act at highs around 10 km and also yes this planes are easy to detect and to engage. But it is only meant as an example. The point i tried to show is that for every wether condition there is a formula to calculate how the LASER has to be to bring best energy on the target. Also i wrote some post above that LASER is for medium and shortrange AD. As far as i know there are no positiv tests for long range ( 50+ km) by now if it comes to targetting and hold the LASER long enough on the moving target.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> Like I said more nonsense. You have no proof that US is planning to use HGVs in saturation attacks. Furthermore, how do you plan on launching hypersonic missiles from a VLS genius? Right now almost any prototype HGV is either BM boosted to outerspace or air launched at high altitude. Neither of these are “saturation attack methods” but strategic weapons.



Apparently you're just going in circles now. So then just wait and see what happens. As for the claim regarding how hypersonic cruise missiles can launched, if the Zircon can be launched from naval ships and submatine, does that mean it requires to be launched at high altitude?


*Putin Names Ships, Subs That Will Get Shadowy Zircon Hypersonic Missile*
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...on-hypersonic-missile-as-test-date-approaches

If you're going to mockingly call someone a "genius" then at least do some research before posting so you don't come across foolishly.


----------



## Draco.IMF

*Interesting analysis of a guy on twitter, about an secret, man portable Iranian SAM with an range beyond 10 km 

sadly a shipment to the Houthis was seized in 2019, so the enemy is already aware of it:*

*










Exclusive: In light of the #E-11A "crash" and doubts about any weapon existing in the portable class to do that, I feel free to talk about a secret Iranian SAM here. It was captured by the U.S in 2019, briefly shown on one photo and hence its existence is already compromised.*

Iran never disclosed the existence of this weapon, since it was designed for covert operations. When U.S official sources published it, they didn't detail it. It went nearly unnoticed. A recent Saudi Ah-64 kill and the unusual crash of the E-11A may now establish a link to it.

Weapons in this weight and size class, such as IR MANPADs normally pose a lower threat to professional/controlled attack helicopter operations. They remain out of range and have counter-measures. That's also true for the high flying E-11A, which simply stays outside the envelope.

The secret Iranian SAM is of the Qaem family, a laser beam riding TOW sized and based SAM with a terminal kick stage. However it is larger and transported in two pieces by a 2-3 man team. The added size allows for ranges beyond 10km and computerized fire control for a high PK.

Key to how this range is achieved is like the Qaem: Initial acceleration - cruise - coast - re-acceleration - kill. Traditional missiles lack the re-acceleration phase and once they are kinematically defeated, they are worthless. The overall lower velocity of it, preserves energy

30k-40k altitude and speed of an E-11A is not what it was designed for and at the edge of its envelope. However due to advanced thermal optics, gimballed/automated tracking/guiding, ranging and trajectory computing, it becomes possible to set a ambush for that kind of targets.

Counter measures against such laser beam riding missiles are almost non-existing. Bad weather can help and we saw it at the crash site. However it might have been targeted before entering clouds that typically accumulate around mountains. Reminder: Cause of the crash is unknown.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Draco.IMF said:


> *Interesting analysis of a guy on twitter, about an secret, man portable Iranian SAM with an range beyond 10 km
> 
> sadly a shipment to the Houthis was seized in 2019, so the enemy is already aware of it:*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exclusive: In light of the #E-11A "crash" and doubts about any weapon existing in the portable class to do that, I feel free to talk about a secret Iranian SAM here. It was captured by the U.S in 2019, briefly shown on one photo and hence its existence is already compromised.*
> 
> Iran never disclosed the existence of this weapon, since it was designed for covert operations. When U.S official sources published it, they didn't detail it. It went nearly unnoticed. A recent Saudi Ah-64 kill and the unusual crash of the E-11A may now establish a link to it.
> 
> Weapons in this weight and size class, such as IR MANPADs normally pose a lower threat to professional/controlled attack helicopter operations. They remain out of range and have counter-measures. That's also true for the high flying E-11A, which simply stays outside the envelope.
> 
> The secret Iranian SAM is of the Qaem family, a laser beam riding TOW sized and based SAM with a terminal kick stage. However it is larger and transported in two pieces by a 2-3 man team. The added size allows for ranges beyond 10km and computerized fire control for a high PK.
> 
> Key to how this range is achieved is like the Qaem: Initial acceleration - cruise - coast - re-acceleration - kill. Traditional missiles lack the re-acceleration phase and once they are kinematically defeated, they are worthless. The overall lower velocity of it, preserves energy
> 
> 30k-40k altitude and speed of an E-11A is not what it was designed for and at the edge of its envelope. However due to advanced thermal optics, gimballed/automated tracking/guiding, ranging and trajectory computing, it becomes possible to set a ambush for that kind of targets.
> 
> Counter measures against such laser beam riding missiles are almost non-existing. Bad weather can help and we saw it at the crash site. However it might have been targeted before entering clouds that typically accumulate around mountains. Reminder: Cause of the crash is unknown.


Dadash please provide the original link.


----------



## Sineva

Sina-1 said:


> Dadash please provide the original link.


I remember the original story now,it was a seizure back in early december last year.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202644850245586946

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

I believe someone stated this was just a longer version of the Qaem laster guided missiles system. This system is nothing for Iran. Losing it hardly means anything. I bet everything in my bank that Iran has many more such systems but more advanced not revealed to the public.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

first i thought it's Iranian copy of Swedish RBS-70 (as the laser receiver is quite similar) but:





well a kornet length is 1.2 meters, RBS-70 length is 1.3 meters so if this image:




credible then this is really a monstrous missile (consider that RBS range is 8 km!!!) for a MANPAD.

RBS-70 missile:

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> first i thought it's Iranian copy of Swedish RBS-70 (as the laser receiver is quite similar) but:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well a kornet length is 1.2 meters, RBS-70 length is 1.3 meters so if this image:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> credible then this is really a monstrous missile (consider that RBS range is 8 km!!!) for a MANPAD.
> 
> RBS-70 missile:


Yes,thats what I was thinking too,but this thing is quite a bit longer than an rbs70,it might be around 2.5m in total length.What it reminds me of is the dual use ADATS system from the 1980s,this was a dual purpose atgm/sam that used laser beam riding and was a similar size to this,perhaps a little shorter in length,the one big difference is that adats was vehicle mounted with canisterized rounds while this is designed for portability.Its a shame we didnt get to see the launcher tho.Whats really surprising is that you would`ve expected that something like this would`ve been unveiled in its complete form by the iranian military ages ago.
In addition what are those things on the right hand side of the pic?,are these small caliber 70-80mm rockets that`ve been retrofitted with precision guidance?,or are they stretched manpad missiles?
Hopefully we`ll get some answers at some point.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IAm

After Iran's attack on US air base in Iraq the western media is surprising silent about US air defenses. Some sources claim there were no US air defenses in Iraq. I still cannot come to terms with this claim that US of all operated air base with 1000s of soldiers without air defenses. 

Was there US air defenses? Did they attempt any interception and failed? Can any one here help?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DoubleYouSee

IAm said:


> After Iran's attack on US air base in Iraq the western media is surprising silent about US air defenses. Some sources claim there were no US air defenses in Iraq. I still cannot come to terms with this claim that US of all operated air base with 1000s of soldiers without air defenses.
> 
> Was there US air defenses? Did they attempt any interception and failed? Can any one here help?


They had patriot air defences batalions near aramco facilities in saudi arabia and due to the malfunction they had execuses ;the radars were not toward Iran's teritories and they missed all the missiles and drones....now they have new excuses.....use your commone sense.....do american leave their most important air base in the region defenceless(which is host of their president and foreign minister)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mithridates

Sineva said:


> Yes,thats what I was thinking too,but this thing is quite a bit longer than an rbs70,it might be around 2.5m in total length.What it reminds me of is the dual use ADATS system from the 1980s,this was a dual purpose atgm/sam that used laser beam riding and was a similar size to this,perhaps a little shorter in length,the one big difference is that adats was vehicle mounted with canisterized rounds while this is designed for portability.Its a shame we didnt get to see the launcher tho.Whats really surprising is that you would`ve expected that something like this would`ve been unveiled in its complete form by the iranian military ages ago.
> In addition what are those things on the right hand side of the pic?,are these small caliber 70-80mm rockets that`ve been retrofitted with precision guidance?,or are they stretched manpad missiles?
> Hopefully we`ll get some answers at some point.


i think they are MANPADs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

Mithridates said:


> i think they are MANPADs.



Looks like a QW-2 with a different cooling system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

DoubleYouSee said:


> They had patriot air defences batalions near aramco facilities in saudi arabia and due to the malfunction they had execuses ;the radars were not toward Iran's teritories and they missed all the missiles and drones....now they have new excuses.....use your commone sense.....do american leave their most important air base in the region defenceless(which is host of their president and foreign minister)



Could it be that they knew their air defenses will fail so, they decided not to try interception at all in order not to expose their failure?


----------



## DoubleYouSee

IAm said:


> Could it be that they knew their air defenses will fail so, they decided not to try interception at all in order not to expose their failure?


the day;sardar hajizade was anouncing the ain-ul-assad's operation,he mentioned that IRGC has hacked all 8 drones had been flying over the base......nobody mentioned this claim even in this forum.....some days later after US soldiers press interview;one of the soldiers said that as the data link cables has burnt we lost our control on the drones for a while.....how do you come to a conclusion!.......how has a cable been burnt,but they lost control just for *a while.....*
i personnaly think
they underestimate their enemies capabalities(not only IRAN....but Russia and China)or maybe wanna paint a weak picture of them......
so what about the patriot story!
first thing first they denied the effectiveness of IRAN's attack,then they said there was not any casulties and at the end they forget their president tweet(he wanted to retaliate any action of IRAN which put their properties or soldiers in danger and didn't do anything)
....now american came with new story to deny effectivness of IRAN's action.....there were no installed patriot to neutral the threats....so what IRAN has done is worthless.......

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Maurício Moreira Santos

IAm said:


> After Iran's attack on US air base in Iraq the western media is surprising silent about US air defenses. Some sources claim there were no US air defenses in Iraq. I still cannot come to terms with this claim that US of all operated air base with 1000s of soldiers without air defenses.
> 
> Was there US air defenses? Did they attempt any interception and failed? Can any one here help?



This article is interesting:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ng-us-troops-in-iraq-and-why-they-still-arent

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

Maurício Moreira Santos said:


> This article is interesting:
> https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ng-us-troops-in-iraq-and-why-they-still-arent



Nice avatar 
Welcome by the way!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Maurício Moreira Santos said:


> This article is interesting:
> https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ng-us-troops-in-iraq-and-why-they-still-arent



Haha, if the Irak government says "US troops out" then US dont care. But if the Irak government says "no Air Defense" then US says "Yessir!" - who should believe that?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1225332663508230144

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## VEVAK



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1225332663508230144


They have retrieved more than what I thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 603881










http://fna.ir/dey72c


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> They have retrieved more than what I thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## mohsen

Gen Hajizadeh:
MQ-4 has an advanced super computer to process and analyze data collected by it's sensors, radars and cameras in real time. but this highly valuable drone is no longer effective against Iran, cause we have discovered all of it's codes, frequencies are encryptions. we can neutralize it not just from 50, 100 or 150km away, but from thousands of kilometers away.

سردار حاجی‌زاده: به تمام کدها و فرکانس‌های پهپاد ام کیو 4 دست پیدا کرده‌ایم/ این هواپیما دیگر در برابر ایران کارایی ندارد | خبرگزاری فارس

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

I did not see anything regarding the engine. Any info on the engine? was it completely annihilated?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1225498728099930112
the question is if there is any value for Iran to gain from it.
Since the RQ-170 downing, Iran for sure has the technology for an synthetic aperture radar (already shown)

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-absar-sar-radar-seen-at-kish-air-show.461310/












I think americans learned from RQ-170 fiasco not to send sensitive technology which can fall in Irans hand
I think there is not much (nothing?) Iran can gain from this wreck

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1225498728099930112
> the question is if there is any value for Iran to gain from it.
> Since the RQ-170 downing, Iran for sure has the technology for an synthetic aperture radar (already shown)
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-absar-sar-radar-seen-at-kish-air-show.461310/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think americans learned from RQ-170 fiasco not to send sensitive technology which can fall in Irans hand
> I think there is not much (nothing?) Iran can gain from this wreck



Lol Iran has the radar intact!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Thus far US has given (not by choice) Iran more advanced technology then they sell to their top allies.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## VEVAK

Philosopher. said:


> I did not see anything regarding the engine. Any info on the engine? was it completely annihilated?



RQ-4's use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_AE_3007 even if there is nothing left of the engine, it really wasn't the engine that made the price tag even more expensive than the F-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1225498728099930112
> the question is if there is any value for Iran to gain from it.
> Since the RQ-170 downing, Iran for sure has the technology for an synthetic aperture radar (already shown)
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-absar-sar-radar-seen-at-kish-air-show.461310/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think americans learned from RQ-170 fiasco not to send sensitive technology which can fall in Irans hand
> I think there is not much (nothing?) Iran can gain from this wreck


Gen Hajizadeh said each recovered part is a treasure which will give us lots of information.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> Gen Hajizadeh said each recovered part is a treasure which will give us lots of information.



All their codes and frequencies are now useless and without $100's of millions in upgrades they(RQ-4's) become more of a liability rather than an asset against Iran! However I would say the biggest lost would the supercomputer and sensor fusing technology because if Iran ever cracks that what the technology gain could potentially lead to would be endless

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

VEVAK said:


>


Engine seems to be missing

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Philosopher. said:


> I did not see anything regarding the engine. Any info on the engine? was it completely annihilated?





Arminkh said:


> Engine seems to be missing


missile hit the rear side of the drone , i doubt you can get anything but pieces from engine (probably only useful from metallurgy point of view if you can learn from that) but as it said the real prize of capturing these drones is not their engine , its their sensors and avionics .
drones usually have a more primitive engine than fighter planes if you want the latest in engine department you must go after them . if you like that engine , my suggestion is to buy one of these second hand and study its engine , they use the same engine

Cessna Citation X
Embraer ERJ family
Embraer Legacy 600
and honestly the real treasure is the small part in front of the drone that the reporter don't care about at all , the air-frame they are showing is just for the one who don't knew much

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> Engine seems to be missing



The engine is reportedly just an 90's era Rolls-Royce AE 3007 engine so it's really nothing that special at least if the reports are true!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

As I said at the end of the day the biggest loss is a rather compact and portable supercomputer with sensor fusing technology because what that could potentially lead too in developing other weapon systems and platforms would practically be endless.

From developing a wide range of more advanced Satellites to various more advanced weapon systems like sensor fusing multiple tanks together to adding the tech to your command center to sensor fuse multiple smaller UAV's, UGV together, to building more advanced fighter jets, UAV, UCAV & AWACS to sensor fusing the sensors on our ships and subs, to building more capable IADS systems,..... If Iran can crack that and reproduce it at an affordable cost the various things Iran could achieve from that tech alone would be endless and not just in the defense sector..... 

However the IRGC needs to be very carful because depending on when it was recovered the Americans could have placed it there as a trojan horse to penetrate our own supercomputers...... Regardless, the hardware is still there for Iran to replicate and if it is as advertised and the IRGC in the coming years does crack it, what it could potentially lead to would be priceless for Iran making what the IRGC recovered truly a priceless treasure!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

Maurício Moreira Santos said:


> This article is interesting:
> https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ng-us-troops-in-iraq-and-why-they-still-arent



This story is really interesting. The US defy Iraqi government to murder Suleimani, They defy Iraqi government to continue occupation, yet the US need the permission of the Iraqi government to protect their occupying forces with patriot air defense. I don't have words to describe this, can someone help?


----------



## Philosopher

So I take it we can expect to see the composite body and fuel system used in next gen Surface to Air missiles too? That could help greatly increase ranges to 300/400km etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

Arminkh said:


> Engine seems to be missing


NOT missing,
not been shown, that was one of first part we recoverd

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

yavar said:


> NOT missing,
> not been shown, that was one of first part we recoverd



Nothing special about that engine anyways! The most sophisticated things on that platform is one of the most sophisticated SAR radars in the world and a compact portable supercomputer with sensor fusing technology.

And in terms of Air Frame a light and highly sophisticated light airframe design with radar scattering tech, engine noise reduction tech & heat reduction tech.... so a gold mine in terms of composites

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Listen to what he is saying at 20:55 regarding the Bavar-373 version in 2 years time:






Seems next gen Bavar is already in the work? @yavar

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Philosopher. said:


> Listen to what he is saying at 20:55 regarding the Bavar-373 version in 2 years time:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems next gen Bavar is already in the work? @yavar


Once you create a system like this development and upgrades never stop,theres always some improvement to be made when new technology becomes available or new enemy weapons are developed that have to be matched.A good example of this would be the soviets/russians upgrading of their various sam systems,hell even the old sa1/s25 berkut which was arguably the first sam system ever deployed was still being upgraded right up until the beginning of the 80s by which time it was a quarter of a century old.
A more up to date example would be the upgrades to the s300 where virtually no part of it was left untouched.
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html#mozTocId697690
It will be very interesting to see just how the b373 develops in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Sineva said:


> A more up to date example would be the upgrades to the s300 where virtually no part of it was left untouched.
> https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html#mozTocId697690
> It will be very interesting to see just how the b373 develops in the future.



Yes, he seems very confident it will be more advanced than S-400! They must be working on something special

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Philosopher. said:


> Yes, he seems very confident it will be more advanced than S-400! They must be working on something special


Whats rather bizarre in light of this is that the old rumor of iran wanting to purchase the s400,supposedly as well as other russian sams ie buk[LOL!],still seems to be alive and well and doing the rounds.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/02/05/russia-s-400-iran-ukrainian-passenger-plane-a69174

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Sineva said:


> Whats rather bizarre in light of this is that the old rumor of iran wanting to purchase the s400,supposedly as well as other russian sams ie buk[LOL!],still seems to be alive and well and doing the rounds.
> https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/02/05/russia-s-400-iran-ukrainian-passenger-plane-a69174



Well our Russian friends have offered Iran S-400 already. I don't see it happening. Any new purchases from Iran will most certainly involved airforce+TOT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227635568026247172

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1227642563378765825

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1224991974714900481
Full PDF: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/[EN]Letter dated 27 January 2020 from the Panel of Experts on Yemen addressed to the President of the Security Council - Final report of the Panel of Experts on Yemen (S-2020-70).pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

One of my "wishes" was always for Iran to develop cheap and easy to manufacture surface to air systems and proliferate them amongst the resistance groups. That would be almost as game changing as the ballistic missile proliferation. Our enemies rely almost entirely on their air dominance when it comes to potential conflicts with our allies. The more we can neutralise that, the better.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@VEVAK 

Your wish has come true, Iran has developed micro-jet powered missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Your wish has come true, Iran has developed micro-jet powered missiles.


Your analysis was not far from reality! Great work!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

PeeD said:


> @VEVAK
> 
> Your wish has come true, Iran has developed micro-jet powered missiles.



Yup and it started with the Akhgar! 

I truly believe that this is not only the low cost type of cruise missile system we will need in the battlefield but it will also allow relatively slow MALE UAV's to respond more quickly and at a safer distance then ever before!.

And against fortified bases and or ships because it's cheap it will allow cheaper swarm attacks before the far more expensive systems come in to finish the job and is a far more sound option against softer targets

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Now we know what those small artillery rockets/stretched manpads were for,these were the boosters for the missile.What we thought was a rear mounted laser seeker was actually a small commercial turbojet.





This is basically a small cruise missile not a sam,probably with a range of many tens of kilometers.I wonder if it has a fiber optic link like a lot of these non line of sight type missiles have.Another advantage of these is their potential to loiter looking for targets of opportunity such as sam systems,armored vehicles,helicopters etc..
Whats surprising is how long it is,it could be getting close to 3m,which is probably why the designers went for a separate under mounted booster rather than a tail mounted booster,its also odd that we havent seen a more compact purely rocket powered version with a range of 10-20kms.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

Sineva said:


> Now we know what those small artillery rockets/stretched manpads were for,these were the boosters for the missile.What we thought was a rear mounted laser seeker was actually a small commercial turbojet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is basically a small cruise missile not a sam,probably with a range of many tens of kilometers.I wonder if it has a fiber optic link like a lot of these non line of sight type missiles have.Another advantage of these is their potential to loiter looking for targets of opportunity such as sam systems,armored vehicles,helicopters etc..
> Whats surprising is how long it is,it could be getting close to 3m,which is probably why the designers went for a separate under mounted booster rather than a tail mounted booster,its also odd that we havent seen a more compact purely rocket powered version with a range of 10-20kms.







^ It looks similar to the ALAS missile developed by the Serbian company EDePro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Evolution of knowledge....the "copier" is now the "innovator"... Any photos of the actual launcher of this beautiful arrow.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Arminkh

aryobarzan said:


> Evolution of knowledge....the "copier" is now the "innovator"... Any photos of the actual launcher of this beautiful arrow.


Given where the booster is mounted, It probably is fired off of a ramp, just like the ones used for Karrar drone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Arminkh said:


> Given where the booster is mounted, It probably is fired off of a ramp, just like the ones used for Karrar drone.


https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/10...سازمان-ملل-از-موشک-پدافندی-جدید-انصارالله-راز

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Looks like it was sent to Quds Force in Yemen for testing and evaluation against western backed systems.

Explains the assassination attempt on leader of Yemen operations for Quds force. Seems Quds is active in supplying experimental Iranian weapons for testing on the battlefield as well as using Iranian engineers alongside Yemen engineers to develop a homegrown capability to build various weapons themselves.

What you are seeing is the building of Yemen Hezbollah. But Houthis have higher independence than Lebanon Hezbollah or Iraqi Hezbollah. So I count them more an ally than a legion to Iran as western media likes to portray.

Intresting enough not many experimental Iranian weapons have been tested in Syrian civil war versus Yemen conflict. Likely because Iran wants data on its weapons against Western weapons/systems whereas in Syria it was mostly a war against low tech terrorists with no conventional force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

Read this (the whole thread)! Deducing how Hizbollah may soon have the capability to target iron dome s-band radars:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228695456936534017
Time for some estimated guess! Which Iranian AD system is this? 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228732502354931714

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228735822796599296

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Yemen sources claim the AD is self produced!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228743760504332288

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Sina-1 said:


> Read this (the whole thread)! Deducing how Hizbollah may soon have the capability to target iron dome s-band radars:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228695456936534017
> Time for some estimated guess! Which Iranian AD system is this?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228732502354931714
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228735822796599296


Isn't technology the most beautiful thing in the world? Apparently flair was not able to fool the missile. But the jet detected it was being targeted so it is not a passive type. 3rd khordad or Tabas?



Sina-1 said:


> Yemen sources claim the AD is self produced!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228743760504332288


Of course it is. Im sure they will soon reveal their own version of quantum computer and fusion reactor too.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> Isn't technology the most beautiful thing in the world? Apparently flair was not able to fool the missile. But the jet detected it was being targeted so it is not a passive type. 3rd khordad or Tabas?
> 
> 
> Of course it is. Im sure they will soon reveal their own version of quantum computer and fusion reactor too.


Probably a 2nd or even 3rd tier irgc system. Maybe even miniaturized and simplified. Any case, to the least they’ve received TOT from Iran. Would love to see some pics of the actual AD system!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Sina-1 said:


> Probably a 2nd or even 3rd tier irgc system. Maybe even miniaturized and simplified. Any case, to the least they’ve received TOT from Iran. Would love to see some pics of the actual AD system!


What I loved was the clean and smooth trajectory of the missile. It reached the target so effortlessly.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

Arminkh said:


> What I loved was the clean and smooth trajectory of the missile. It reached the target so effortlessly.


A great example that power cannot be bought. Houties professionally operating mature Iranian tech versus Saudi western built aircraft that they can’t even operate (flares going of way too soon)!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Arminkh said:


> What I loved was the clean and smooth trajectory of the missile. It reached the target so effortlessly.


compering with the missile that houthies shot some years ago against f-15;this missile done the task flawlessly.




tracking system is same as the old system but missile differ.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1041844/شروع-سال-انتقام-پدافندی-در-یمن-با-شکار-جنگنده-مشهور-اروپایی

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Looks more like a manpad type missile rather than an AD missile. Could use IR with an anti radiation seeker.

I don’t think there is a 3rd Khordad system rolling around in the middle of no where in Yemen. It’s to easy to spot with US intelligence providing Saudis with targeting data.

Also speed of missile is another fact typically AD missiles fly at several Mach’s, this didn’t seem to be that fast.

IDK maybe it’s the angle of video but it looks more like a portable AD fired off a railing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> Looks more like a manpad type missile rather than an AD missile. Could use IR with an anti radiation seeker.
> 
> I don’t think there is a 3rd Khordad system rolling around in the middle of no where in Yemen. It’s to easy to spot with US intelligence providing Saudis with targeting data.
> 
> Also speed of missile is another fact typically AD missiles fly at several Mach’s, this didn’t seem to be that fast.
> 
> IDK maybe it’s the angle of video but it looks more like a portable AD fired off a railing.


I think it was the angle of the video. It seems like the missile was moving away from the camera. But I agree a 3rd Khordad would draw too much attention unless they have made it look like a container truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

Arminkh said:


> I think it was the angle of the video. It seems like the missile was moving away from the camera. But I agree a 3rd Khordad would draw too much attention unless they have made it look like a container truck.



If it actually is Iranian then it's doubtful it be a missile any larger than the new missiles Iran's built for the Mersad… If Iranian then its would like be a modified version of these for within visible range operations... Something that would use optical systems rather than Search Radars...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> Looks more like a manpad type missile rather than an AD missile. Could use IR with an anti radiation seeker.
> 
> I don’t think there is a 3rd Khordad system rolling around in the middle of no where in Yemen. It’s to easy to spot with US intelligence providing Saudis with targeting data.
> 
> Also speed of missile is another fact typically AD missiles fly at several Mach’s, this didn’t seem to be that fast.
> 
> IDK maybe it’s the angle of video but it looks more like a portable AD fired off a railing.



No manpad missile has such a powerful warhead!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228750484762132481^ The vertical gyroscope 'Model V10' found inside the mysterious intercepted missile appears to be the same model that was recovered from a crashed Qasef-1 UAV in 2017



Sina-1 said:


> Yemen sources claim the AD is self produced!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228743760504332288




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228781443045896197

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> .


One could easily imagine an air launched version of this using the pop out fins that were used on the balaban or yasin pgms,rather than the four large fixed fins.
It would be pretty much a powered version of something like the uae al tariq




One could easily imagine these used as loitering weapons controlled by the back seater to engage sams or other targets of opportunity while the launch aircraft stayed at a safer distance.




Another option would be to use a modified rear section as a power unit to extend the range of irans yasin and balaban air launched pgms.
The further developmental potential of this weapon,which frankly looks like it was just put together very quickly using a variety of whatever cheap cots that iran had access to in order just to give the yemenis a cheap simple nlos weapon,is actually rather impressive.I hope that we see it developed further in iranian service.
I think it also demonstrates just how increasingly easy it is for countries to build very cheap precision guided weapons using cheap off the shelf components.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229219936435949568

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229220670896300033

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229686401526116353

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

Sina-1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229686401526116353




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228616256368136193

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229694961312043008^ So according to him, Oghab is a wheeled Tor-M1-based SHORAD system that is equipped with missiles only, whereas Separ is a Pantsir-S1-based point-defense SAM system equipped with both missiles and 30 mm AAA guns. Oghab has a range of 12 km and is equipped with night vision sights.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229292904105103361^ He says Oghab will be the first Iranian product to use a vertical cold launch system

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

https://tn.ai/2123798
^ In this article by Tasnim News, an IRIADF official mentioned that the "first phase" (version) of Oghab systems will only have missiles to engage low-altitude targets. But in "later phases" (versions) Oghab systems will be equipped with both missiles and AAA guns.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228616256368136193
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229694961312043008^ So according to him, Oghab is a wheeled Tor-M1-based SHORAD system that is equipped with missiles only, whereas Separ is a Pantsir-S1-based point-defense SAM system equipped with both missiles and 30 mm AAA guns. Oghab has a range of 12 km and is equipped with night vision sights.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229292904105103361^ He says Oghab will be the first Iranian product to use a vertical cold launch system



The use of cold launch is very suspect and leads me to believe to a ToT between Russia and Iran. Possibly one of the “damages” that Russia had to pay for the disaster delay in S-300 deal.

For Iran to use a cold launch tech now after a 20 years of building hot launch missiles including in its domestic Bavar-373 is surprising.

I think this Oghab may end up looking like a Iranian Tor-M1 with some improvements made by Iran to bring it closer to M2 standard.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1230238442031808514

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

_The 358 missiles consist of three parts: two motors and an explosive warhead. The weapon can be assembled after shipment and fired from a crude launcher on the ground. Once the missile is fired and traveling fast enough, a solid-fuel boost motor falls away and a cruise motor takes over; at that point the weapon flies in a figure-eight pattern and looks for targets._

As suspected it is fired off a crude launcher. Rather ingenious. Dedicated AD systems stand out too much and a manpad is not advanced enough/large enough for this.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

TheImmortal said:


> _The 358 missiles consist of three parts: two motors and an explosive warhead. The weapon can be assembled after shipment and fired from a crude launcher on the ground. Once the missile is fired and traveling fast enough, a solid-fuel boost motor falls away and a cruise motor takes over; at that point the weapon flies in a figure-eight pattern and looks for targets._
> 
> As suspected it is fired off a crude launcher. Rather ingenious. Dedicated AD systems stand out too much and a manpad is not advanced enough/large enough for this.



Imagine if this thing loitering and not finding target, then simply deploying a chute and land. Then the operators can refuel it and launch it again. Suddenly you have a reusable SAM against frequent cheap targets such as choppers. The potentials are impressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xbat

that is not a dedicated SAM , it is a long range ATGM with limited AD role for slow and low flying objects like choppers. i dont know why they exaggerate it too much because IRAN has much advanced SAMs.


----------



## Sina-1

xbat said:


> that is not a dedicated SAM , it is a long range ATGM with limited AD role for slow and low flying objects like choppers. i dont know why they exaggerate it too much because RAN has much advanced SAMs.


It is a dedicated AD missile, however not a conventional one! It Loiters in slow speed on high altitude and waiting for a target and then goes supersonic to hit target. It's kind of an aerial mine if you will. It's very innovative and I wouldn't be surprised if other countries would start producing similar system since it effectively establishes a no-fly-zone very cost efficiently.

Reactions: Like Like:

3


----------



## xbat

Sina-1 said:


> It is a dedicated AD missile, however not a conventional one! It Loiters in slow speed on high altitude and waiting for a target and then goes supersonic to hit target. It's kind of an aerial mine if you will. It's very innovative and I wouldn't be surprised if other countries would start producing similar system since it effectively establishes a no-fly-zone very cost efficiently.


That shape cant go mach+ , believe it or not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

xbat said:


> that is not a dedicated SAM , it is a long range ATGM



This system is designed specifically for flying targets, so how that make it a ATGM?



> with limited AD role for slow and low flying objects like choppers.



it shot down a Saudi Tornado, is that a chopper?



> i dont know why they exaggerate it too much because IRAN has much advanced SAMs.



We're talking about Yemen here. Iran cannot export those advanced system there. Having said that, this new system is ingenious.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> Imagine if this thing loitering and not finding target, then simply deploying a chute and land. Then the operators can refuel it and launch it again. Suddenly you have a reusable SAM against frequent cheap targets such as choppers. The potentials are impressive.



really depends on a couple of factors:

1 cruise missile motor (is one time use engine ie cheap or reusable)?

2 fuel type (solid fuel or not?)?

Given the small amount of missiles sent for testing, I think these are to be used in high probability situations. Meaning as long as the drone/helicopter/jet is within proper engagement altitude then use it. But it isn’t meant to be a airborne flying AD system.

It is basically a modern day solution to AirPower for guirella fighters similar to what the stinger missile was to Afghan fighters during soviet invasion.

Iran will likely continue testing on it battlefield to determine probability of kill ratio.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## R Wing

Philosopher. said:


> This system is designed specifically for flying targets, so how that make it a ATGM?
> 
> 
> 
> it shot down a Saudi Tornado, is that a chopper?
> 
> 
> 
> We're talking about Yemen here. Iran cannot export those advanced system there. Having said that, this new system is ingenious.



Extremely impressed.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

Philosopher. said:


> This system is designed specifically for flying targets, so how that make it a ATGM?
> 
> 
> 
> it shot down a Saudi Tornado, is that a chopper?
> 
> 
> 
> We're talking about Yemen here. Iran cannot export those advanced system there. Having said that, this new system is ingenious.


It's jet engine has limited speed so it's not designed to hit fighter jets.
Yemenis will unveil their Tornado killer soon.



xbat said:


> i dont know why they exaggerate it too much because IRAN has much advanced SAMs.


They exaggerate even when they capture few rifles.
They want to cover the failure of their superior weapons behind a big name like Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Any fighter jet that comes in for CAS or low altitude bombing run automatically is eligible to be hit by this missile. If it’s seeker is passive (radiation seeker) then pilot will not know until it is too late to drop tanks and go supersonic.

So it can certainly hit aircraft that are operating in low altitude or CAS role. But it is unlikely to be able to engage a fighter jet just passing by or a air superiority fighter.

But again look at the design vs it’s task. Iran created something that any force with minor training can use to engage aircraft.

It will be mighty tough to build a hypersonic AD and have it rail launched (most optimal for insurgent groups) and NOT need radar for targeting. 

All these things stand out like sore thumbs to aerial targeting data seekers. You don’t want to make an asymmetric force be a conventional one. That is not it’s speciality.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231030556898533378

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231033192985092096

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231034383995457536

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231036390978310144

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231188046634192897

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231087135740092416^ It seems as if Iran reverse-engineered this 'Titan' minijet engine

Specification PDF of this jet engine: http://www.amtjets.com/pdf/Titan_specifications.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xbat

Good Morning Iranians! , when we say it is not SAM it is a long range ATGM with limited air defence role , not supersonic only good for heli , you were praising how advanced the missile as SAM.


----------



## PeeD

xbat said:


> Good Morning Iranians! , when we say it is not SAM it is a long range ATGM with limited air defence role , not supersonic only good for heli , you were praising how advanced the missile as SAM.



CENTCOM calls it a SAM but xbat says its not... who to believe?

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## xbat

PeeD said:


> CENTCOM calls it a SAM but xbat says its not... who to believe?


looks like the guy who post the tweets above, can have two eyes and a brain, like xbat.


----------



## Mithridates

xbat said:


> Good Morning Iranians! , when we say it is not SAM it is a long range ATGM with limited air defence role , not supersonic only good for heli , you were praising how advanced the missile as SAM.


you do not put proximity sensors on an ATGM. best definition for this missile would be loitering munition.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231030556898533378
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231033192985092096
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231034383995457536
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231036390978310144
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231188046634192897
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231087135740092416^ It seems as if Iran reverse-engineered this 'Titan' minijet engine
> 
> Specification PDF of this jet engine: http://www.amtjets.com/pdf/Titan_specifications.pdf



12K Euros for the engine? But @VEVAK would let you believe everything that Iran creates doesn’t cost more than a “noon baar baari” 

Just Remember who here said that Iran still procures foreign parts in rocket/missile industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

xbat said:


> looks like the guy who post the tweets above, can have two eyes and a brain, like xbat.



yes u both have eyes and brains, CENTCOM probably uses AI which is under an internship programme....So the riddle is solved...
For me its a multi purpose missile, may have dedicated mode for SAM behaviour.. No ones puts coastly proximity sensor array, necessary controllers and electronic support for analyzing feedbacks in a dedicated ATGM.



Mithridates said:


> you do not put proximity sensors on an ATGM. best definition for this missile would be loitering munition.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231206310013784066

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sina-1

The jet engine is already reverse engineered and produced by Iran.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231087135740092416

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> 12K Euros for the engine?.



yes, the "original" is being sold for 12k EUR, I dont think producing it would even cost 20% of it.
Maybe the original was used for plausible deniability, so what?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> 12K Euros for the engine? But @VEVAK would let you believe everything that Iran creates doesn’t cost more than a “noon baar baari”
> 
> Just Remember who here said that Iran still procures foreign parts in rocket/missile industry.


I'm one of those people who said Iran IS still receiving equipment, parts , metals, technology from outside Iran. First culprit is China. 2nd is probably Russia, then or Belarus or Serbia. In this case, Iran did use imported foreign equipment. cheers.



Draco.IMF said:


> I dont think producing it would even cost 20% of it.
> ?


How do you really know this? SO far only them have this engine and its 12K EUR so how can you arbitrarily say it can be made for 20% of this 12kEUR cost? there is no proof it can/has been produced for cheaper at the same quality and reliability....(and reliability is the reason Iran paid such good money for it)


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> 12K Euros for the engine? But @VEVAK would let you believe everything that Iran creates doesn’t cost more than a “noon baar baari”
> 
> Just Remember who here said that Iran still procures foreign parts in rocket/missile industry.



Clearly you don't know how to read..... What does a micro jet engine built in Europe have to do with Iranian prices?


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> 12K Euros for the engine? But @VEVAK would let you believe everything that Iran creates doesn’t cost more than a “noon baar baari”
> 
> Just Remember who here said that Iran still procures foreign parts in rocket/missile industry.



Also you act as if this was the 1st time you've ever seen RC jet engine prices !LOL! so here! When me and @PeeD used to talk about it i used to post them on this very site you fool! LOL! However the ones I posted were under 50lbf range but here haleshoo bebar osghol!
http://modelaircraftcompany.com/newshop/en/15-micro-jet-turbines
https://www.dreamworksrc.com/turbine-engines/jetcat-rc-turbines

nadeed badeed e badbakht!

And what the hell does that have to do with Iranian produced weapons that use domestic engines and even if we wanted to buy them for use on our weapons we would buy them bulk so the price would be nothing even close to $12000.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

When comparing price of a western military product with a copied Iranian version you can safely use a *factor of 10 reduction* for the Iranian price ..so if it is 12000 Euros in Europe the similar product will cost roughly 1200 euros if made entirely with Iranian components/labor . By the way I did not pull that factor 10 out of a hat..there are logic and numbers behind it and it held true when in this forum some one arrived at almost the same factor using totally different approach. remember it is only a ROM (Rough Order of Magnitude).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

I would imagine 4-5k, and they mark up to 12k for IP considerations. This kind of hardware could easily have 200-300% profit margin so it wouldn't surprise me if the costs are much less than 10k

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

VEVAK said:


> Also you act as if this was the 1st time you've ever seen RC jet engine prices !LOL! so here! When me and @PeeD used to talk about it i used to post them on this very site you fool! LOL! However the ones I posted were under 50lbf range but here haleshoo bebar osghol!
> http://modelaircraftcompany.com/newshop/en/15-micro-jet-turbines
> https://www.dreamworksrc.com/turbine-engines/jetcat-rc-turbines
> 
> nadeed badeed e badbakht!
> 
> And what the hell does that have to do with Iranian produced weapons that use domestic engines and even if we wanted to buy them for use on our weapons we would buy them bulk so the price would be nothing even close to $12000.....



God you are beyond stupid. 

First of all it is illegal to sell weapons (yes dual use jet engines for cruise missiles counts) to Iran per UN Security Council resolution. So these are being bought on BLACK MARKET and thus price is HIGHER than 12K or a bulk price. That is the cost of going through a middle man!

And my point is, it is unlikely that every last screw and part from an Iranian missile is built in Iran. Somethings due get imported.

But continue living in that fantasy land of yours where Iran has 10’s of thousands of missiles.

I don’t forget your earlier posts of drivel and nonsense when all you would do is sit here on this board and post “Hollywood movie tech weapons“ for each suggestion in a thread about how Iran can build this wonder weapon for [insert amount that you pulled out of thin air]. I ridiculed you then enough, thank god you moved away from those nonsense posts of yours. But it seems you found another infatuation this time with BMs being the end all and be all of Iranian offensive power.



Stryker1982 said:


> I would imagine 4-5k, and they mark up to 12k for IP considerations. This kind of hardware could easily have 200-300% profit margin so it wouldn't surprise me if the costs are much less than 10k





Stryker1982 said:


> I would imagine 4-5k, and they mark up to 12k for IP considerations. This kind of hardware could easily have 200-300% profit margin so it wouldn't surprise me if the costs are much less than 10k



Except it is illegal to sell these components to Iran. So no European country/company will run the risk of pissing off EU/US for a lousy parts order. Chinese companies are more willing to take the risk because they don’t have business in those countries and get shielded by the state.

So as the Babak Zanjani scandal showed, Iran loses boatloads of cash beating sanctions by using a wide vast network of middle men and front companies.

What users on this board dont see is the tens of hundreds of cases that Iran pays for these types of things ranging from missile parts to nuclear components to whatever and they get intercepted by US/NATO after they find out the paperwork was hiding final destination.


----------



## Aramagedon

TheImmortal said:


> God you are beyond stupid.
> 
> First of all it is illegal to sell weapons (yes dual use jet engines for cruise missiles counts) to Iran per UN Security Council resolution. So these are being bought on BLACK MARKET and thus price is HIGHER than 12K or a bulk price. That is the cost of going through a middle man!
> 
> And my point is, it is unlikely that every last screw and part from an Iranian missile is built in Iran. Somethings due get imported.
> 
> But continue living in that fantasy land of yours where Iran has 10’s of thousands of missiles.
> 
> I don’t forget your earlier posts of drivel and nonsense when all you would do is sit here on this board and post “Hollywood movie tech weapons“ for each suggestion in a thread about how Iran can build this wonder weapon for [insert amount that you pulled out of thin air]. I ridiculed you then enough, thank god you moved away from those nonsense posts of yours. But it seems you found another infatuation this time with BMs being the end all and be all of Iranian offensive power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except it is illegal to sell these components to Iran. So no European country/company will run the risk of pissing off EU/US for a lousy parts order. Chinese companies are more willing to take the risk because they don’t have business in those countries and get shielded by the state.
> 
> So as the Babak Zanjani scandal showed, Iran loses boatloads of cash beating sanctions by using a wide vast network of middle men and front companies.
> 
> What users on this board dont see is the tens of hundreds of cases that Iran pays for these types of things ranging from missile parts to nuclear components to whatever and they get intercepted by US/NATO after they find out the paperwork was hiding final destination.




You are super stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231522314241609728^ The four today revealed 'Houthi' air-defense systems are called Thaqeb-1, Thaqeb-2, Thaqeb-3 and Fater-1 (which was already revealed before).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231522314241609728^ The four today revealed 'Houthi' air-defense systems are called Thaqeb-1, Thaqeb-2, Thaqeb-3 and Fater-1 (which was already revealed before).

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


>



what!!!!??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Draco.IMF said:


>







Thaqeb-1:

Based on the R-73 (AA-11 Archer)
Length: 2.93 m
Weight: 105 kg
Speed: Mach 1.5
Range: 9 km
Altitude: 5.5 km
Guidance system: Infrared homing

Thaqeb-2:

Based on the R-27 (AA-10 Alamo)
Length: 3.97 m
Weight: 125 kg
Speed: Mach 2.5
Range: 15 km
Altitude: 8 km
Guidance system: Infrared homing

Thaqeb-3:

Based on the R-77 (AA-12 Adder)

Length: 3.6 m
Weight: 175 kg
Speed: Mach 2.5
Range: 20 km
Altitude: 6 km
Guidance system: Combined

Fater-1:

Based on the 3M9 missile of the Kub SAM system

Length: 5.8 m
Weight: 599 kg
Speed: Mach 2.8
Range: 22.6 km
Altitude: 10 km
Guidance system: Infrared homing


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231562173824016384

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## aryobarzan

Congratulations to brave Houthies and Yemen people . Very impressive and very dignified presentation. The poorest Arab country under constant bombardment and total blockade has managed to achieve this (and yes they did have Iranian help and great that they did). Now compare this to incompetent saudis that despite all the money and access can not even manufacture a single bolt without some american or european doing it for them giving them the machines and paint so that they can stand by the product and claim it is made in saudi arabia..

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Draco.IMF

now imagine what Hezbollah has

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ In their new air-defense music video, they reveal that they used one of their Thaqeb-2/R-27 to shoot down a Saudi Wing Loong UCAV on April 19, 2019:














Another screenshot of a Thaqeb-2/R-27 missile launch:





The missile that shot down the Saudi AH-64 Apache on November 29, 2019:




^ It looks rather slim and pointy, maybe it was a Thaqeb-3/R-77? Or a 9M33 Osa?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Navigator

Messerschmitt said:


> The missile that shot down the Saudi AH-64 Apache on November 29, 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^ It looks rather slim and pointy, maybe it was a Thaqeb-3/R-77? Or a 9M33 Osa?



It's more like something like Rapier..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Poorest country in the region and with enough quantities of missiles, has upgraded itself to the level consistent with air defenses of a Eastern European military. Unbelievable progress! Well done to Yemen, and to Iran for the impressive ability to help these people defend themselves from relentless bombing despite all odds.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231699742830321664


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231632503024373760


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> ^ In their new air-defense music video, they reveal that they used one of their Thaqeb-2/R-27 to shoot down a Saudi Wing Loong UCAV on April 19, 2019:
> View attachment 607791
> View attachment 607792
> View attachment 607793
> View attachment 607795
> 
> 
> Another screenshot of a Thaqeb-2/R-27 missile launch:
> View attachment 607798
> 
> 
> The missile that shot down the Saudi AH-64 Apache on November 29, 2019:
> View attachment 607799
> 
> ^ It looks rather slim and pointy, maybe it was a Thaqeb-3/R-77? Or a 9M33 Osa?


Whats more impressive is that we finally see the yemeni R-77s and that like the R27s they`ve come up with a way to use them as land based sams,perhaps by using mig29 radar sets as a ground based sam illuminator?.
let us hope that iran has taken advantage of this priceless opportunity to acquire some of the R-77s for local reverse/reengineering,tho in truth whether the airforce would actually have either the will or ability to make use of this weapon seems rather doubtful sadly.
But just imagine for a moment the performance upgrade for the iranian airforce if even just the mig29 fleet alone was indigenously upgraded to fulcrum C standard with the ability to use an iranian built and improved R-77.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Raytheon's *SLAMRAAM* (Surface Launched (SL) and AMRAAM) (Radar Homing A2A missiles) 

A design like this, on Safir, Aras or Rointen vehicle could provide short range and very mobile AA defense. Fantastic for asymmetrical warfare. A design on a small vehicle that can carry this amount of weight, I think would prove useful for forces that are dealing with foes with air superiority Ahem* Ahem*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Whats more impressive is that we finally see the yemeni R-77s and that like the R27s they`ve come up with a way to use them as land based sams,perhaps by using mig29 radar sets as a ground based sam illuminator?.
> let us hope that iran has taken advantage of this priceless opportunity to acquire some of the R-77s for local reverse/reengineering,tho in truth whether the airforce would actually have either the will or ability to make use of this weapon seems rather doubtful sadly.
> But just imagine for a moment the performance upgrade for the iranian airforce if even just the mig29 fleet alone was indigenously upgraded to fulcrum C standard with the ability to use an iranian built and improved R-77.



Remains to be see if these missles are actually being “produced”. They could be just firing old inventory.

People forget that Yemen was the most heavily armed country in Middle East due to constant wars. Then the entire Yemeni army inventory fell into hands of Houthi’s. So Yemen didn’t have any shortages of weapons contrary to public belief.


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Remains to be see if these missles are actually being “produced”. They could be just firing old inventory.
> 
> People forget that Yemen was the most heavily armed country in Middle East due to constant wars. Then the entire Yemeni army inventory fell into hands of Houthi’s. So Yemen didn’t have any shortages of weapons contrary to public belief.


Oh,these would undoubtedly be the older russian built missiles for the yemeni mig29smt fleet that were originally supplied waaay back in the mid 2000s.But it would probably be irans best ever chance to acquire actual samples of the R77 for reverse/reengineering purposes.
This would be a far,far better use of scarce resources by the airforce instead of screwing around trying to reverse engineer non upgraded copies of the F5 light fighter.



Stryker1982 said:


> Raytheon's *SLAMRAAM* (Surface Launched (SL) and AMRAAM) (Radar Homing A2A missiles)
> 
> A design like this, on Safir, Aras or Rointen vehicle could provide short range and very mobile AA defense. Fantastic for asymmetrical warfare. A design on a small vehicle that can carry this amount of weight, I think would prove useful for forces that are dealing with foes with air superiority Ahem* Ahem*


Very true.One could certainly imagine hezbollah operating a system like this,a good advantage is that it uses both active radar seeker and ir homing equipped missiles,so double the trouble for any potential targets.If you also had a short ranged aesa or pesa radar and optronic system mounted in another vehicle then you would have a very light weight sam system that would still prove a potentially very nasty surprise for any intruder.This could also have potential as a naval sam system for lightweight vessels such as the sina/kamin class missile boats.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> God you are beyond stupid.
> 
> First of all it is illegal to sell weapons (yes dual use jet engines for cruise missiles counts) to Iran per UN Security Council resolution. So these are being bought on BLACK MARKET and thus price is HIGHER than 12K or a bulk price. That is the cost of going through a middle man!
> 
> And my point is, it is unlikely that every last screw and part from an Iranian missile is built in Iran. Somethings due get imported.
> 
> But continue living in that fantasy land of yours where Iran has 10’s of thousands of missiles.
> 
> I don’t forget your earlier posts of drivel and nonsense when all you would do is sit here on this board and post “Hollywood movie tech weapons“ for each suggestion in a thread about how Iran can build this wonder weapon for [insert amount that you pulled out of thin air]. I ridiculed you then enough, thank god you moved away from those nonsense posts of yours. But it seems you found another infatuation this time with BMs being the end all and be all of Iranian offensive power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except it is illegal to sell these components to Iran. So no European country/company will run the risk of pissing off EU/US for a lousy parts order. Chinese companies are more willing to take the risk because they don’t have business in those countries and get shielded by the state.
> 
> So as the Babak Zanjani scandal showed, Iran loses boatloads of cash beating sanctions by using a wide vast network of middle men and front companies.
> 
> What users on this board dont see is the tens of hundreds of cases that Iran pays for these types of things ranging from missile parts to nuclear components to whatever and they get intercepted by US/NATO after they find out the paperwork was hiding final destination.



It seem our US Brothers are finding it difficult believing that a missile costing $3m in USA will cost $300k in Iran, but they failed to look at differences in the economies. I just checked my salary against similar position in USA and that of US is ten(10) times higher. This means labour cost in USA will be 10 times higher than Ghana. I checked my utility bill against that of Iran and that of Iran is ten(10) time cheaper. There will be unprecedented jubilation in Ghana if we are asked to pay five(5) times what Iranians are paying. I wonder why Iranians were killing and burning because they are pay just 10% of what we pay here. When it comes to energy and utilities the Iranians are in Heaven without knowing. 

If the metal is taken from Iranian soil which belong to the government, then material cost will be paper cost only and not real outlay of cash. Most of the cost will be labour and few imported component if any, and if salaries in Iran is like that of mine which I believe it is, then the missile will cost 10% of that of USA & EU. So, I do not doubt such low cost of missiles at all. 

The missiles costing $300k does not mean it is cheap from Iran's perspective. It will take the same effort to earn $300k in Iran as it will take to earn $3m in USA.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## VEVAK

TheImmortal said:


> God you are beyond stupid.
> 
> First of all it is illegal to sell weapons (yes dual use jet engines for cruise missiles counts) to Iran per UN Security Council resolution. So these are being bought on BLACK MARKET and thus price is HIGHER than 12K or a bulk price. That is the cost of going through a middle man!
> 
> And my point is, it is unlikely that every last screw and part from an Iranian missile is built in Iran. Somethings due get imported.
> 
> But continue living in that fantasy land of yours where Iran has 10’s of thousands of missiles.
> 
> I don’t forget your earlier posts of drivel and nonsense when all you would do is sit here on this board and post “Hollywood movie tech weapons“ for each suggestion in a thread about how Iran can build this wonder weapon for [insert amount that you pulled out of thin air]. I ridiculed you then enough, thank god you moved away from those nonsense posts of yours. But it seems you found another infatuation this time with BMs being the end all and be all of Iranian offensive power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except it is illegal to sell these components to Iran. So no European country/company will run the risk of pissing off EU/US for a lousy parts order. Chinese companies are more willing to take the risk because they don’t have business in those countries and get shielded by the state.
> 
> So as the Babak Zanjani scandal showed, Iran loses boatloads of cash beating sanctions by using a wide vast network of middle men and front companies.
> 
> What users on this board dont see is the tens of hundreds of cases that Iran pays for these types of things ranging from missile parts to nuclear components to whatever and they get intercepted by US/NATO after they find out the paperwork was hiding final destination.



I have never claimed BM are the end of all weapons and have repeatedly claim low cost cruise missiles are vital for us both on the battlefield and for use on our UCAVS & the only delusional fool influenced by Hollywood movies and American propaganda here is YOU! 

Your the one under the delusion that millions didn't attend Soleimani's Funeral and that speaks for its self where as im the one who said Iran needs to start producing CM with Micro Jet engines long before Iran started producing them.... so that also speak for its self!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Heres an oldy,a close up of the original russian sa11 gadfly/buk m1 sam inspired interceptor missile design for the 3rd of khordad.




plus a pic of the very early sa17 grizzly/buk m2 inspired tel design for what would eventually become the 3rd of khordad sam system.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

Look at PR


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233476964822003712


They make it as if the system has capability of targeting or defending it self against F16 ,

It was Deployed in Idlib to defend against terrorist using drone or quodchapters

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

yavar said:


> Look at PR
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233476964822003712
> 
> 
> They make it as if the system has capability of targeting or defending it self against F16 ,
> 
> It was Deployed in Idlib to defend against terrorist using drone or quodchapters


it must have been able to protect itself from the bomb or cruise missile or whatever it was, the question is what it has to do with Iran , we don't even have Pantsir


----------



## Stryker1982

What bothers me the most is how it wasn't able to stop the drone monitoring it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

yavar said:


> Look at PR
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233476964822003712
> 
> 
> They make it as if the system has capability of targeting or defending it self against F16 ,
> 
> It was Deployed in Idlib to defend against terrorist using drone or quodchapters



I thought Pantsir S1 is able to target fighter jets, Russia marketed it as able to do so. It's not that short range, should be able to target F16s


----------



## TheImmortal

yavar said:


> Look at PR
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233476964822003712
> 
> 
> They make it as if the system has capability of targeting or defending it self against F16 ,
> 
> It was Deployed in Idlib to defend against terrorist using drone or quodchapters





Hack-Hook said:


> it must have been able to protect itself from the bomb or cruise missile or whatever it was, the question is what it has to do with Iran , we don't even have Pantsir





Stryker1982 said:


> What bothers me the most is how it wasn't able to stop the drone monitoring it.





camelguy said:


> I thought Pantsir S1 is able to target fighter jets, Russia marketed it as able to do so. It's not that short range, should be able to target F16s



Pantsir is able to target fighter jets at 20KM and up to 10KM altitude. Also it can intercept other objects. It’s just not very capable. As Israel has shown in wiping out several of them.

But still a pantsir is only as capable as its crew. But like I said Pantsir and Tor M1 are not very capable systems. They are jammable and able to be fooled.

If the crew is incompetent then they might even shoot down an airliner flying right next to them


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Stryker1982 said:


> What bothers me the most is how it wasn't able to stop the drone monitoring it.


The altitude of the drone and the fact whether it armed or not,matters.....suppose that the drone was flying at the height of 10km ,in this case ther is no chance to shot it down by pantsir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

DoubleYouSee said:


> The altitude of the drone and the fact whether it armed or not,matters.....suppose that the drone was flying at the height of 10km ,in this case ther is no chance to shot it down by pantsir



But the radar goes further then 10 km and so the S1 can recognize the UAV and can move if it cant shot down the UAV. Also they can call air force after recognizing. Due to all this did not happen, me also think the crew wasnt the best, maybe drinking tea.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Maurício Moreira Santos

yavar said:


> Look at PR
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233476964822003712
> 
> 
> They make it as if the system has capability of targeting or defending it self against F16 ,
> 
> It was Deployed in Idlib to defend against terrorist using drone or quodchapters



https://twitter.com/ynms79797979

This confirm?



Maurício Moreira Santos said:


> https://twitter.com/ynms79797979
> 
> This confirm?


https://charly015.blogspot.com/2020/02/que-tendra-el-pantsir-cuando-lo-bendicen.html


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> People forget that Yemen was the most heavily armed country in Middle East due to constant wars. Then the entire Yemeni army inventory fell into hands of Houthi’s. So Yemen didn’t have any shortages of weapons contrary to public belief.


you are not correct - you mean to say Yemen had the largest inventory of BASIC OLD RUSSIAN weapons....Yemen is poor so how could Yemen have the money to buy high quality strategic weapons stocks still around? and even after Saudi bombed the life out of yemen? i dont buy this your hoax. We cant see evidence of these "old weapons" u talk about...99% of what Houthis fire is either Iranian or Yemenized versions of Iranian weapons...



VEVAK said:


> I have never claimed BM are the end of all weapons and have repeatedly claim low cost cruise missiles are vital for us both on the battlefield and for use on our UCAVS & the only delusional fool influenced by Hollywood movies and American propaganda here is YOU!
> 
> Your the one under the delusion that millions didn't attend Soleimani's Funeral and that speaks for its self where as im the one who said Iran needs to start producing CM with Micro Jet engines long before Iran started producing them.... so that also speak for its self!


He IS American afterall...just sayin..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

It’s a Libyan pantsir. still an achievement by turkey and disgrace for Russians.

russia is admittedly a weak player when it comes to EW and avionics. My guess is that Turks are jamming the crap out of the Russian equipment, which could open up the game entirely if Russian aircraft would be as vulnerable as their ground systems.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233732555188424704

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> you are not correct - you mean to say Yemen had the largest inventory of BASIC OLD RUSSIAN weapons....Yemen is poor so how could Yemen have the money to buy high quality strategic weapons stocks still around? and even after Saudi bombed the life out of yemen? i dont buy this your hoax. We cant see evidence of these "old weapons" u talk about...99% of what Houthis fire is either Iranian or Yemenized versions of Iranian weapons...
> 
> 
> He IS American afterall...just sayin..



You should probably learn Yemen history before you sprout off nonsense.

The same Houthi’s that Saudi Arabia is bombing, were allies of Saudi Arabia against Yemen Army & Salehi. So Saudi Arabia supported the Houthis with cash and arms to fuel their proxy against Salehi multiple times in the past.

Yemen has been a battlefield for many proxy wars which external actors infused the country with weapons and funds.

Fuethermore, a country being poor is not a direct correlation on the arms they have. North Korea is one of the poorest countries in the world yet they carry some of the most sophisticated ballistic missiles.

Also some of the missiles used are clearly Russian like the Tochka missile that wiped out the Emirati military base in Yemen.

And Saudi Arabia like Israel is bombing anything mostly civilians and vital infrastructure. Yemen is such an unforgiving terrain that arms can easily be hid throughout the country.


----------



## 925boy

Sina-1 said:


> It’s a Libyan pantsir. still an achievement by turkey and disgrace for Russians.
> 
> russia is admittedly a weak player when it comes to EW and avionics. My guess is that Turks are jamming the crap out of the Russian equipment, which could open up the game entirely if Russian aircraft would be as vulnerable as their ground systems.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233732555188424704


You might be confusing performance of Russian equipment that is manned by non-Russians or well trained people and russian weapons being manned by militias,proxies, inexperienced militaries, etc. 

If you want to find out if those Russian weapons are really fake, you will regret yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Ich said:


> But the radar goes further then 10 km and so the S1 can recognize the UAV and can move if it cant shot down the UAV. Also they can call air force after recognizing. Due to all this did not happen, me also think the crew wasnt the best, maybe drinking tea.


Your analysis would be correct for a normal condition....not a country who doesn't have an powerfull airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

DoubleYouSee said:


> Your analysis would be correct for a normal condition....not a country who doesn't have an powerfull airforce



it’s a battlefield and the crew likely didn’t think Turkey would attack them. 

Thus a “peacekeeper” drone flying around wasn’t deemed a threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Great read for those who are interested in understand VHF radars & how it helps to counter conventional stealth air power of the U.S. Very applicable to Iranian systems. 

https://www.ausairpower.net/SP/DT-Rus-VHF-Radar-2008.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

Stryker1982 said:


> Great read for those who are interested in understand VHF radars...


I understand them.



Stryker1982 said:


> ...& how it helps to counter conventional stealth air power of the U.S. Very applicable to Iranian systems.
> 
> https://www.ausairpower.net/SP/DT-Rus-VHF-Radar-2008.pdf


There is no 'help' here. We already knew of VHF's effects on bodies deliberately designed to be low observable in the shorter freqs. But 'stealth' does not mean a license to ignore radar nets, regardless of what types. Articles like this left out the most important fact of mission planning: That US 'stealth' fighters avoids the freqs that we shaped against. So that mean we will avoid the VHF seeking radar and we already know how to do that. There is no 'help' here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Sina-1 said:


> It’s a Libyan pantsir. still an achievement by turkey and disgrace for Russians.
> 
> russia is admittedly a weak player when it comes to EW and avionics. My guess is that Turks are jamming the crap out of the Russian equipment, which could open up the game entirely if Russian aircraft would be as vulnerable as their ground systems.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233732555188424704


Russia is NOt weak in EW. Dont conflate the lack of EW action and attacks with lack of EW capability. Russia is actually VERY advanced in electronic and hybrid warfare.



TheImmortal said:


> Fuethermore, a country being poor is not a direct correlation on the arms they have. North Korea is one of the poorest countries in the world yet they carry some of the most sophisticated ballistic missiles.


Thats because North Korea is lucky is has wealthy daddy in China. Which military daddy does Yemen have? None! 



> Also some of the missiles used are clearly Russian like the Tochka missile that wiped out the Emirati military base in Yemen.


agreed, but thats about it. what else is advanced? i told you all that houthis BMs were Iranian and many of u said its not true, but we found out they are so what other newer "weapons" does yemen have since the creating of that stte? i'm waiting, we have 1:

tochka.


----------



## Sina-1

925boy said:


> Russia is NOt weak in EW. Dont conflate the lack of EW action and attacks with lack of EW capability. Russia is actually VERY advanced in electronic and hybrid warfare.


I know what I said! Russia is arguably the best or at least top two when it comes to mechanical aircraft engineering and aerospace propulsion systems. Their radar systems is also top notch!

In EW they are *maybe* top 10. And countries such as turkey and Israel are arguably ahead.

Pantsir in Syria is getting replaced with TOR because it was so weak against Turkish attacks! Let’s see how TOR performs...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saddam Hussein

It's not news that it's easy to jam pantsir. This has been claimed years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

Sina-1 said:


> It’s a Libyan pantsir. still an achievement by turkey and disgrace for Russians.
> 
> russia is admittedly a weak player when it comes to EW and avionics. My guess is that Turks are jamming the crap out of the Russian equipment, which could open up the game entirely if Russian aircraft would be as vulnerable as their ground systems.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1233732555188424704



Russian EWs are effective, Russian export weapons are nearly as bad as overpriced export Patriot missile systems.

What Russia exports is designed to lose to Washington weapon systems used in Amerikkan wars. So Russian export products that are sold to Mideast nations are deliberately inferior. Why is Russia in Syria? ... to test out their Russian weapons in a war and defeat ISIS which Obama declined on. You take Russian export weapons and improve on them. Pantsirs are not as good as 100 Mesbah 1.

In short, Putin is in on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

zectech said:


> Russian EWs are effective, Russian export weapons are nearly as bad as overpriced export Patriot missile systems.



The buzz is that the Achilles heel for Russian weaponry is the EW factor. True or not is purely speculative. Judging from the fact the prior customers to Russian tech have preferred to replace avionic and electronics with another vendor point to the fact that buzz might be true. But, of course it is only speculations. However I firmly believe it to be true. We can agree to disagree!



zectech said:


> What Russia exports is designed to lose to Washington weapon systems used in Amerikkan wars. So Russian export products that are sold to Mideast nations are deliberately inferior.



Again this is purely speculative, but IMO I don't think it makes any marketing sense to field weapons that intentionally fails. That will hamper your future efforts to sell similar hardware. Of course the export versions are more inferior in order to protect the technology to fall into enemy sphere of knowledge. However, it is a stretch to say that they are designed to loose. Anyhow, it is speculative so we can again agree to disagree.



zectech said:


> Why is Russia in Syria? ... to test out their Russian weapons in a war and defeat ISIS which Obama declined on. You take Russian export weapons and improve on them.


Agreed! That is one of the reasons. There are tons! One is to increase Russian influence in ME and limit further Turkey/Nato expansionistic agenda.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

Sina-1 said:


> However, it is a stretch to say that they are designed to loose.



They are designed to lose against Israhell's air force and USA air force, which use similar technology. If you want to use Russian weaponry to kill 3rd world Muslims, it is most certainly not designed to lose. They are built in inferior because the global order is Putin is to be the zionist handler of Muslim countries to give them a false hope that somebody cares about them, when Putin works for Netanyahu and Moscow rabbis.







The EW Russia has is top notch. Better than the Swedes. But they do not implement them for export that much because the technology could fall into the hands of the Chinese or Muslims, export is not zionist approved.

Every geopolitical action Putin takes has to be approved by jewish zionists.


----------



## Blue In Green

Any updates on the Oghab?


----------



## zectech

Sina-1 said:


> Agreed! That is one of the reasons. There are tons! One is to increase Russian influence in ME and limit further Turkey/Nato expansionistic agenda.



I knew this was going on before reuters wrote the article.

*Russia, after Netanyahu visit, backs off Syria S-300 missile supplies*
Andrew Osborn
4 Min Read

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is not in talks with the Syrian government about supplying advanced S-300 ground-to-air missiles and does not think they are needed, the Izvestia daily cited a top Kremlin aide as saying on Friday, in an apparent U-turn by Moscow.

FILE PHOTO: An S-300 air defense missile system launches a missile during the Keys to the Sky competition at the International Army Games 2017 at the Ashuluk shooting range outside Astrakhan, Russia August 5, 2017. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/File Photo
The comments, by Vladimir Kozhin, an aide to President Vladimir Putin who oversees Russian military assistance to other countries, follow a visit to Moscow by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week, who has been lobbying Putin hard not to transfer the missiles.

Russia last month hinted it would supply the weapons to President Bashar al-Assad, over Israeli objections, after Western military strikes on Syria. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the strikes had removed any moral obligation Russia had to withhold the missiles and Russia’s Kommersant daily cited unnamed military sources as saying deliveries might begin imminently.

But Kozhin’s comments, released so soon after Netanyahu’s Moscow talks with Putin, suggest the Israeli leader’s lobbying efforts have, for the time being, paid off.

“For now, we’re not talking about any deliveries of new modern (air defense) systems,” Izvestia cited Kozhin as saying when asked about the possibility of supplying Syria with S-300s.

The Syrian military already had “everything it needed,” Kozhin added.

The Kremlin played down the idea that it had performed a U-turn on the missile question or that any decision was linked to Netanyahu’s visit.

“Deliveries (of the S-300s) were never announced as such,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call, when asked about the matter.

“But we did say after the (Western) strikes (on Syria) that of course Russia reserved the right to do anything it considered necessary.”

The possibility of missile supplies to Assad along with its military foray into Syria itself has helped Moscow boost its Middle East clout. with Putin hosting everyone from Netanyahu to the presidents of Turkey and Iran and the Saudi king.

*ISRAELI LOBBYING *
Israel has made repeated efforts to persuade Moscow not to sell the S-300s to Syria, as it fears this would hinder its aerial capabilities against arms shipments to Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah. Israel has carried out scores of air strikes against suspected shipments.

On Thursday, Israel said it had attacked nearly all of Iran’s military infrastructure in Syria after Iranian forces fired rockets at Israeli-held territory. S-300s could have significantly complicated the Israeli strikes.

Slideshow (2 Images)
The missile system, originally developed by the Soviet military, but since modernized and available in several versions with significantly different capabilities, fires missiles from trucks and is designed to shoot down military aircraft and short and medium-range ballistic missiles.

Though since been superseded by the more modern S-400 system, the S-300s are still regarded as highly potent and outstrip anything that the Syrian government currently has.

Syria currently relies on a mixture of less advanced Russian-made anti-aircraft systems to defend its air space.

Russian media on Friday were actively circulating a video released by the Israeli military which showed an Israeli missile destroying one such system — a Russian-made Pantsir S-1 air defense battery — on Thursday in Syria.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ff-syria-s-300-missile-supplies-idUSKBN1IC0SW

Israhell delays export equipment to Syria until Israhell feels safe that the S-300s are old enough and Israhell is stronger than cheap Russian exports.


----------



## Sina-1

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Any updates on the Oghab?


Twitter chatter says its done but will not be showcased for at least a year! Could be bs, but that’s the chatter...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Erdogans drone operation made one thing clear: You better have systems in the class of the 3rd Khordad around to avoid an enemy exploiting lacking mid to high altitude spectrum.

3rd Khordad is a medium range system but against such slow targets as Anka/S-129 up to MQ-9 it can exploit the max. possible range of the Taer-2C of up to 105km. Syrian Buk-M2 were limited to the ~45km max. engagement range designed to combat fighter jets.

If they had 3rd Khordad instead, they could engage Turkish drones from well behind the front-line when they would enter Syrian airspace.

Low RCS of these drones for the fire control radar of the 3rd Khordad would be no issue here: The recent developments in thermal imaging systems allow Iran to track targets as far away as 100km+ and the 3rd Khordad has been upgraded with it. So even passive engagement could be performed. Initial detection would be done by the big powerful early warning radars of the upped IADS echelon.

A Taer-2C would likely be outmaneuvered by a F-16 pulling 6g but for MALE drones not even a MQ-9 could outmaneuver it.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Sineva

zectech said:


> I knew this was going on before reuters wrote the article.
> 
> *Russia, after Netanyahu visit, backs off Syria S-300 missile supplies*
> Andrew Osborn
> 4 Min Read
> 
> MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is not in talks with the Syrian government about supplying advanced S-300 ground-to-air missiles and does not think they are needed, the Izvestia daily cited a top Kremlin aide as saying on Friday, in an apparent U-turn by Moscow.
> 
> FILE PHOTO: An S-300 air defense missile system launches a missile during the Keys to the Sky competition at the International Army Games 2017 at the Ashuluk shooting range outside Astrakhan, Russia August 5, 2017. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/File Photo
> The comments, by Vladimir Kozhin, an aide to President Vladimir Putin who oversees Russian military assistance to other countries, follow a visit to Moscow by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week, who has been lobbying Putin hard not to transfer the missiles.
> 
> Russia last month hinted it would supply the weapons to President Bashar al-Assad, over Israeli objections, after Western military strikes on Syria. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the strikes had removed any moral obligation Russia had to withhold the missiles and Russia’s Kommersant daily cited unnamed military sources as saying deliveries might begin imminently.
> 
> But Kozhin’s comments, released so soon after Netanyahu’s Moscow talks with Putin, suggest the Israeli leader’s lobbying efforts have, for the time being, paid off.
> 
> “For now, we’re not talking about any deliveries of new modern (air defense) systems,” Izvestia cited Kozhin as saying when asked about the possibility of supplying Syria with S-300s.
> 
> The Syrian military already had “everything it needed,” Kozhin added.
> 
> The Kremlin played down the idea that it had performed a U-turn on the missile question or that any decision was linked to Netanyahu’s visit.
> 
> “Deliveries (of the S-300s) were never announced as such,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call, when asked about the matter.
> 
> “But we did say after the (Western) strikes (on Syria) that of course Russia reserved the right to do anything it considered necessary.”
> 
> The possibility of missile supplies to Assad along with its military foray into Syria itself has helped Moscow boost its Middle East clout. with Putin hosting everyone from Netanyahu to the presidents of Turkey and Iran and the Saudi king.
> 
> *ISRAELI LOBBYING *
> Israel has made repeated efforts to persuade Moscow not to sell the S-300s to Syria, as it fears this would hinder its aerial capabilities against arms shipments to Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah. Israel has carried out scores of air strikes against suspected shipments.
> 
> On Thursday, Israel said it had attacked nearly all of Iran’s military infrastructure in Syria after Iranian forces fired rockets at Israeli-held territory. S-300s could have significantly complicated the Israeli strikes.
> 
> Slideshow (2 Images)
> The missile system, originally developed by the Soviet military, but since modernized and available in several versions with significantly different capabilities, fires missiles from trucks and is designed to shoot down military aircraft and short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
> 
> Though since been superseded by the more modern S-400 system, the S-300s are still regarded as highly potent and outstrip anything that the Syrian government currently has.
> 
> Syria currently relies on a mixture of less advanced Russian-made anti-aircraft systems to defend its air space.
> 
> Russian media on Friday were actively circulating a video released by the Israeli military which showed an Israeli missile destroying one such system — a Russian-made Pantsir S-1 air defense battery — on Thursday in Syria.
> 
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ff-syria-s-300-missile-supplies-idUSKBN1IC0SW
> 
> Israhell delays export equipment to Syria until Israhell feels safe that the S-300s are old enough and Israhell is stronger than cheap Russian exports.


What a shocker.....!!
I`m shocked,absolutely shocked that the russians are going back on their word........again.One would hope that by now the syrians wouldve learnt their lesson,just as iran did long ago,about the unwiseness of relying on russian promises and deals.
PS
Did I mention I was shocked?,because I am,.....deeply,deeply shocked.....!.


----------



## Sineva

Heres some classic old pics from a decade ago.I`ve posted them on a couple of other sites recently so I thought I might as well post them here as well.
Its all the pics I could find from the very unexpected appearance in an early 2010 iranian military parade of what on the surface at least appeared to be an s300 sam system.What made this such a shock to so many observers was that just prior to this unveiling the russians had officially refused to deliver the s300 system that iran had purchased in 2007 citing spurious un sanctions,even tho the purely politically motivated sanctions did not even include air defence systems like the s300.
Unfortunately in the decade since then little more reliable information on this system has appeared,tho there are various theories,all without any evidence to back them up one way or another.
If nothing else it shows just how incredibly far iran has come in the field of air defence since those dark days of a decade ago.Well done Iran.

*P.S.*
At the time [2010 ] Carlo Kopp from the Ausairpower.net website wrote a piece where he assessed irans sam based air defences including the appearance of this system.To his credit he did not simply dismiss the possibility of it being an actual S300 system out of hand as many of the self proclaimed "experts" would`ve done simply just on principle.In addition he clearly notes the considerable effort that iran had even at that time put into the reverse/reegineering of systems like the hawk as well as acquiring more advanced radar technologies,and indeed considering the huge leaps that iran has made in both radar and sam technologies in the decade after this was written,he ends it on what could almost be considered as a rather potentially prescient note:

"_If Israeli or US led air forces are called upon to fly against Iran in the nearer future, we should not be surprised if there are some nasty and “surprising” capability surprises in the Iranian IADS._"

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> I know what I said! Russia is arguably the best or at least top two when it comes to mechanical aircraft engineering and aerospace propulsion systems. Their radar systems is also top notch!
> 
> In EW they are *maybe* top 10. And countries such as turkey and Israel are arguably ahead.
> 
> Pantsir in Syria is getting replaced with TOR because it was so weak against Turkish attacks! Let’s see how TOR performs...



If it’s anything like Iran’s TOR, it might confuse a car with an ICBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

zectech said:


> I knew this was going on before reuters wrote the article.
> 
> *Russia, after Netanyahu visit, backs off Syria S-300 missile supplies*
> Andrew Osborn
> 4 Min Read
> 
> MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is not in talks with the Syrian government about supplying advanced S-300 ground-to-air missiles and does not think they are needed, the Izvestia daily cited a top Kremlin aide as saying on Friday, in an apparent U-turn by Moscow.
> 
> FILE PHOTO: An S-300 air defense missile system launches a missile during the Keys to the Sky competition at the International Army Games 2017 at the Ashuluk shooting range outside Astrakhan, Russia August 5, 2017. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/File Photo
> The comments, by Vladimir Kozhin, an aide to President Vladimir Putin who oversees Russian military assistance to other countries, follow a visit to Moscow by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week, who has been lobbying Putin hard not to transfer the missiles.
> 
> Russia last month hinted it would supply the weapons to President Bashar al-Assad, over Israeli objections, after Western military strikes on Syria. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the strikes had removed any moral obligation Russia had to withhold the missiles and Russia’s Kommersant daily cited unnamed military sources as saying deliveries might begin imminently.
> 
> But Kozhin’s comments, released so soon after Netanyahu’s Moscow talks with Putin, suggest the Israeli leader’s lobbying efforts have, for the time being, paid off.
> 
> “For now, we’re not talking about any deliveries of new modern (air defense) systems,” Izvestia cited Kozhin as saying when asked about the possibility of supplying Syria with S-300s.
> 
> The Syrian military already had “everything it needed,” Kozhin added.
> 
> The Kremlin played down the idea that it had performed a U-turn on the missile question or that any decision was linked to Netanyahu’s visit.
> 
> “Deliveries (of the S-300s) were never announced as such,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call, when asked about the matter.
> 
> “But we did say after the (Western) strikes (on Syria) that of course Russia reserved the right to do anything it considered necessary.”
> 
> The possibility of missile supplies to Assad along with its military foray into Syria itself has helped Moscow boost its Middle East clout. with Putin hosting everyone from Netanyahu to the presidents of Turkey and Iran and the Saudi king.
> 
> *ISRAELI LOBBYING *
> Israel has made repeated efforts to persuade Moscow not to sell the S-300s to Syria, as it fears this would hinder its aerial capabilities against arms shipments to Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah. Israel has carried out scores of air strikes against suspected shipments.
> 
> On Thursday, Israel said it had attacked nearly all of Iran’s military infrastructure in Syria after Iranian forces fired rockets at Israeli-held territory. S-300s could have significantly complicated the Israeli strikes.
> 
> Slideshow (2 Images)
> The missile system, originally developed by the Soviet military, but since modernized and available in several versions with significantly different capabilities, fires missiles from trucks and is designed to shoot down military aircraft and short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
> 
> Though since been superseded by the more modern S-400 system, the S-300s are still regarded as highly potent and outstrip anything that the Syrian government currently has.
> 
> Syria currently relies on a mixture of less advanced Russian-made anti-aircraft systems to defend its air space.
> 
> Russian media on Friday were actively circulating a video released by the Israeli military which showed an Israeli missile destroying one such system — a Russian-made Pantsir S-1 air defense battery — on Thursday in Syria.
> 
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ff-syria-s-300-missile-supplies-idUSKBN1IC0SW
> 
> Israhell delays export equipment to Syria until Israhell feels safe that the S-300s are old enough and Israhell is stronger than cheap Russian exports.



I said earlier on this threat that it is better for Iran to rely on it own domestic air defenses than that of the Russians but some guys disagreed with me. I still stand by it. The only reason Iran is safe today is that Iran has it own air defenses. If you can develop your own you better concentrate on that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/720989663700324353^ (Not a new video)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mohsen

zectech said:


> I knew this was going on before reuters wrote the article.
> 
> *Russia, after Netanyahu visit, backs off Syria S-300 missile supplies*
> Andrew Osborn
> 4 Min Read
> 
> MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is not in talks with the Syrian government about supplying advanced S-300 ground-to-air missiles and does not think they are needed, the Izvestia daily cited a top Kremlin aide as saying on Friday, in an apparent U-turn by Moscow.
> 
> FILE PHOTO: An S-300 air defense missile system launches a missile during the Keys to the Sky competition at the International Army Games 2017 at the Ashuluk shooting range outside Astrakhan, Russia August 5, 2017. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/File Photo
> The comments, by Vladimir Kozhin, an aide to President Vladimir Putin who oversees Russian military assistance to other countries, follow a visit to Moscow by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week, who has been lobbying Putin hard not to transfer the missiles.
> 
> Russia last month hinted it would supply the weapons to President Bashar al-Assad, over Israeli objections, after Western military strikes on Syria. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the strikes had removed any moral obligation Russia had to withhold the missiles and Russia’s Kommersant daily cited unnamed military sources as saying deliveries might begin imminently.
> 
> But Kozhin’s comments, released so soon after Netanyahu’s Moscow talks with Putin, suggest the Israeli leader’s lobbying efforts have, for the time being, paid off.
> 
> “For now, we’re not talking about any deliveries of new modern (air defense) systems,” Izvestia cited Kozhin as saying when asked about the possibility of supplying Syria with S-300s.
> 
> The Syrian military already had “everything it needed,” Kozhin added.
> 
> The Kremlin played down the idea that it had performed a U-turn on the missile question or that any decision was linked to Netanyahu’s visit.
> 
> “Deliveries (of the S-300s) were never announced as such,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call, when asked about the matter.
> 
> “But we did say after the (Western) strikes (on Syria) that of course Russia reserved the right to do anything it considered necessary.”
> 
> The possibility of missile supplies to Assad along with its military foray into Syria itself has helped Moscow boost its Middle East clout. with Putin hosting everyone from Netanyahu to the presidents of Turkey and Iran and the Saudi king.
> 
> *ISRAELI LOBBYING *
> Israel has made repeated efforts to persuade Moscow not to sell the S-300s to Syria, as it fears this would hinder its aerial capabilities against arms shipments to Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah. Israel has carried out scores of air strikes against suspected shipments.
> 
> On Thursday, Israel said it had attacked nearly all of Iran’s military infrastructure in Syria after Iranian forces fired rockets at Israeli-held territory. S-300s could have significantly complicated the Israeli strikes.
> 
> Slideshow (2 Images)
> The missile system, originally developed by the Soviet military, but since modernized and available in several versions with significantly different capabilities, fires missiles from trucks and is designed to shoot down military aircraft and short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
> 
> Though since been superseded by the more modern S-400 system, the S-300s are still regarded as highly potent and outstrip anything that the Syrian government currently has.
> 
> Syria currently relies on a mixture of less advanced Russian-made anti-aircraft systems to defend its air space.
> 
> Russian media on Friday were actively circulating a video released by the Israeli military which showed an Israeli missile destroying one such system — a Russian-made Pantsir S-1 air defense battery — on Thursday in Syria.
> 
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ff-syria-s-300-missile-supplies-idUSKBN1IC0SW
> 
> Israhell delays export equipment to Syria until Israhell feels safe that the S-300s are old enough and Israhell is stronger than cheap Russian exports.


Any reason for postings this outdated false report?!

*Russia completes delivery of S-300 system to Syria*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> Any reason for postings this outdated false report?!
> 
> *Russia completes delivery of S-300 system to Syria*


The russians never supplied the interceptors for the system,without the actual missiles its basically useless......unless of course iran was willing to supply some out of its own stocks I suppose.....now theres a possibility.
Personally I dont think this system was ever activated or operational to be honest,I suspect that the russians probably sent some components but not others,likely coming up with repeated excuses for the syrians as to why they couldnt be delivered ie typical russian bullsh!t.Just like with iran I dont think the russians ever had any real intentions of delivering the system to the syrians,I think it was just one more of putins cons/double deals to get the zionists to back off attacking syria with the implied threat of a far more lethal syrian air defence,on the other hand considering the relatively poor performance of some of the russian sam systems against the usraeli-nato air forces maybe puti didnt want to risk an actual engagement that could find that the s300 just didnt live up to its hype,who knows....
https://www.uawire.org/why-russia-s...inst-israeli-airstrikes-thoughts-and-theories


----------



## NaCon

Sineva said:


> The russians never supplied the interceptors for the system,without the actual missiles its basically useless......unless of course iran was willing to supply some out of its own stocks I suppose.....now theres a possibility.
> Personally I dont think this system was ever activated or operational to be honest,I suspect that the russians probably sent some components but not others,likely coming up with repeated excuses for the syrians as to why they couldnt be delivered ie typical russian bullsh!t.Just like with iran I dont think the russians ever had any real intentions of delivering the system to the syrians,I think it was just one more of putins cons/double deals to get the zionists to back off attacking syria with the implied threat of a far more lethal syrian air defence,on the other hand considering the relatively poor performance of some of the russian sam systems against the usraeli-nato air forces maybe puti didnt want to risk an actual engagement that could find that the s300 just didnt live up to its hype,who knows....
> https://www.uawire.org/why-russia-s...inst-israeli-airstrikes-thoughts-and-theories


S300 has been fully delivered to syria but It is being operated by russia in hama province

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

NaCon said:


> S300 has been fully delivered to syria but It is being operated by russia in hama province


That makes absolutely no sense at all,why would the russians be operating that system when they have their own separate air defence systems,the s300 was supposed to be for the syrian air defences wasnt it?.
Very strange that a system that was supposedly claimed as "fully operational" way waaay back in 2018 has never once fired a single shot despite the near continuous israeli air attacks during that same time period.
Then again I guess maybe the russians really wouldnt want any of their good zionist friends in the israeli af to get shot down,right?


----------



## NaCon

Sineva said:


> That makes absolutely no sense at all,why would the russians be operating that system when they have their own separate air defence systems,the s300 was supposed to be for the syrian air defences wasnt it?.
> Very strange that a system that was supposedly claimed as "fully operational" way waaay back in 2018 has never once fired a single shot despite the near continuous israeli air attacks during that same time period.
> Then again I guess maybe the russians really wouldnt want any of their good zionist friends in the israeli af to get shot down,right?


https://www.timesofisrael.com/image...atteries-in-syria-likely-turning-operational/

*Russian specialists reconfigure S-300 systems in Syria*
Syrian military personnel is now to be instructed in their use



© Donat Sorokin/TASS
MOSCOW, November 7. /TASS/. Russian technical specialists have completed the reconfiguration of S-300PM/PM-2 air defense systems to the export version S-300PMU-2 Favorit and returned to Russia, a military-diplomatic source told TASS on Wednesday.

"Technical specialists from Russia’s defense industry enterprises who arrived in Syria in early October following the supply of S-300PM/PM-2 systems have completed their reconfiguration to the export version S-300PMU-2. They returned to Russia several days ago," the source said.
"All three battalions armed with S-300PMU-2 systems are ready for combat operation in Syria. Syrian military personnel is now to be instructed in their use," he added.

Another military-diplomatic source earlier told TASS that Russia’s technical specialists were to replace Russian codes and letter frequencies of the ground radar interrogator and letter codes of radars to Syrian ones.


On October 31, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said that alongside the S-300 air defense systems Russia provided sets of the automated system of air defense means control Polyana D-4, which ensures effective control of combat operations by a missile air defense brigade or a mixed air defense group of air defense missile systems S-300 and Tor, air defense systems Buk, and air defense missile and artillery systems Pantsir-S and Tunguska.

The agreement on providing S-300 systems to Syria was signed back in 2010 only to be frozen shortly afterwards. On September 24, 2018 after the loss of Russia’s Ilyushin-20 reconnaissance plane in Syria Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said that Russia would provide S-300 systems to reinforce the Syrian army’s combat capabilities. On October 2, 2018 Shoigu reported to President Vladimir Putin that the S-300 systems had been airlifted to Syria and that Syrian military personnel would take three months to be instructed in using them in combat.



Sineva said:


> That makes absolutely no sense at all,why would the russians be operating that system when they have their own separate air defence systems,the s300 was supposed to be for the syrian air defences wasnt it?.
> Very strange that a system that was supposedly claimed as "fully operational" way waaay back in 2018 has never once fired a single shot despite the near continuous israeli air attacks during that same time period.
> Then again I guess maybe the russians really wouldnt want any of their good zionist friends in the israeli af to get shot down,right?


now they are handing control over to the syrians

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

As much as I'd like to, you can't trust Russian made systems. They'd sell you out to America the minute it's convenient.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

mohsen said:


> Any reason for postings this outdated false report?!
> 
> *Russia completes delivery of S-300 system to Syria*



You fail to read what I wrote, that is a true Reuters story and I mentioned when Netanyahu feels secure enough to fly the skies of Lebanon and Syria, weapon systems get approved for Syrian use.

I reported nothing false, or outdated. That was the news when S-300s were not approved by zionists. Zionists control Moscow foreign affairs. I already knew the S-300s were approved (by Hell Aviv). What members don't realize is that Putin is close with zionists, allied with zionists.

* The Happy-Go-Lucky Jewish Group That Connects Trump and Putin *
Where Trump's real estate world meets a top religious ally of the Kremlin.


By BEN SCHRECKINGER

April 09, 2017

Continue to article content

 Facebook 
 Twitter 

Email
 Comment 
 Print 
Continue to article content
*The Friday Cover*





Read more
_Ben Schreckinger is a reporter for _Politico.

Chabad of Port Washington, a Jewish community center on Long Island’s Manhasset Bay, sits in a squat brick edifice across from a Shell gas station and a strip mall. The center is an unexceptional building on an unexceptional street, save for one thing: Some of the shortest routes between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin run straight through it.

Two decades ago, as the Russian president set about consolidating power on one side of the world, he embarked on a project to supplant his country’s existing Jewish civil society and replace it with a parallel structure loyal to him. On the other side of the world, the brash Manhattan developer was working to get a piece of the massive flows of capital that were fleeing the former Soviet Union in search of stable assets in the West, especially real estate, and seeking partners in New York with ties to the region.


Their respective ambitions led the two men—along with Trump’s future son-in-law, Jared Kushner—to build a set of close, overlapping relationships in a small world that intersects on Chabad, an international Hasidic movement most people have never heard of.

Starting in 1999, Putin enlisted two of his closest confidants, the oligarchs Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich, who would go on to become Chabad’s biggest patrons worldwide, to create the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would come to be known as “Putin’s rabbi.”

A few years later, Trump would seek out Russian projects and capital by joining forces with a partnership called Bayrock-Sapir, led by Soviet emigres Tevfik Arif, Felix Sater and Tamir Sapir—who maintain close ties to Chabad. The company’s ventures would lead to multiple lawsuits alleging fraud and a criminal investigation of a condo project in Manhattan.

Meanwhile, the links between Trump and Chabad kept piling up. In 2007, Trump hosted the wedding of Sapir’s daughter and Leviev’s right-hand man at Mar-a-Lago, his Palm Beach resort. A few months after the ceremony, Leviev met Trump to discuss potential deals in Moscow and then hosted a bris for the new couple’s first son at the holiest site in Chabad Judaism. Trump attended the bris along with Kushner, who would go on to buy a $300 million building from Leviev and marry Ivanka Trump, who would form a close relationship with Abramovich’s wife, Dasha Zhukova. Zhukova would host the power couple in Russia in 2014 and reportedly attend Trump’s inauguration as their guest.

With the help of this trans-Atlantic diaspora and some globetrotting real estate moguls, Trump Tower and Moscow’s Red Square can feel at times like part of the same tight-knit neighborhood. Now, with Trump in the Oval Office having proclaimed his desire to reorient the global order around improved U.S. relations with Putin’s government—and as the FBI probes the possibility of improper coordination between Trump associates and the Kremlin—that small world has suddenly taken on outsize importance.

*Trump’s kind of Jews*

Founded in Lithuania in 1775, the Chabad-Lubavitch movement today has adherents numbering in the five, or perhaps six, figures. What the movement lacks in numbers it makes up for in enthusiasm, as it is known for practicing a particularly joyous form of Judaism.

Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, recalled having this trait impressed upon him during one family wedding at which the two tables occupied by his first cousins, Chabad rabbis, put the rest of the celebrants to shame. “They were dancing up a storm, these guys. I thought they were black. Instead they’re just black-hat,” Klein said, referring to their traditional Hasidic garb.

Despite its small size, Chabad has grown to become the most sprawling Jewish institution in the world, with a presence in over 1,000 far-flung cities, including locales like Kathmandu and Hanoi with few full-time Jewish residents. The movement is known for these outposts, called Chabad houses, which function as community centers and are open to all Jews. “Take any forsaken city in the world, you have a McDonald’s and a Chabad house,” explained Ronn Torossian, a Jewish public relations executive in New York.

Chabad adherents differ from other Hasidic Jews on numerous small points of custom, including the tendency of Chabad men to wear fedoras instead of fur hats. Many adherents believe that the movement’s last living leader, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who died in 1994, is the messiah, and some believe he is still alive. Chabad followers are also, according to Klein, “remarkable” fundraisers.

As the closest thing the Jewish world has to evangelism—much of its work is dedicated to making Jews around the world more involved in Judaism—Chabad serves many more Jews who are not full-on adherents.

According to Schmuley Boteach, a prominent rabbi in New Jersey and a longtime friend of Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, Chabad offers Jews a third way of relating to their religious identity. “You have three choices as a Jew,” he explained. “You can assimilate and not be very affiliated. You can be religious and Orthodox, or there’s sort of a third possibility that Chabad offers for people who don’t want to go the full Orthodox route but do want to stay on the traditional spectrum.”

This third way may explain the affinity Trump has found with a number of Chabad enthusiasts—Jews who shun liberal reform Judaism in favor of traditionalism but are not strictly devout.

“It’s not a surprise that Trump-minded people are involved with Chabad,” said Torossian. “Chabad is a place that tough, strong Jews feel comfortable. Chabad is a nonjudgmental place where people that are not traditional and not by-the-book feel comfortable.”

He summarized the Chabad attitude, which is less strict than the Orthodox one, as, “If you can’t keep all of the commandments, keep as many as you can.”

Torossian, who coincidentally said he is Sater’s friend and PR rep, also explained that this balance is particularly appealing to Jews from the former Soviet Union, who appreciate its combination of traditional trappings with a lenient attitude toward observance. “All Russian Jews go to Chabad,” he said. “Russian Jews are not comfortable in a reform synagogue.”

*Putin’s kind of Jews*

The Russian state’s embrace of Chabad happened, like many things in Putin’s Russia, as the result of a factional power struggle.

In 1999, soon after he became prime minister, Putin enlisted Abramovich and Leviev to create the Federation of Russian Jewish Communities. Its purpose was to undermine the existing umbrella for Russia’s Jewish civil society, the Russian Jewish Congress, led by oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky, a potential threat to Putin and President Boris Yeltsin. A year later, Gusinsky was arrested by Putin’s government and forced into exile.

At the time, Russia already had a chief rabbi as recognized by the Russian Jewish Congress, Adolf Shayevich. But Abramovich and Leviev installed Chabad rabbi Lazar at the head of their rival organization. The Kremlin removed Shayevich from its religious affairs council, and ever since it has instead recognized Lazar as Russia’s chief rabbi, leaving the country with two rival claimants to the title.

The Putin-Chabad alliance has reaped benefits for both sides. Under Putin, anti-Semitism has been officially discouraged, a break from centuries of discrimination and pogroms, and the government has come to embrace a state-sanctioned version of Jewish identity as a welcome part of the nation.

As Putin has consolidated his control of Russia, Lazar has come to be known derisively as “Putin’s rabbi.” He has escorted the Russian leader to Jerusalem’s Western Wall and attended the opening ceremony of the Sochi Olympics, Putin’s pet project, on the Jewish Sabbath. Putin returned that favor by arranging for Lazar to enter the stadium without submitting to security checks that would have broken the rules for observing Shabbat.

In 2013, a $50 million Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center opened in Moscow under the auspices of Chabad and with funding from Abramovich. Putin donated a month of his salary to the project, while the Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB, pitched in by offering relevant documents from its archives.

In 2014, Lazar was the only Jewish leader present at Putin’s triumphal announcement of the annexation of Crimea.

But the rabbi has paid a price for his loyalty to Putin. Since the annexation, his continued support for the Russian autocrat has caused a rift with Chabad leaders in Ukraine. And for years, the Russian government has defied an American court order to turn over a trove of Chabad texts called the “Schneerson Library” to the Chabad Lubavitch headquarters in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. Shortly after the opening of the tolerance museum, Putin ordered the collection transferred there instead. The move made Lazar the custodian of a prized collection that his Brooklyn comrades believe is rightfully theirs.

If Lazar has any qualms about his role in all the intra-Chabad drama, he hasn’t let on publicly. “Challenging the government is not the Jewish way,” the rabbi said in 2015.

*Trump, Bayrock, Sapir*

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, as Trump looked for business and investors in the former Soviet Union during the first years of this century, he struck up an enduring relationship with a firm called Bayrock-Sapir.

Bayrock was co-led by Felix Sater, a convicted mob associate.

Sater and another Bayrock employee, Daniel Ridloff, who like Sater later went on to work directly for the Trump Organization, belong to the Port Washington Chabad house. Sater told POLITICO Magazine that in addition to serving on the board of the Port Washington Chabad house, he sits on the boards of numerous Chabad entities in the U.S. and abroad, though none in Russia.

The extent of Sater’s ties to Trump is a matter of some dispute. Working out of Trump Tower, Sater partnered with the celebrity developer on numerous Trump-branded developments and scouted deals for him in the former Soviet Union. In 2006, Sater escorted Trump’s children Ivanka and Don Jr. around Moscow to scour the city for potential projects, and he worked especially closely with Ivanka on the development of Trump SoHo, a hotel and condominium building in Manhattan whose construction was announced on “The Apprentice” in 2006.

In 2007, Sater’s stock fraud conviction became public. The revelation did not deter Trump, who brought him on as “a senior advisor to the Trump Organization” in 2010. In 2011, a number of purchasers of Trump SoHo units sued Trump and his partners for fraud and the New York attorney general’s office opened a criminal inquiry into the building’s marketing. But the purchasers settled and agreed not to cooperate with the criminal investigation, which was subsequently scuttled, according to the _New York Times_. Two former executives are suing Bayrock alleging tax evasion, money laundering, racketeering, bribery, extortion and fraud.

Under oath, Sater has described a close relationship with the Trumps, while Trump has testified under oath that he barely knew Sater and would not be able to pick his face out in a crowd. Several people who worked closely with Sater during this period and who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation from both men, scoffed at Trump’s testimony, describing frequent meetings and near-constant phone calls between the two. One person recalled numerous occasions on which Trump and Sater dined together, including at the now-defunct Kiss & Fly in Manhattan’s Meatpacking District.

“Trump called Felix like every other day to his office. So the fact that he’s saying he doesn’t know him, that’s a lot of crap,” said a former Sater colleague. “They were definitely in contact always. They spoke on the phone all the time.”

In 2014, the Port Washington Chabad house named Sater its “man of the year.” At the ceremony honoring Sater, the chabad’s founder, Shalom Paltiel, recounted how Sater would spill his guts to him about his adventures working as a government cooperator on sensitive matters of national security.

“I only recently told Felix I really didn’t believe most of it. I thought perhaps he watched too many James Bond movies, read one too many Tom Clancy novels,” said Paltiel at the ceremony. “Anyone who knows Felix knows he can tell a good story. I simply did not put too much credence to them.”

But Paltiel went on to recount receiving special clearance years later to accompany Sater to a ceremony at the federal building in Manhattan. There, said Paltiel, officials from every American intelligence agency applauded Sater’s secret work and divulged “stuff that was more fantastic, and more unbelievable, than anything he had been telling me.” A video of the event honoring Sater has been removed from the Port Washington Chabad house’s website but is still available on YouTube.

When I contacted Paltiel for this article, he hung up the phone as soon as I introduced myself. I wanted to ask him about some of the connections I’d come across in the course of my reporting. In addition to his relationship with Sater, Paltiel is also close to “Putin’s rabbi” Lazar, calling Lazar “my dear friend and mentor” in a short note about running into him at Schneerson’s gravesite in Queens.

According to Boteach, this is unsurprising, because Chabad is the sort of community where everybody knows everybody else. “In the world of Chabad, we all went to Yeshiva together, we were all ordained together,” Boteach explained. “I knew Berel Lazar from yeshiva.”

The Port Washington Chabad house has another Bayrock tie. Among its top 13 benefactors, its “Chai Circle,” as listed on its website, is Sater’s partner, Bayrock founder Tevfik Arif.

Arif, a former Soviet bureaucrat turned wealthy real estate developer, owns a mansion in Port Washington, an upscale suburb, but he makes a curious patron for the town’s Chabad. A Kazakh-born citizen of Turkey with a Muslim name, Arif is not Jewish, according to people who have worked with him. In 2010, he was arrested in a raid on a yacht in Turkey that once belonged to the founder of the modern Turkish state, Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, and charged with running an international underage prostitution ring. Arif was later cleared of the charges.

Before the scandal on Ataturk’s yacht, Arif partnered closely with Trump, Ivanka Trump and Sater in the development of Trump SoHo along with the Sapir family, a New York real estate dynasty and the other half of Bayrock-Sapir.

Its patriarch, the late billionaire Tamir Sapir, was born in the Soviet state of Georgia and arrived in 1976 in New York, where he opened an electronics store in the Flatiron district that, according to the _New York Times_, catered largely to KGB agents.

Trump has called Sapir “a great friend.” In December 2007, he hosted the wedding of Sapir’s daughter, Zina, at Mar-a-Lago. The event featured performances by Lionel Ritchie and the Pussycat Dolls. The groom, Rotem Rosen, was the CEO of the American branch of Africa Israel, the Putin oligarch Leviev’s holding company.

Five months later, in early June 2008, Zina Sapir and Rosen held a bris for their newborn son. Invitations to the bris described Rosen as Leviev’s “right-hand man.” By then, Leviev had become the single largest funder of Chabad worldwide, and he personally arranged for the bris to take place at Schneerson’s grave, Chabad’s most holy site.

Trump attended the bris. A month earlier, in May 2008, he and Leviev had met to discuss possible real estate projects in Moscow, according to a contemporaneous Russian news report. An undated photograph on a Pinterest account called LLD Diamond USA, the name of a firm registered to Leviev, shows Trump and Leviev shaking hands and smiling. (The photograph was first pointed out by Pacific Standard.)

That same year, Sapir, an active Chabad donor in his own right, joined Leviev in Berlin to tour Chabad institutions in the city.

*Jared, Ivanka, Roman, Dasha*

Also present at the Sapir-Rosen bris was Kushner, who along with his now-wife Ivanka Trump has forged his own set of ties to Putin’s Chabad allies. Kushner’s family, which is Modern Orthodox, has long been highly engaged in philanthropy across the Jewish world, including to Chabad entities, and during his undergraduate years at Harvard, Kushner was active in the university’s Chabad house. Three days before the presidential election, the couple visited Schneerson’s grave and prayed for Trump. In January, the couple purchased a home in Washington’s Kalorama neighborhood and settled on the city’s nearby Chabad synagogue, known as TheSHUL of the Nation's Capital, as their house of worship.

In May 2015, a month before Trump officially entered the Republican presidential primary, Kushner bought a majority stake in the old New York Times building on West 43rd Street from Leviev for $295 million.

Kushner and Ivanka Trump are also close with Abramovich’s wife, Dasha Zhukova. Abramovich, an industrialist worth more than $7 billion and the owner of the British soccer club Chelsea FC, is the former governor of the Russian province of Chukotka, where he is still revered as a hero. He owes his fortune to his triumphant emergence from Russia’s post-Soviet “aluminum wars,” in which more than 100 people are estimated to have died in fighting over control of aluminum refineries. Abramovich admitted in 2008 that he amassed his assets by paying billions of dollars in bribes. In 2011, his former business partner, the late Boris Berezovsky—an oligarch who had fallen out with Putin and gone on to live in exile at the Trump International on Central Park West—accused him of threats, blackmail and intimidation in a lawsuit in the United Kingdom, which Abramovich won.

Abramovich was reportedly the first person to recommend to Yeltsin that he choose Putin as his successor. In their 2004 biography of Abramovich, the British journalists Chris Hutchins and Dominic Midgely write, “When Putin needed a shadowy force to act against his enemies behind the scenes, it was Abramovich whom he could rely on to prove a willing co-conspirator.” The biographers compare the two men’s relationship to that between a father and a son and report that Abramovich personally interviewed candidates for Putin’s first cabinet. He has reportedly gifted Putin a $30 million yacht, though Putin denies it.

Abramovich’s vast business holdings and his personal life overlap with Trump’s world in multiple ways.

According to a 2012 report from researchers at Cornell University, Evraz, a firm partly owned by Abramovich, has contracts to provide 40 percent of the steel for the Keystone XL pipeline, a project whose completion was approved by Trump in March after years of delay. And in 2006, Abramovich purchased a large stake in the Russian oil giant Rosneft, a company now being scrutinized for its possible role in alleged collusion between Trump and Russia. Both Trump and the Kremlin have dismissed as "fake news" a dossier that alleges that a recent sale of Rosneft shares was part of a scheme to ease U.S. sanctions on Russia.

Meanwhile, his wife, Zhukova, has long traveled in the same social circles as Kushner and Ivanka Trump: She is a friend and business partner of Rupert Murdoch’s ex-wife Wendi Deng, one of Ivanka’s closest friends, and a friend of Karlie Kloss, the longtime girlfriend of Kushner’s brother, Josh.

Over the years, Zhukova has grown close to Jared and Ivanka themselves. In February 2014, a month before Putin illegally annexed Crimea from Ukraine, Ivanka Trump posted a photo to Instagram of herself with Zhukova, Wendi Deng, a bottle of wine, and the caption, “Thank you [Zhukova] for an unforgettable four days in Russia!” Deng was recently rumored to be dating Putin, though she denied it. Other photos from the trip show Kushner was also present in Russia at the time.

Last summer, Kushner and Ivanka Trump shared a box at the U.S. Open with Zhukova and Deng. In January, Zhukova reportedly attended Trump’s inauguration as Ivanka Trump’s guest.

On March 14, The Daily Mail spotted Josh Kushner dining with Zhukova in New York. According to the outlet, Josh Kushner “hid his face as he exited the eatery with Dasha.”

A week later, at the same time Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump were vacationing in Aspen with her two brothers and their families, Abramovich’s plane flew from Moscow to Denver, according to a flight tracking service. Abramovich owns two properties in the Aspen area.

A spokesman for Abramovich declined to comment on the record about the Colorado overlap. The White House referred queries about the couples to a personal spokeswoman for Ivanka Trump. The spokeswoman, Risa Heller, initially indicated she would provide answers to questions about the Colorado overlap and recent contacts between the couples, but did not do so.

President Trump has reportedly sought security clearances for Kushner and Ivanka, who have taken on growing roles in his White House. For anyone else, a close personal relationship with the family of a top Putin confidant would present significant hurdles to obtaining security clearances, former high-ranking intelligence officials said, but political pressure to grant clearances to the president’s children would be likely to override any security concerns.

“Yes, such connections to Russia should matter for a clearance,” said Steve Hall, a former CIA Moscow station chief. “Question is, will they?”

“I don’t think the Trump family camp will have any trouble with security clearances, as long as there’s no polygraph involved,” said Milt Bearden, former chief of the CIA’s Eastern European division. “It’s absolutely crazy, but not going to be an issue.”

***

With Washington abuzz about the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of Trump world’s relationship with Putin’s Kremlin, their overlapping networks remain the object of much scrutiny and fascination.

In March, the _New York Times_ reported that Lazar had met last summer with the Trump administration’s special representative for international negotiations Jason Greenblatt, then a lawyer for the Trump Organization. The men characterized the meeting as a normal part of Greenblatt’s campaign outreach to Jewish leaders and said it included general discussion of Russian society and anti-Semitism. The meeting was brokered by New York PR rep Joshua Nass, and Lazar has said he did not discuss that meeting with the Russian government.

In late January, Sater met with Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to discuss a proposed Ukraine peace deal that would end U.S. sanctions on Russia, which Cohen then delivered to Trump’s then-national security adviser Michael Flynn at the White House, according to the Times. Cohen has given varying accounts of the episode.

According to one Jewish Republican who said he sees Cohen “all the time” there, Cohen himself is a regular presence at the Midtown Chabad on Fifth Avenue, a dozen blocks south of Trump Tower and a half-dozen blocks south of his current office at 30 Rockefeller Plaza.

Cohen disputed this, saying, “I’ve never been to a Chabad and I’ve never been to one in New York City either.” Cohen then said he last stepped foot in a Chabad over 15 years ago to attend a bris. He said the last Chabad-related event he attended was on March 16 at a hotel in Newark when he spoke at a dinner honoring Trump’s secretary of veterans affairs, David Shulkin. The dinner was hosted by the Rabbinical College of America, a Chabad organization.

To those unfamiliar with Russian politics, Trump’s world and Hasidic Judaism, all these Chabad links can appear confounding. Others simply greet them with a shrug.

“The interconnectedness of the Jewish world through Chabad is not surprising insofar as it’s one of the main Jewish players,” said Boteach. “I would assume that the world of New York real estate isn’t that huge either.”

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...sh-group-that-connects-trump-and-putin-215007

Netanyahu campaigned for reelection on being close friends with Putin. The internet is filled with hundreds, perhaps thousands of articles from jewish and Western sources that prove a link between Putin and Hell Aviv.

I am done with the Iranian Forum and warning them about information I have researched for the past 15 years.

Done after the personal attack. Be happy with American flags over Tehran.


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ An old Iranian project to turn the Rapier into a mobile truck-based system

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Sineva

Sineva said:


> Heres some classic old pics from a decade ago.I`ve posted them on a couple of other sites recently so I thought I might as well post them here as well.
> Its all the pics I could find from the very unexpected appearance in an early 2010 iranian military parade of what on the surface at least appeared to be an s300 sam system.What made this such a shock to so many observers was that just prior to this unveiling the russians had officially refused to deliver the s300 system that iran had purchased in 2007 citing spurious un sanctions,even tho the purely politically motivated sanctions did not even include air defence systems like the s300.
> Unfortunately in the decade since then little more reliable information on this system has appeared,tho there are various theories,all without any evidence to back them up one way or another.
> If nothing else it shows just how incredibly far iran has come in the field of air defence since those dark days of a decade ago.Well done Iran.
> 
> *P.S.*
> At the time [2010 ] Carlo Kopp from the Ausairpower.net website wrote a piece where he assessed irans sam based air defences including the appearance of this system.To his credit he did not simply dismiss the possibility of it being an actual S300 system out of hand as many of the self proclaimed "experts" would`ve done simply just on principle.In addition he clearly notes the considerable effort that iran had even at that time put into the reverse/reegineering of systems like the hawk as well as acquiring more advanced radar technologies,and indeed considering the huge leaps that iran has made in both radar and sam technologies in the decade after this was written,he ends it on what could almost be considered as a rather potentially prescient note:
> 
> "_If Israeli or US led air forces are called upon to fly against Iran in the nearer future, we should not be surprised if there are some nasty and “surprising” capability surprises in the Iranian IADS._"
> 
> View attachment 611472
> 
> View attachment 611473
> 
> View attachment 611475
> 
> View attachment 611476
> 
> View attachment 611477
> 
> View attachment 611478
> 
> View attachment 611479
> 
> View attachment 611480
> 
> View attachment 611481
> 
> View attachment 611482
> 
> View attachment 611484
> 
> View attachment 611485
> 
> View attachment 611486


****UPDATE****
I found a few more pics of the 2010 S300














I managed to find about the only good image out of the few images available of one of the Babr series trucks prior to its being modified for use as a transporter for part of the S300 sam system.Originally it was used as a tank transporter and the chassis is likely a refurbished/modified soviet Maz with a new iranian built cab fitted.




You can clearly see that the cab has undergone some minor restyling around the door windows and cab sides,the lights have been moved down and recessed into the bumper.The most obvious change is the fitting of the offset radiator in the front of the cab,why this was done and why the radiator was slightly offset to the right rather than being centered in the middle is a bit of a mystery.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> ****UPDATE****
> I found a few more pics of the 2010 S300
> 
> View attachment 613127
> 
> View attachment 613128
> 
> View attachment 613130
> 
> 
> I managed to find about the only good image out of the few images available of one of the Babr series trucks prior to its being modified for use as a transporter for part of the S300 sam system.Originally it was used as a tank transporter and the chassis is likely a refurbished/modified soviet Maz with a new iranian built cab fitted.
> View attachment 613133
> 
> You can clearly see that the cab has undergone some minor restyling around the door windows and cab sides,the lights have been moved down and recessed into the bumper.The most obvious change is the fitting of the offset radiator in the front of the cab,why this was done and why the radiator was slightly offset to the right rather than being centered in the middle is a bit of a mystery.



Im not sure why you are posting pictures of welded oil drums on the back of a truck?

It was clearly a mock up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> ^ An old Iranian project to turn the Rapier into a mobile truck-based system


I found a smaller pic with slightly better quality.




Interestingly it looks like the exact same sort of vehicle,tho not identical as the cab is slightly different in configuration,was used as a transporter for the AN/MPQ-46 radar for one of the earliest iranian attempts at producing a more mobile Hawk sam system.This is the ancestor of todays Mersad 16 sam system.




Now heres a very interesting pic,we see 2 different sam seeker designs,these look to be slotted planar array types like the iranian reengineered Hawk though clearly different from it.This appears to be at the same unveiling for the early sam system prototypes that would eventually go on to be the Third of Khordad and the Tabbas.It seems very likely that these could be the seekers for the earlier versions of the Taer 1 and Taer 2 interceptors.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Im not sure why you are posting pictures of welded oil drums on the back of a truck?
> 
> It was clearly a mock up.


LOLOLOL!!
If those were "welded oil drums" then I guess thats pretty much what the s300 and hq9 must use for their missile canisters as well,right?,because even the most cursory look at these supposed "welded oil drums" shows that the reinforcing ribs are a separate welded piece which is quite unlike normal oil drums which use a raised rib thats pressed in to the metal by rollers.So clearly NOT welded oil drums I`m afraid and to be blunt to even suggest that makes you look like a complete total idiot,no offense intended.
If this was a fake/mock up then its actually a pretty damn good one as it has just enough visible detail of good enough quality to make it seem somewhat credible,or at least not able to be easily dismissed simply at a glance,and its certainly not some crude bullsh!t made out of "welded oil drums" either.
I dont know what this system was and neither does anyone else,or if they do they`re not talking.Now with the passage of time and the unveiling of the b373 it seems increasingly likely that yes this was very probably a fake/mock up,however back in 2010 who could say with absolute certainty that is was.....and that was likely the point,the possibility no matter how remote it was that iran could have a functioning s300 or even just components of it for that matter,would still have to be taken into account by the usraeli/gcc/nato forces.
The reason that I was posting these was because its also a part of the history of sam development in iran and a very clear testament to just how far that development has come in less than a decade,pretty damn fvcking incredible,huh?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> LOLOLOL!!
> If those were "welded oil drums" then I guess thats pretty much what the s300 and hq9 must use for their missile canisters as well,right?,because even the most cursory look at these supposed "welded oil drums" shows that the reinforcing ribs are a separate welded piece which is quite unlike normal oil drums which use a raised rib thats pressed in to the metal by rollers.So clearly NOT welded oil drums I`m afraid and to be blunt to even suggest that makes you look like a complete total idiot,no offense intended.
> If this was a fake/mock up then its actually a pretty damn good one as it has just enough visible detail of good enough quality to make it seem somewhat credible,or at least not able to be easily dismissed simply at a glance,and its certainly not some crude bullsh!t made out of "welded oil drums" either.
> I dont know what this system was and neither does anyone else,or if they do they`re not talking.Now with the passage of time and the unveiling of the b373 it seems increasingly likely that yes this was very probably a fake/mock up,however back in 2010 who could say with absolute certainty that is was.....and that was likely the point,the possibility no matter how remote it was that iran could have a functioning s300 or even just components of it for that matter,would still have to be taken into account by the usraeli/gcc/nato forces.
> The reason that I was posting these was because its also a part of the history of sam development in iran and a very clear testament to just how far that development has come in less than a decade,pretty damn fvcking incredible,huh?



So first you say it wasn’t a mock up then admit it was a mock up. Man you are an idiot.

First of all that was unveiled shortly after Russia refused to supply S-300 to Iran back in 2010. So how convenient that after Iran couldn’t acquire S-300 it MAGICALLY was holding an S-300 the whole time? If you look at Iran’s air defense industry in 2010 it was COMPLETE GARBAGE of S-200, hawk, and other 70’s and 80’s systems. no unified system, massive holes (since 2010 Iran has added thousands of points of radar coverage)

So it is IMPOSSIBLE that Iran was hiding a long range air defense system back then as it had little experience in that field.

The articles released back then clearly showed it was a mock up, the only other possibility I heard was it was old S-300 PMU-1 system that was acquired from Belarus in early 90’s. But I doubt that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

In those trucks, they had put "ma mitavanim" i.e we can do it. Those were nothing but a showcase to the start of the Bavar project. They were just symbolic, nothing more.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Watch out for speculation because Iran has always said that they keep weapons secret. Iran has surprises in the bank

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 614159


wel that's Tabas , second generation of Ra'ad Family of airdefense that uses a mechanical radar, it later turned int 3rd of Khordad air defense system which is the third generation of the Ra'ad Family air defense and uses AESA radar and is Iran most advanced medium range system 








the improvement over Tabas is the Radar itself and increasing the engagement range up to more than 105km compared to previous 50km-75km and increasing detection range thanks to Bashir Radar reached up to 350km from previous 90km

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

Heres an interesting old vid that I found,it showcases an air defence drill from almost 10 years ago.The differences between now and then are pretty stark and it really shows just how much development has happened in that time.




The thing that really brings it home are the prevalence of all of the old,likely original,pahlavi/cold war era circular crt screens,tho there are a couple of scenes showing hybrid consoles fitted with new plasma/lcd flat screens as well as the old crts.
Its definitely worth taking a look at if only to remember just how far iran has come in less than a decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Sineva said:


> Heres an interesting old vid that I found,it showcases an air defence drill from almost 10 years ago.The differences between now and then are pretty stark and it really shows just how much development has happened in that time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing that really brings it home are the prevalence of all of the old,likely original,pahlavi/cold war era circular crt screens,tho there are a couple of scenes showing hybrid consoles fitted with new plasma/lcd flat screens as well as the old crts.
> Its definitely worth taking a look at if only to remember just how far iran has come in less than a decade.


Great vid! We will see exactly the same progress in navy and then Air Force (either manned or unmanned, depending on IRI AI capabilities)


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Heres an interesting old vid that I found,it showcases an air defence drill from almost 10 years ago.The differences between now and then are pretty stark and it really shows just how much development has happened in that time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing that really brings it home are the prevalence of all of the old,likely original,pahlavi/cold war era circular crt screens,tho there are a couple of scenes showing hybrid consoles fitted with new plasma/lcd flat screens as well as the old crts.
> Its definitely worth taking a look at if only to remember just how far iran has come in less than a decade.



All these drills and they still shot down a passenger plane right next to Iran’s biggest airport.

On top of that they had reports of this occurring in the past.

Iran’s air defense competence is a huge question mark right now. Doesn’t matter what fancy equipment they unveil, what matters is the crew that’s manning it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> All these drills and they still shot down a passenger plane right next to Iran’s biggest airport.
> 
> On top of that they had reports of this occurring in the past.
> 
> Iran’s air defense competence is a huge question mark right now. Doesn’t matter what fancy equipment they unveil, what matters is the crew that’s manning it.


Army air defense - IRGC air defense two different crew trainings

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

TheImmortal said:


> All these drills and they still shot down a passenger plane right next to Iran’s biggest airport.
> 
> On top of that they had reports of this occurring in the past.
> 
> Iran’s air defense competence is a huge question mark right now. Doesn’t matter what fancy equipment they unveil, what matters is the crew that’s manning it.



You may gloat and ridicule all you want but that does not take away Iran's capability, no, not even a jot of it. If Iran's air defenses were dumb as you wish there will be no passenger plane flying over Iran, all will have been shot down by now. US little success of hacking the passenger plane to behave like a hostile target must not last. Many planes flew that day over the same air defense but were not shot down.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241765249382076419

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241766124867465216

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241769238286741504

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241765249382076419
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241766124867465216
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241769238286741504


I think reporters have blown it out of proportion. The reporter was there to show that some of the military people need to stay in their posts and guard the country instead of being with their family on new year's starting moment. And then they see an F-18 that is heading towards Iran and warn it off.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> I think reporters have blown it out of proportion. The reporter was there to show that some of the military people need to stay in their posts and guard the country instead of being with their family on new year's starting moment. And then they see an F-18 that is heading towards Iran and warn it off.


Why showing faces?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

zectech said:


> You fail to read what I wrote, that is a true Reuters story and I mentioned when Netanyahu feels secure enough to fly the skies of Lebanon and Syria, weapon systems get approved for Syrian use.
> 
> I reported nothing false, or outdated. That was the news when S-300s were not approved by zionists. Zionists control Moscow foreign affairs. I already knew the S-300s were approved (by Hell Aviv). What members don't realize is that Putin is close with zionists, allied with zionists.
> 
> * The Happy-Go-Lucky Jewish Group That Connects Trump and Putin *
> Where Trump's real estate world meets a top religious ally of the Kremlin.
> 
> 
> By BEN SCHRECKINGER
> 
> April 09, 2017
> 
> Continue to article content
> 
> Facebook
> Twitter
> 
> Email
> Comment
> Print
> Continue to article content
> *The Friday Cover*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read more
> _Ben Schreckinger is a reporter for _Politico.
> 
> Chabad of Port Washington, a Jewish community center on Long Island’s Manhasset Bay, sits in a squat brick edifice across from a Shell gas station and a strip mall. The center is an unexceptional building on an unexceptional street, save for one thing: Some of the shortest routes between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin run straight through it.
> 
> Two decades ago, as the Russian president set about consolidating power on one side of the world, he embarked on a project to supplant his country’s existing Jewish civil society and replace it with a parallel structure loyal to him. On the other side of the world, the brash Manhattan developer was working to get a piece of the massive flows of capital that were fleeing the former Soviet Union in search of stable assets in the West, especially real estate, and seeking partners in New York with ties to the region.
> 
> 
> Their respective ambitions led the two men—along with Trump’s future son-in-law, Jared Kushner—to build a set of close, overlapping relationships in a small world that intersects on Chabad, an international Hasidic movement most people have never heard of.
> 
> Starting in 1999, Putin enlisted two of his closest confidants, the oligarchs Lev Leviev and Roman Abramovich, who would go on to become Chabad’s biggest patrons worldwide, to create the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia under the leadership of Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar, who would come to be known as “Putin’s rabbi.”
> 
> A few years later, Trump would seek out Russian projects and capital by joining forces with a partnership called Bayrock-Sapir, led by Soviet emigres Tevfik Arif, Felix Sater and Tamir Sapir—who maintain close ties to Chabad. The company’s ventures would lead to multiple lawsuits alleging fraud and a criminal investigation of a condo project in Manhattan.
> 
> Meanwhile, the links between Trump and Chabad kept piling up. In 2007, Trump hosted the wedding of Sapir’s daughter and Leviev’s right-hand man at Mar-a-Lago, his Palm Beach resort. A few months after the ceremony, Leviev met Trump to discuss potential deals in Moscow and then hosted a bris for the new couple’s first son at the holiest site in Chabad Judaism. Trump attended the bris along with Kushner, who would go on to buy a $300 million building from Leviev and marry Ivanka Trump, who would form a close relationship with Abramovich’s wife, Dasha Zhukova. Zhukova would host the power couple in Russia in 2014 and reportedly attend Trump’s inauguration as their guest.
> 
> With the help of this trans-Atlantic diaspora and some globetrotting real estate moguls, Trump Tower and Moscow’s Red Square can feel at times like part of the same tight-knit neighborhood. Now, with Trump in the Oval Office having proclaimed his desire to reorient the global order around improved U.S. relations with Putin’s government—and as the FBI probes the possibility of improper coordination between Trump associates and the Kremlin—that small world has suddenly taken on outsize importance.
> 
> *Trump’s kind of Jews*
> 
> Founded in Lithuania in 1775, the Chabad-Lubavitch movement today has adherents numbering in the five, or perhaps six, figures. What the movement lacks in numbers it makes up for in enthusiasm, as it is known for practicing a particularly joyous form of Judaism.
> 
> Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, recalled having this trait impressed upon him during one family wedding at which the two tables occupied by his first cousins, Chabad rabbis, put the rest of the celebrants to shame. “They were dancing up a storm, these guys. I thought they were black. Instead they’re just black-hat,” Klein said, referring to their traditional Hasidic garb.
> 
> Despite its small size, Chabad has grown to become the most sprawling Jewish institution in the world, with a presence in over 1,000 far-flung cities, including locales like Kathmandu and Hanoi with few full-time Jewish residents. The movement is known for these outposts, called Chabad houses, which function as community centers and are open to all Jews. “Take any forsaken city in the world, you have a McDonald’s and a Chabad house,” explained Ronn Torossian, a Jewish public relations executive in New York.
> 
> Chabad adherents differ from other Hasidic Jews on numerous small points of custom, including the tendency of Chabad men to wear fedoras instead of fur hats. Many adherents believe that the movement’s last living leader, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who died in 1994, is the messiah, and some believe he is still alive. Chabad followers are also, according to Klein, “remarkable” fundraisers.
> 
> As the closest thing the Jewish world has to evangelism—much of its work is dedicated to making Jews around the world more involved in Judaism—Chabad serves many more Jews who are not full-on adherents.
> 
> According to Schmuley Boteach, a prominent rabbi in New Jersey and a longtime friend of Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, Chabad offers Jews a third way of relating to their religious identity. “You have three choices as a Jew,” he explained. “You can assimilate and not be very affiliated. You can be religious and Orthodox, or there’s sort of a third possibility that Chabad offers for people who don’t want to go the full Orthodox route but do want to stay on the traditional spectrum.”
> 
> This third way may explain the affinity Trump has found with a number of Chabad enthusiasts—Jews who shun liberal reform Judaism in favor of traditionalism but are not strictly devout.
> 
> “It’s not a surprise that Trump-minded people are involved with Chabad,” said Torossian. “Chabad is a place that tough, strong Jews feel comfortable. Chabad is a nonjudgmental place where people that are not traditional and not by-the-book feel comfortable.”
> 
> He summarized the Chabad attitude, which is less strict than the Orthodox one, as, “If you can’t keep all of the commandments, keep as many as you can.”
> 
> Torossian, who coincidentally said he is Sater’s friend and PR rep, also explained that this balance is particularly appealing to Jews from the former Soviet Union, who appreciate its combination of traditional trappings with a lenient attitude toward observance. “All Russian Jews go to Chabad,” he said. “Russian Jews are not comfortable in a reform synagogue.”
> 
> *Putin’s kind of Jews*
> 
> The Russian state’s embrace of Chabad happened, like many things in Putin’s Russia, as the result of a factional power struggle.
> 
> In 1999, soon after he became prime minister, Putin enlisted Abramovich and Leviev to create the Federation of Russian Jewish Communities. Its purpose was to undermine the existing umbrella for Russia’s Jewish civil society, the Russian Jewish Congress, led by oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky, a potential threat to Putin and President Boris Yeltsin. A year later, Gusinsky was arrested by Putin’s government and forced into exile.
> 
> At the time, Russia already had a chief rabbi as recognized by the Russian Jewish Congress, Adolf Shayevich. But Abramovich and Leviev installed Chabad rabbi Lazar at the head of their rival organization. The Kremlin removed Shayevich from its religious affairs council, and ever since it has instead recognized Lazar as Russia’s chief rabbi, leaving the country with two rival claimants to the title.
> 
> The Putin-Chabad alliance has reaped benefits for both sides. Under Putin, anti-Semitism has been officially discouraged, a break from centuries of discrimination and pogroms, and the government has come to embrace a state-sanctioned version of Jewish identity as a welcome part of the nation.
> 
> As Putin has consolidated his control of Russia, Lazar has come to be known derisively as “Putin’s rabbi.” He has escorted the Russian leader to Jerusalem’s Western Wall and attended the opening ceremony of the Sochi Olympics, Putin’s pet project, on the Jewish Sabbath. Putin returned that favor by arranging for Lazar to enter the stadium without submitting to security checks that would have broken the rules for observing Shabbat.
> 
> In 2013, a $50 million Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center opened in Moscow under the auspices of Chabad and with funding from Abramovich. Putin donated a month of his salary to the project, while the Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB, pitched in by offering relevant documents from its archives.
> 
> In 2014, Lazar was the only Jewish leader present at Putin’s triumphal announcement of the annexation of Crimea.
> 
> But the rabbi has paid a price for his loyalty to Putin. Since the annexation, his continued support for the Russian autocrat has caused a rift with Chabad leaders in Ukraine. And for years, the Russian government has defied an American court order to turn over a trove of Chabad texts called the “Schneerson Library” to the Chabad Lubavitch headquarters in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. Shortly after the opening of the tolerance museum, Putin ordered the collection transferred there instead. The move made Lazar the custodian of a prized collection that his Brooklyn comrades believe is rightfully theirs.
> 
> If Lazar has any qualms about his role in all the intra-Chabad drama, he hasn’t let on publicly. “Challenging the government is not the Jewish way,” the rabbi said in 2015.
> 
> *Trump, Bayrock, Sapir*
> 
> Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, as Trump looked for business and investors in the former Soviet Union during the first years of this century, he struck up an enduring relationship with a firm called Bayrock-Sapir.
> 
> Bayrock was co-led by Felix Sater, a convicted mob associate.
> 
> Sater and another Bayrock employee, Daniel Ridloff, who like Sater later went on to work directly for the Trump Organization, belong to the Port Washington Chabad house. Sater told POLITICO Magazine that in addition to serving on the board of the Port Washington Chabad house, he sits on the boards of numerous Chabad entities in the U.S. and abroad, though none in Russia.
> 
> The extent of Sater’s ties to Trump is a matter of some dispute. Working out of Trump Tower, Sater partnered with the celebrity developer on numerous Trump-branded developments and scouted deals for him in the former Soviet Union. In 2006, Sater escorted Trump’s children Ivanka and Don Jr. around Moscow to scour the city for potential projects, and he worked especially closely with Ivanka on the development of Trump SoHo, a hotel and condominium building in Manhattan whose construction was announced on “The Apprentice” in 2006.
> 
> In 2007, Sater’s stock fraud conviction became public. The revelation did not deter Trump, who brought him on as “a senior advisor to the Trump Organization” in 2010. In 2011, a number of purchasers of Trump SoHo units sued Trump and his partners for fraud and the New York attorney general’s office opened a criminal inquiry into the building’s marketing. But the purchasers settled and agreed not to cooperate with the criminal investigation, which was subsequently scuttled, according to the _New York Times_. Two former executives are suing Bayrock alleging tax evasion, money laundering, racketeering, bribery, extortion and fraud.
> 
> Under oath, Sater has described a close relationship with the Trumps, while Trump has testified under oath that he barely knew Sater and would not be able to pick his face out in a crowd. Several people who worked closely with Sater during this period and who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation from both men, scoffed at Trump’s testimony, describing frequent meetings and near-constant phone calls between the two. One person recalled numerous occasions on which Trump and Sater dined together, including at the now-defunct Kiss & Fly in Manhattan’s Meatpacking District.
> 
> “Trump called Felix like every other day to his office. So the fact that he’s saying he doesn’t know him, that’s a lot of crap,” said a former Sater colleague. “They were definitely in contact always. They spoke on the phone all the time.”
> 
> In 2014, the Port Washington Chabad house named Sater its “man of the year.” At the ceremony honoring Sater, the chabad’s founder, Shalom Paltiel, recounted how Sater would spill his guts to him about his adventures working as a government cooperator on sensitive matters of national security.
> 
> “I only recently told Felix I really didn’t believe most of it. I thought perhaps he watched too many James Bond movies, read one too many Tom Clancy novels,” said Paltiel at the ceremony. “Anyone who knows Felix knows he can tell a good story. I simply did not put too much credence to them.”
> 
> But Paltiel went on to recount receiving special clearance years later to accompany Sater to a ceremony at the federal building in Manhattan. There, said Paltiel, officials from every American intelligence agency applauded Sater’s secret work and divulged “stuff that was more fantastic, and more unbelievable, than anything he had been telling me.” A video of the event honoring Sater has been removed from the Port Washington Chabad house’s website but is still available on YouTube.
> 
> When I contacted Paltiel for this article, he hung up the phone as soon as I introduced myself. I wanted to ask him about some of the connections I’d come across in the course of my reporting. In addition to his relationship with Sater, Paltiel is also close to “Putin’s rabbi” Lazar, calling Lazar “my dear friend and mentor” in a short note about running into him at Schneerson’s gravesite in Queens.
> 
> According to Boteach, this is unsurprising, because Chabad is the sort of community where everybody knows everybody else. “In the world of Chabad, we all went to Yeshiva together, we were all ordained together,” Boteach explained. “I knew Berel Lazar from yeshiva.”
> 
> The Port Washington Chabad house has another Bayrock tie. Among its top 13 benefactors, its “Chai Circle,” as listed on its website, is Sater’s partner, Bayrock founder Tevfik Arif.
> 
> Arif, a former Soviet bureaucrat turned wealthy real estate developer, owns a mansion in Port Washington, an upscale suburb, but he makes a curious patron for the town’s Chabad. A Kazakh-born citizen of Turkey with a Muslim name, Arif is not Jewish, according to people who have worked with him. In 2010, he was arrested in a raid on a yacht in Turkey that once belonged to the founder of the modern Turkish state, Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, and charged with running an international underage prostitution ring. Arif was later cleared of the charges.
> 
> Before the scandal on Ataturk’s yacht, Arif partnered closely with Trump, Ivanka Trump and Sater in the development of Trump SoHo along with the Sapir family, a New York real estate dynasty and the other half of Bayrock-Sapir.
> 
> Its patriarch, the late billionaire Tamir Sapir, was born in the Soviet state of Georgia and arrived in 1976 in New York, where he opened an electronics store in the Flatiron district that, according to the _New York Times_, catered largely to KGB agents.
> 
> Trump has called Sapir “a great friend.” In December 2007, he hosted the wedding of Sapir’s daughter, Zina, at Mar-a-Lago. The event featured performances by Lionel Ritchie and the Pussycat Dolls. The groom, Rotem Rosen, was the CEO of the American branch of Africa Israel, the Putin oligarch Leviev’s holding company.
> 
> Five months later, in early June 2008, Zina Sapir and Rosen held a bris for their newborn son. Invitations to the bris described Rosen as Leviev’s “right-hand man.” By then, Leviev had become the single largest funder of Chabad worldwide, and he personally arranged for the bris to take place at Schneerson’s grave, Chabad’s most holy site.
> 
> Trump attended the bris. A month earlier, in May 2008, he and Leviev had met to discuss possible real estate projects in Moscow, according to a contemporaneous Russian news report. An undated photograph on a Pinterest account called LLD Diamond USA, the name of a firm registered to Leviev, shows Trump and Leviev shaking hands and smiling. (The photograph was first pointed out by Pacific Standard.)
> 
> That same year, Sapir, an active Chabad donor in his own right, joined Leviev in Berlin to tour Chabad institutions in the city.
> 
> *Jared, Ivanka, Roman, Dasha*
> 
> Also present at the Sapir-Rosen bris was Kushner, who along with his now-wife Ivanka Trump has forged his own set of ties to Putin’s Chabad allies. Kushner’s family, which is Modern Orthodox, has long been highly engaged in philanthropy across the Jewish world, including to Chabad entities, and during his undergraduate years at Harvard, Kushner was active in the university’s Chabad house. Three days before the presidential election, the couple visited Schneerson’s grave and prayed for Trump. In January, the couple purchased a home in Washington’s Kalorama neighborhood and settled on the city’s nearby Chabad synagogue, known as TheSHUL of the Nation's Capital, as their house of worship.
> 
> In May 2015, a month before Trump officially entered the Republican presidential primary, Kushner bought a majority stake in the old New York Times building on West 43rd Street from Leviev for $295 million.
> 
> Kushner and Ivanka Trump are also close with Abramovich’s wife, Dasha Zhukova. Abramovich, an industrialist worth more than $7 billion and the owner of the British soccer club Chelsea FC, is the former governor of the Russian province of Chukotka, where he is still revered as a hero. He owes his fortune to his triumphant emergence from Russia’s post-Soviet “aluminum wars,” in which more than 100 people are estimated to have died in fighting over control of aluminum refineries. Abramovich admitted in 2008 that he amassed his assets by paying billions of dollars in bribes. In 2011, his former business partner, the late Boris Berezovsky—an oligarch who had fallen out with Putin and gone on to live in exile at the Trump International on Central Park West—accused him of threats, blackmail and intimidation in a lawsuit in the United Kingdom, which Abramovich won.
> 
> Abramovich was reportedly the first person to recommend to Yeltsin that he choose Putin as his successor. In their 2004 biography of Abramovich, the British journalists Chris Hutchins and Dominic Midgely write, “When Putin needed a shadowy force to act against his enemies behind the scenes, it was Abramovich whom he could rely on to prove a willing co-conspirator.” The biographers compare the two men’s relationship to that between a father and a son and report that Abramovich personally interviewed candidates for Putin’s first cabinet. He has reportedly gifted Putin a $30 million yacht, though Putin denies it.
> 
> Abramovich’s vast business holdings and his personal life overlap with Trump’s world in multiple ways.
> 
> According to a 2012 report from researchers at Cornell University, Evraz, a firm partly owned by Abramovich, has contracts to provide 40 percent of the steel for the Keystone XL pipeline, a project whose completion was approved by Trump in March after years of delay. And in 2006, Abramovich purchased a large stake in the Russian oil giant Rosneft, a company now being scrutinized for its possible role in alleged collusion between Trump and Russia. Both Trump and the Kremlin have dismissed as "fake news" a dossier that alleges that a recent sale of Rosneft shares was part of a scheme to ease U.S. sanctions on Russia.
> 
> Meanwhile, his wife, Zhukova, has long traveled in the same social circles as Kushner and Ivanka Trump: She is a friend and business partner of Rupert Murdoch’s ex-wife Wendi Deng, one of Ivanka’s closest friends, and a friend of Karlie Kloss, the longtime girlfriend of Kushner’s brother, Josh.
> 
> Over the years, Zhukova has grown close to Jared and Ivanka themselves. In February 2014, a month before Putin illegally annexed Crimea from Ukraine, Ivanka Trump posted a photo to Instagram of herself with Zhukova, Wendi Deng, a bottle of wine, and the caption, “Thank you [Zhukova] for an unforgettable four days in Russia!” Deng was recently rumored to be dating Putin, though she denied it. Other photos from the trip show Kushner was also present in Russia at the time.
> 
> Last summer, Kushner and Ivanka Trump shared a box at the U.S. Open with Zhukova and Deng. In January, Zhukova reportedly attended Trump’s inauguration as Ivanka Trump’s guest.
> 
> On March 14, The Daily Mail spotted Josh Kushner dining with Zhukova in New York. According to the outlet, Josh Kushner “hid his face as he exited the eatery with Dasha.”
> 
> A week later, at the same time Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump were vacationing in Aspen with her two brothers and their families, Abramovich’s plane flew from Moscow to Denver, according to a flight tracking service. Abramovich owns two properties in the Aspen area.
> 
> A spokesman for Abramovich declined to comment on the record about the Colorado overlap. The White House referred queries about the couples to a personal spokeswoman for Ivanka Trump. The spokeswoman, Risa Heller, initially indicated she would provide answers to questions about the Colorado overlap and recent contacts between the couples, but did not do so.
> 
> President Trump has reportedly sought security clearances for Kushner and Ivanka, who have taken on growing roles in his White House. For anyone else, a close personal relationship with the family of a top Putin confidant would present significant hurdles to obtaining security clearances, former high-ranking intelligence officials said, but political pressure to grant clearances to the president’s children would be likely to override any security concerns.
> 
> “Yes, such connections to Russia should matter for a clearance,” said Steve Hall, a former CIA Moscow station chief. “Question is, will they?”
> 
> “I don’t think the Trump family camp will have any trouble with security clearances, as long as there’s no polygraph involved,” said Milt Bearden, former chief of the CIA’s Eastern European division. “It’s absolutely crazy, but not going to be an issue.”
> 
> ***
> 
> With Washington abuzz about the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of Trump world’s relationship with Putin’s Kremlin, their overlapping networks remain the object of much scrutiny and fascination.
> 
> In March, the _New York Times_ reported that Lazar had met last summer with the Trump administration’s special representative for international negotiations Jason Greenblatt, then a lawyer for the Trump Organization. The men characterized the meeting as a normal part of Greenblatt’s campaign outreach to Jewish leaders and said it included general discussion of Russian society and anti-Semitism. The meeting was brokered by New York PR rep Joshua Nass, and Lazar has said he did not discuss that meeting with the Russian government.
> 
> In late January, Sater met with Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to discuss a proposed Ukraine peace deal that would end U.S. sanctions on Russia, which Cohen then delivered to Trump’s then-national security adviser Michael Flynn at the White House, according to the Times. Cohen has given varying accounts of the episode.
> 
> According to one Jewish Republican who said he sees Cohen “all the time” there, Cohen himself is a regular presence at the Midtown Chabad on Fifth Avenue, a dozen blocks south of Trump Tower and a half-dozen blocks south of his current office at 30 Rockefeller Plaza.
> 
> Cohen disputed this, saying, “I’ve never been to a Chabad and I’ve never been to one in New York City either.” Cohen then said he last stepped foot in a Chabad over 15 years ago to attend a bris. He said the last Chabad-related event he attended was on March 16 at a hotel in Newark when he spoke at a dinner honoring Trump’s secretary of veterans affairs, David Shulkin. The dinner was hosted by the Rabbinical College of America, a Chabad organization.
> 
> To those unfamiliar with Russian politics, Trump’s world and Hasidic Judaism, all these Chabad links can appear confounding. Others simply greet them with a shrug.
> 
> “The interconnectedness of the Jewish world through Chabad is not surprising insofar as it’s one of the main Jewish players,” said Boteach. “I would assume that the world of New York real estate isn’t that huge either.”
> 
> https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...sh-group-that-connects-trump-and-putin-215007
> 
> Netanyahu campaigned for reelection on being close friends with Putin. The internet is filled with hundreds, perhaps thousands of articles from jewish and Western sources that prove a link between Putin and Hell Aviv.
> 
> I am done with the Iranian Forum and warning them about information I have researched for the past 15 years.
> 
> Done after the personal attack. Be happy with American flags over Tehran.



For those who don't believe me:

https://www.unz.com/audio/kbarrett_christopher-bjerknes-hitler-was-a-false-flag/

That Putin was the zionist revolution in Russia. The late Soviet Union was pro-gentile, the late Soviet Union was partly opposed to zionism and hated for that by the zionists, so Russia was looted and replaced with Putin's new Soviet Union, zionist and criminal:

*Putin's Reign of Terror the Permanent Revolution in Our Time*

*On 16 August 1999, the Duma elected Vladimir Putin Prime Minister of Russia. He faced enormous opposition to his rule. On 26 August 1999, Putin began to attack the Chechen People on the pretext of suppressing the activities of the Islamic International Brigade and in response to the "Apartment Bombings" which Putin blamed on the Chechens, but which were in fact the work of the KGB/FSB. These international terrorists were working for Putin, not against him. Putin rapidly gained the popularity he was initially wanting and used it to elevate himself onto the lofty throne of a new Russian dictatorship. His feet barely reached the ground. Vladimir Putin quickly restored the communist dictatorship of the Soviet Union with covert State sponsored terrorism which provided a pretext for ever expanding State powers. Putin took over control of the media and persecuted dissenting journalists, thereby insulating his communist kleptocracy from public scrutiny. Vladimir Putin has used Chechen terrorists as a pretext to invade Chechnya, Georgia and Syria. In Chechnya, Ukraine and Syria, Putin has pitted Chechens against Chechens to intensify the fighting and amplify the destruction. Where the Chechen terrorists go, Putin and the Russian military follow, and occupy. Reconstructing and expanding the Soviet Union as he goes, Putin has since followed the Chechen shock troops he commands all the way to Syria, where they lead ISIS. These same terrorists strike around the world at key moments in the election cycle of Putin's favored political candidates abroad, candidates who run on an anti-terrorism platform and benefit politically from the terrorism they ostensibly oppose. It is a generally unacknowledged fact that ISIS strikes in regions and at times which benefit Putin's preferred politicians abroad and at home. This cannot be a coincidence, given the numbers of attacks and their predictable effects on elections. But the author is alone in reporting this obvious fact to the world. Putin and Trump are colluding to subvert and co-opt NATO and change its mission from defending Europe from Russia, to fighting self consuming wars against Muslims -- destroying their countries and the West for the benefit of Russia and Israel. The book exposes the hypocritical role neonazis play in undermining NATO and promoting KGB communist Vladimir Putin, and Putin's hypocrisy in supporting "fascists" abroad while outlawing Nationalism and anti-Semitism in Russia. It provides a history of the controlled opposition of Libertarianism to Communism, as well as Murray Rothbard's anti-American Soviet apologetics and Ron Paul's revealing Russian apologetics. Ayn Rand is exposed as a communist and zionist subversive, and member of the Soviet "Trust". Trotskyite neoconservatives commandeered the Republican Party, and in collusion with Russia and Israel have forwarded the Marxist permanent revolution worldwide with false flag terrorism and endless wars. Given Americans' reluctance to fight more self-defeating wars against Islam, Putin now carries the torch of Trotsky's permanent revolution and engages in relentless false flag terrorism. He seeks to turn all of Europe into vassal States serving a new and enlarged Eurasian Soviet Union. The communists are staging conflicts between bolshevik antifa and their neonazi twins so as to destabilize the West to the point of a crisis, at which point the communists will instigate civil wars and invade. The communists never stopped fighting WW II and seek to genocide the German People as an act of revenge and a means to prevent another counter-revolutionary war against Russian bolshevism. There is a large section on the British 2017 general election and the spate of terrorism that took place leading up to it. The Soviets created the modern anti-zionist movement and are using it to promote Muslim immigration to Europe and America, and to drive a wedge between the North Atlantic alliance and Israel, in favor of a Russian-Israeli alliance.*

Sadly, Iran defended Putin when Putin was genociding the Chechens, Iran props up part of the zionist regime that seeks global slavery - Russia.


----------



## Hack-Hook

zectech said:


> For those who don't believe me:
> 
> https://www.unz.com/audio/kbarrett_christopher-bjerknes-hitler-was-a-false-flag/
> 
> That Putin was the zionist revolution in Russia. The late Soviet Union was pro-gentile, the late Soviet Union was partly opposed to zionism and hated for that by the zionists, so Russia was looted and replaced with Putin's new Soviet Union, zionist and criminal:
> 
> *Putin's Reign of Terror the Permanent Revolution in Our Time*
> 
> *On 16 August 1999, the Duma elected Vladimir Putin Prime Minister of Russia. He faced enormous opposition to his rule. On 26 August 1999, Putin began to attack the Chechen People on the pretext of suppressing the activities of the Islamic International Brigade and in response to the "Apartment Bombings" which Putin blamed on the Chechens, but which were in fact the work of the KGB/FSB. These international terrorists were working for Putin, not against him. Putin rapidly gained the popularity he was initially wanting and used it to elevate himself onto the lofty throne of a new Russian dictatorship. His feet barely reached the ground. Vladimir Putin quickly restored the communist dictatorship of the Soviet Union with covert State sponsored terrorism which provided a pretext for ever expanding State powers. Putin took over control of the media and persecuted dissenting journalists, thereby insulating his communist kleptocracy from public scrutiny. Vladimir Putin has used Chechen terrorists as a pretext to invade Chechnya, Georgia and Syria. In Chechnya, Ukraine and Syria, Putin has pitted Chechens against Chechens to intensify the fighting and amplify the destruction. Where the Chechen terrorists go, Putin and the Russian military follow, and occupy. Reconstructing and expanding the Soviet Union as he goes, Putin has since followed the Chechen shock troops he commands all the way to Syria, where they lead ISIS. These same terrorists strike around the world at key moments in the election cycle of Putin's favored political candidates abroad, candidates who run on an anti-terrorism platform and benefit politically from the terrorism they ostensibly oppose. It is a generally unacknowledged fact that ISIS strikes in regions and at times which benefit Putin's preferred politicians abroad and at home. This cannot be a coincidence, given the numbers of attacks and their predictable effects on elections. But the author is alone in reporting this obvious fact to the world. Putin and Trump are colluding to subvert and co-opt NATO and change its mission from defending Europe from Russia, to fighting self consuming wars against Muslims -- destroying their countries and the West for the benefit of Russia and Israel. The book exposes the hypocritical role neonazis play in undermining NATO and promoting KGB communist Vladimir Putin, and Putin's hypocrisy in supporting "fascists" abroad while outlawing Nationalism and anti-Semitism in Russia. It provides a history of the controlled opposition of Libertarianism to Communism, as well as Murray Rothbard's anti-American Soviet apologetics and Ron Paul's revealing Russian apologetics. Ayn Rand is exposed as a communist and zionist subversive, and member of the Soviet "Trust". Trotskyite neoconservatives commandeered the Republican Party, and in collusion with Russia and Israel have forwarded the Marxist permanent revolution worldwide with false flag terrorism and endless wars. Given Americans' reluctance to fight more self-defeating wars against Islam, Putin now carries the torch of Trotsky's permanent revolution and engages in relentless false flag terrorism. He seeks to turn all of Europe into vassal States serving a new and enlarged Eurasian Soviet Union. The communists are staging conflicts between bolshevik antifa and their neonazi twins so as to destabilize the West to the point of a crisis, at which point the communists will instigate civil wars and invade. The communists never stopped fighting WW II and seek to genocide the German People as an act of revenge and a means to prevent another counter-revolutionary war against Russian bolshevism. There is a large section on the British 2017 general election and the spate of terrorism that took place leading up to it. The Soviets created the modern anti-zionist movement and are using it to promote Muslim immigration to Europe and America, and to drive a wedge between the North Atlantic alliance and Israel, in favor of a Russian-Israeli alliance.*
> 
> Sadly, Iran defended Putin when Putin was genociding the Chechens, Iran props up part of the zionist regime that seeks global slavery - Russia.


I don't knew what putin is ,was or plan to be but his reign was good for Russia . he saved the Russia that the drug kart be for him was systematically destroying.


----------



## zectech

Hack-Hook said:


> I don't knew what putin is ,was or plan to be but his reign was good for Russia . he saved the Russia that the drug kart be for him was systematically destroying.



"I don't knew what trump is, or or plan to be but his reign was good for United States . he saved the America that the hillary cartel be for him was systematically destroying"


----------



## Hack-Hook

zectech said:


> "I don't knew what trump is, or or plan to be but his reign was good for United States . he saved the America that the hillary cartel be for him was systematically destroying"


Probably ,yes probably no only time Will tell.


----------



## striver44

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241765249382076419
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241766124867465216
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1241769238286741504


At least the air traffic are less these days


----------



## mohsen

zectech said:


> For those who don't believe me:
> 
> https://www.unz.com/audio/kbarrett_christopher-bjerknes-hitler-was-a-false-flag/
> 
> That Putin was the zionist revolution in Russia. The late Soviet Union was pro-gentile, the late Soviet Union was partly opposed to zionism and hated for that by the zionists, so Russia was looted and replaced with Putin's new Soviet Union, zionist and criminal:
> 
> *Putin's Reign of Terror the Permanent Revolution in Our Time*
> 
> *On 16 August 1999, the Duma elected Vladimir Putin Prime Minister of Russia. He faced enormous opposition to his rule. On 26 August 1999, Putin began to attack the Chechen People on the pretext of suppressing the activities of the Islamic International Brigade and in response to the "Apartment Bombings" which Putin blamed on the Chechens, but which were in fact the work of the KGB/FSB. These international terrorists were working for Putin, not against him. Putin rapidly gained the popularity he was initially wanting and used it to elevate himself onto the lofty throne of a new Russian dictatorship. His feet barely reached the ground. Vladimir Putin quickly restored the communist dictatorship of the Soviet Union with covert State sponsored terrorism which provided a pretext for ever expanding State powers. Putin took over control of the media and persecuted dissenting journalists, thereby insulating his communist kleptocracy from public scrutiny. Vladimir Putin has used Chechen terrorists as a pretext to invade Chechnya, Georgia and Syria. In Chechnya, Ukraine and Syria, Putin has pitted Chechens against Chechens to intensify the fighting and amplify the destruction. Where the Chechen terrorists go, Putin and the Russian military follow, and occupy. Reconstructing and expanding the Soviet Union as he goes, Putin has since followed the Chechen shock troops he commands all the way to Syria, where they lead ISIS. These same terrorists strike around the world at key moments in the election cycle of Putin's favored political candidates abroad, candidates who run on an anti-terrorism platform and benefit politically from the terrorism they ostensibly oppose. It is a generally unacknowledged fact that ISIS strikes in regions and at times which benefit Putin's preferred politicians abroad and at home. This cannot be a coincidence, given the numbers of attacks and their predictable effects on elections. But the author is alone in reporting this obvious fact to the world. Putin and Trump are colluding to subvert and co-opt NATO and change its mission from defending Europe from Russia, to fighting self consuming wars against Muslims -- destroying their countries and the West for the benefit of Russia and Israel. The book exposes the hypocritical role neonazis play in undermining NATO and promoting KGB communist Vladimir Putin, and Putin's hypocrisy in supporting "fascists" abroad while outlawing Nationalism and anti-Semitism in Russia. It provides a history of the controlled opposition of Libertarianism to Communism, as well as Murray Rothbard's anti-American Soviet apologetics and Ron Paul's revealing Russian apologetics. Ayn Rand is exposed as a communist and zionist subversive, and member of the Soviet "Trust". Trotskyite neoconservatives commandeered the Republican Party, and in collusion with Russia and Israel have forwarded the Marxist permanent revolution worldwide with false flag terrorism and endless wars. Given Americans' reluctance to fight more self-defeating wars against Islam, Putin now carries the torch of Trotsky's permanent revolution and engages in relentless false flag terrorism. He seeks to turn all of Europe into vassal States serving a new and enlarged Eurasian Soviet Union. The communists are staging conflicts between bolshevik antifa and their neonazi twins so as to destabilize the West to the point of a crisis, at which point the communists will instigate civil wars and invade. The communists never stopped fighting WW II and seek to genocide the German People as an act of revenge and a means to prevent another counter-revolutionary war against Russian bolshevism. There is a large section on the British 2017 general election and the spate of terrorism that took place leading up to it. The Soviets created the modern anti-zionist movement and are using it to promote Muslim immigration to Europe and America, and to drive a wedge between the North Atlantic alliance and Israel, in favor of a Russian-Israeli alliance.*


good pack of lies for kids who don't know the history!
I read about a paragraph and there was enough lies for me to understand it's nothing but a Zionist propaganda.

takfiri terrorism was founded by west and specially US to encounter their enemies, whether soviets in that time, or Iran, Syria and Russia in the present; whether in Chechen and Afghanistan, or in Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan and basically every Muslim country.

following the *destruction (and subsequent collapse) of Soviet Union by pro-west Reformists*, all Russians hated the reformists to the bone, what was better for US than sacrificing few of these reformists, blaming the opposite, and change the public opinion?!


----------



## TheImmortal

striver44 said:


> At least the air traffic are less these days



Yeah now these idiots can’t shoot down their own plane.

Government trying to make it like these soldiers aren’t idiots. Time will tell.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashool

TheImmortal said:


> Yeah now these idiots can’t shoot down their own plane.
> 
> Government trying to make it like these soldiers aren’t idiots. Time will tell.


U R so flagrant and rude go kiddy with shitty flag and report me with cry ok so when u have only سوختن م.. what r u doing in our country forum ,go to your forum yanki satanist

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*The Deputy Minister of Defense and Support of the Armed Forces said: "Along with the development of the Bavar-373 Air Defense System, we are looking to build an advanced air defense system to deal with ballistic missiles."*
*





*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *The Deputy Minister of Defense and Support of the Armed Forces said: "Along with the development of the Bavar-373 Air Defense System, we are looking to build an advanced air defense system to deal with ballistic missiles."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Waste of money.

Intercepting BMs is an expensive and fools errand. Iran’s enemies won’t be firing SCUDs at Iran (the missile that is most interceptable). In fact, only Saudi Arabia and Israel would potentially use BMs against Iran in a military conflict. Unlikely Iran could intercept either countries missiles at a good success rate.

Why waste so much money on an interceptor platform for an at best 30% success interception rate?

Iran should double down on production of systems that can intercept drone and cruise missile swarms. Not BMs.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Waste of money.
> 
> Intercepting BMs is an expensive and fools errand. Iran’s enemies won’t be firing SCUDs at Iran (the missile that is most interceptable). In fact, only Saudi Arabia and Israel would potentially use BMs against Iran in a military conflict. Unlikely Iran could intercept either countries missiles at a good success rate.
> 
> Why waste so much money on an interceptor platform for an at best 30% success interception rate?
> 
> Iran should double down on production of systems that can intercept drone and cruise missile swarms. Not BMs.



last year they said an other system is ready that is more powerful then S400 so that was long coming.

maybe, we have been building all kind of short range systems and AA guns that can be used for swarm attacks and now 2 new short range systems like TOR and Pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

some of Iranian made IIR systems:

sepehr 14:

MAX range: more than 50 km














sepehr 14 (image 1 and2) and USAF boeing E-3 AWACS detected by this system.

sadad family:

compact surveillance device consisting of IIR and optical sensors with range finder. system is capable of elevation to cover more area.
sadad can achieve 100x zoom and it's field of view changes between 0.26-26 degrees. it can rotate in 360 degrees horizontally and 90 degrees vertically. maximum rotation rate is 200 RPS.









sadad 404 (first image) and sadad T201 (second image) in Iraqi PMU service during fight against ISIS.

raad-2:

maximum range: 80 km
EO/IIR+radar







seraj decection system:

EO/IIR+laser range finder (20 km)








stabilized airborne and seaborne sensors for drones and ships:








sensors for kamand CIWS:








space surveillance devices:











(international space station detected by Iranian made space surveillance device)



*the most important Iranian made IIR sensor:
*
TIC-S-1 and TIC-S-2 are the most important Iranian made infrared sensors. these systems detection range against fighter jets are 50 and 150 respectively, in case of TIC-S-2 for leaving aircraft the range extents to 300 km because of more infrared emission by engine exhaust. this system (TIC-S-2) is also capable of detecting a human from 15 and a tank from 30 km away.
TIC-S series utilize advanced real time image analyzing software for better processing the input of it's FPA (focal plane array) sensors for better detecting potential targets. the sensor is a cooled variant to achieve better image. all combined results in a clear image comparable to the ones of CCD devices.
TIC-S-2 is a compact system with 60 cm in length, 26 in width and 30 cm in height. thus it's possible to integrate in different platforms including fighter jets.










TIC-S-1 (up) and TIC-S-2 (down)


and in the end:





detection of american RQ-170 using an IR sensor which resulted in subsequent hacking of the drone and landing it on Iranian soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## 925boy

Mithridates said:


> some of Iranian made IIR systems:
> 
> sepehr 14:
> 
> MAX range: more than 50 km
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 618329
> 
> View attachment 618328
> 
> 
> sepehr 14 (image 1 and2) and USAF boeing E-3 AWACS detected by this system.
> 
> sadad family:
> 
> compact surveillance device consisting of IIR and optical sensors with range finder. system is capable of elevation to cover more area.
> sadad can achieve 100x zoom and it's field of view changes between 0.26-26 degrees. it can rotate in 360 degrees horizontally and 90 degrees vertically. maximum rotation rate is 200 RPS.
> View attachment 618330
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sadad 404 (first image) and sadad T201 (second image) in Iraqi PMU service during fight against ISIS.
> 
> raad-2:
> 
> maximum range: 80 km
> EO/IIR+radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seraj decection system:
> 
> EO/IIR+laser range finder (20 km)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stabilized airborne and seaborne sensors for drones and ships:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sensors for kamand CIWS:
> 
> View attachment 618331
> 
> 
> 
> 
> space surveillance devices:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (international space station detected by Iranian made space surveillance device)
> 
> 
> 
> *the most important Iranian made IIR sensor:
> *
> TIC-S-1 and TIC-S-2 are the most important Iranian made infrared sensors. these systems detection range against fighter jets are 50 and 150 respectively, in case of TIC-S-2 for leaving aircraft the range extents to 300 km because of more infrared emission by engine exhaust. this system (TIC-S-2) is also capable of detecting a human from 15 and a tank from 30 km away.
> TIC-S series utilize advanced real time image analyzing software for better processing the input of it's FPA (focal plane array) sensors for better detecting potential targets. the sensor is a cooled variant to achieve better image. all combined results in a clear image comparable to the ones of CCD devices.
> TIC-S-2 is a compact system with 60 cm in length, 26 in width and 30 cm in height. thus it's possible to integrate in different platforms including fighter jets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TIC-S-1 (up) and TIC-S-2 (down)
> 
> 
> and in the end:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> detection of american RQ-170 using an IR sensor which resulted in subsequent hacking of the drone and landing it on Iranian soil.


Nice post and welcome back.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

925boy said:


> Nice post and welcome back.


thank you bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran has just cleared its skies of all commercial traffic overflights without explanation. This may mean that its strategic missile command and air defenses are on heightened alert and expecting imminent action.*
*




*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> *Iran has just cleared its skies of all commercial traffic overflights without explanation. This may mean that its strategic missile command and air defenses are on heightened alert and expecting imminent action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Was there air travel ban? Possible response to the virus?


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> Was there air travel ban? Possible response to the virus?


not that i know of


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> not that i know of



Could be training then. You know, not to repeat the same mistake. See how quick the airlines do to get all the planes on the ground if possible war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *Iran has just cleared its skies of all commercial traffic overflights without explanation. This may mean that its strategic missile command and air defenses are on heightened alert and expecting imminent action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


At least they learned their lesson. This is a good sign.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Khordad 15 gen 2???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> Khordad 15 gen 2???


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> Was there air travel ban? Possible response to the virus?


*now we know why this happened*


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *now we know why this happened*


What?


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> What?


iran expecting an attack , general Qaani is in Iraq US gun ship just came to Iraqi air space and few high ranking US generals just came to al asad air base something big is happening








        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> iran expecting an attack , general Qaani is in Iraq US gun ship just came to Iraqi air space and few high ranking US generals just came to al asad air base something big is happening
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


I still think if they wanted to do anything they would move their troop out of Iran's reach not the contrary unless all of a sudden they have totally changed their battle strategy and have lost their regard for high casualty. Maybe I'm wrong. 
This is their situation now:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/c...ilors-off-ship/ar-BB11YOXd?ocid=mmx&PC=EMMX20

This can put one of their carriers near China out of commission. I seriously doubt they look for trouble now. However, maybe they think Iran may decide to take advantage of this situation so they are bringing their forces near to show Iran they can defend their interests.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

Some unconfirmed sources say US want to attack Iraqi Militias because they think Iran is weakened by covid-19 and this is the right time to strike.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

IAm said:


> Some unconfirmed sources say US want to attack Iraqi Militias because they think Iran is weakened by covid-19 and this is the right time to strike.


well it will be there lost not us



Arminkh said:


> I still think if they wanted to do anything they would move their troop out of Iran's reach not the contrary unless all of a sudden they have totally changed their battle strategy and have lost their regard for high casualty. Maybe I'm wrong.
> This is their situation now:
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/c...ilors-off-ship/ar-BB11YOXd?ocid=mmx&PC=EMMX20
> 
> This can put one of their carriers near China out of commission. I seriously doubt they look for trouble now. However, maybe they think Iran may decide to take advantage of this situation so they are bringing their forces near to show Iran they can defend their interests.



sure as hell Iran dose not think that, as they are clearing up Iran air space every night for practice witch shows they expecting something and air defenses and missile forces are on high alert

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

@skyshadow Is posting allegations without any proof?

US going to go to war with Iran during a global pandemic and economic recession?

I mean where do propagandists get this stuff


----------



## Mithridates

Arminkh said:


> I still think if they wanted to do anything they would move their troop out of Iran's reach not the contrary unless all of a sudden they have totally changed their battle strategy and have lost their regard for high casualty. Maybe I'm wrong.
> This is their situation now:
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/c...ilors-off-ship/ar-BB11YOXd?ocid=mmx&PC=EMMX20
> 
> This can put one of their carriers near China out of commission. I seriously doubt they look for trouble now. However, maybe they think Iran may decide to take advantage of this situation so they are bringing their forces near to show Iran they can defend their interests.


actually they are changing their strategies. they will rely on smaller but numerous camps except of large and concentrated bases. also they will put them close to Iranian borders so in case of a military conflict they can strike deeper in. 
i'm wondering in this case how much each camp will be equipped?? and what kind of equipment will they have??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

I think I know why Iran is acting up. Iran was freaking out that the U.S. was bringing in the Patriots into Iraq.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-warns-us-patriot-deployment-iraq-100646861.html

*Iran warns US after Patriot deployment to Iraq*

Tehran (AFP) - Iran warned the US Wednesday that it was leading the Middle East to disaster in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic after it deployed Patriot air defence missiles to Iraq.

Washington had been in talks with Baghdad about the proposed deployment since January but it was not immediately clear whether it had secured its approval or not.

Iran, which wields huge influence in its western neighbour, said that it had not.

The US deployment runs "counter to the official position of the Iraqi government, parliament and people," a foreign ministry statement said.

It called for a halt to "warmongering during the coronavirus outbreak" and warned that US military activities in the region could lead it to "instability and disaster".

Iran is in the throes of one of the world's deadliest coronavirus outbreaks with more than 3,000 fatalities. The US death toll has meanwhile surpassed Iran's, topping 4,000.

US forces should "respect the wishes of the Iraqi people and government and leave the country," the Iranian foreign ministry added.

The Patriot is Washington's principal anti-missile missile system.

Its deployment to Iraq comes after a spate of rocket and other attacks on bases and other facilities used by US personnel that Washington has blamed on Tehran-backed Shiite militias or Tehran itself.

One of the Patriot batteries was delivered to the Ain al-Asad in western Iraq last week and is now being assembled, a US defence official and an Iraqi military source said.

Ain al-Asad was hit by a retaliatory Iranian missile strike in January after Washington killed Tehran's foreign operations chief Major General Qasem Soleimani in a drone strike just outside Baghdad airport.

A second battery was deployed to a base in Arbil, capital of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region.

Two more are still in Kuwait, where Washington has rear bases for its operations in Iraq, the US official said.

Iraqi leaders have resisted US deployment of the advanced weapons system for fear that it would anger Iran and further ratchet up tensions between its main allies.

On Monday, Iraq's caretaker prime minister Adel Abdel Mahdi warned against any "offensive military action without the approval of the Iraqi government." He did not specifically mention the Patriot deployment.


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> @skyshadow Is posting allegations without any proof?
> 
> US going to go to war with Iran during a global pandemic and economic recession?
> 
> I mean where do propagandists get this stuff



Yeah, I don't think it's a _'war'_ that the U.S. wants but instead an expansion of operations aimed at obliterating PMU factions and their respective capabilities is most definitely in the works, at least in some capacity since we've seen this more or less playing out for quite some time now.

But one shouldn't mistake a war for a short-term conflict. Just my opinion but I do think the U.S. could engage in a short-term high intensity kinetic conflict with Iran over the Iraq stuff, (in-spite of the COVID-19 pandemic currently ravaging our country, meaning America) don't see exactly what's stopping the U.S.A from going this route. I would bet my bottom dollar that the consensus within Trump's ill-forged administration is that Iran is indeed well occupied with mitigating the COVID-19 virus and can't fully commit to a short-lived conflict since resources are supposedly strained and morale would subsequently be low and money is in short supply (again, supposedly).

Truth be told though man, I can't exactly understand why American armed forces are consolidating their forces in several key locations. This makes it considerably more easier for Iran to maximize casualties if it came down to blows. The fact that there is talk of these new bases being 'permanent' is quite concerning though especially since they're close to the Iranian border making them, again, an easy target for Iranian forces to destroy.

What do you think?


----------



## Shawnee

No country attacks with prior notice. Trump is awaiting the worst two weeks of Coronavirus and the numbers in US will pass millions. There is absolutely no appetite in US for a war.

Trump will only do very short interventions with no payback. He will not risk anything bigger with possible repercussions.

These headlines help Trump in two ways:

The fact that he is withdrawing forces to limited centers is really bad and spreading these headlines helps him to save face.

The other way these headlines help Trump is decreasing the chance of further rocket attacks on US forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Truth be told though man, I can't exactly understand why American armed forces are consolidating their forces in several key locations. This makes it considerably more easier for Iran to maximize casualties if it came down to blows. The fact that there is talk of these new bases being 'permanent' is quite concerning though especially since they're close to the Iranian border making them, again, an easy target for Iranian forces to destroy.
> 
> What do you think?



Probably make it easier to defend. If you have too many forces spread out, then you know what happens.


----------



## Shawnee

Oldman1 said:


> Probably make it easier to defend. If you have too many forces spread out, then you know what happens.



Those centers are still very very sensitive and patriot will not help a lot. They are outnumbered and outgunned inside Iraq.

I think Trump team should pay more attention to the Iranians president and Zarif. They try to bargain and try to look miserable and weak to get sanction relief and this makes US to sit on the stronger side of the table.
His weakness was undermining Zarif and strengthening Qaani.


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> Probably make it easier to defend. If you have too many forces spread out, then you know what happens.



Fair enough, If it were to be defended against the Houthis or some other smaller non-state actor, then yes your statement would hold weight but this isn't some non-state actor those missile defense systems are going up against. 

Iran has more than enough munitions to render those Patriot batteries more-or-less ineffective since they will be destroyed along with the other military assets meant for obliteration as well. Since the new bases are so concentrated and some are going to be close to the Iranian border (making Iran's job that much easier) one can only contemplate as to what America is actually thinking. 

You are quite right though, having your troops and assets in several key bases is intrinsically easier to defend.


----------



## Oldman1

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Fair enough, If it were to be defended against the Houthis or some other smaller non-state actor, then yes your statement would hold weight but this isn't some non-state actor those missile defense systems are going up against.
> 
> Iran has more than enough munitions to render those Patriot batteries more-or-less ineffective since they will be destroyed along with the other military assets meant for obliteration as well. Since the new bases are so concentrated and some are going to be close to the Iranian border (making Iran's job that much easier) one can only contemplate as to what America is actually thinking.
> 
> You are quite right though, having your troops and assets in several key bases is intrinsically easier to defend.



The Patriots were pretty much design against advanced forces. I'm sure with enough saturation it will overwhelmed the Patriots. No different then saturating Iran's SAMs with enough munitions. That don't mean we shouldn't have it eh?


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> The Patriots were pretty much design against advanced forces. I'm sure with enough saturation it will overwhelmed the Patriots. No different then saturating Iran's SAMs with enough munitions. That don't mean we shouldn't have it eh?



No, it has good reason to be there can't argue against that lol.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> @skyshadow Is posting allegations without any proof?
> 
> US going to go to war with Iran during a global pandemic and economic recession?
> 
> I mean where do propagandists get this stuff



*even Iran know it so here your proof



Important / US message to Abdul Mahdi about attacking resistance forces

Kamal al-Hasnawi, leader of al-Hashed al-Shaba'i: Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi has received messages from Americans about attacks on resistance forces in #Iraq / IRNA


 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244678803252809730



Iran Guards Warn Washington Against Any Attack On Proxies In Iraq
*
Furthermore, the statement cautioned, "The Islamic Republic's response will be definitive and devastating and will not even give them the opportunity to regret their actions".
*
https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-gu...t-any-attack-on-proxies-in-iraq/30520759.html
*

*Iran warns US after Patriot deployment to Iraq*

*https://www.france24.com/en/20200401-iran-warns-us-after-patriot-deployment-to-iraq*

*Iran Warns About American 'Military Moves' In Iraq*

https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-warns-about-american-military-moves-in-iraq/30521895.html



*Major General Safavid Warns US About Suspicious Movements in Iraq*
*

https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...شکوک-در-عراق-شکست-بزرگی-از-مردم-عراق-می-خورید*


----------



## Shawnee

Long story short no stupid US general will tell you that he will attack you before he attacks you. You should leave your time and location of the attack a mystery.

It helps to save face for withdrawing troops to limited centers and decrease the chance of further rocket attacks by scaring them. It will be a bargaining chip in politics too.

You will be surprised to see how many mullahs and IRGC generals are cowards. They are not the same people when they were young. They calculate for months before anything. This tactic will probably help.


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> *even Iran know it so here your proof
> 
> 
> 
> Important / US message to Abdul Mahdi about attacking resistance forces
> 
> Kamal al-Hasnawi, leader of al-Hashed al-Shaba'i: Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi has received messages from Americans about attacks on resistance forces in #Iraq / IRNA
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244678803252809730
> 
> 
> 
> Iran Guards Warn Washington Against Any Attack On Proxies In Iraq
> *
> Furthermore, the statement cautioned, "The Islamic Republic's response will be definitive and devastating and will not even give them the opportunity to regret their actions".
> *
> https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-gu...t-any-attack-on-proxies-in-iraq/30520759.html
> *
> 
> *Iran warns US after Patriot deployment to Iraq*
> 
> *https://www.france24.com/en/20200401-iran-warns-us-after-patriot-deployment-to-iraq*
> 
> *Iran Warns About American 'Military Moves' In Iraq*
> 
> https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-warns-about-american-military-moves-in-iraq/30521895.html
> 
> 
> 
> *Major General Safavid Warns US About Suspicious Movements in Iraq
> 
> 
> https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1399/01/13/2234733/هشدار-سرلشکر-صفوی-به-آمریکا-درباره-تحرکات-مشکوک-در-عراق-شکست-بزرگی-از-مردم-عراق-می-خورید*



Is Iran willing to launch missile attacks against U.S. bases again if they attack the PMU?


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> I think I know why Iran is acting up. Iran was freaking out that the U.S. was bringing in the Patriots into Iraq.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-warns-us-patriot-deployment-iraq-100646861.html
> 
> *Iran warns US after Patriot deployment to Iraq*
> 
> Tehran (AFP) - Iran warned the US Wednesday that it was leading the Middle East to disaster in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic after it deployed Patriot air defence missiles to Iraq.
> 
> Washington had been in talks with Baghdad about the proposed deployment since January but it was not immediately clear whether it had secured its approval or not.
> 
> Iran, which wields huge influence in its western neighbour, said that it had not.
> 
> The US deployment runs "counter to the official position of the Iraqi government, parliament and people," a foreign ministry statement said.
> 
> 
> It called for a halt to "warmongering during the coronavirus outbreak" and warned that US military activities in the region could lead it to "instability and disaster".
> 
> Iran is in the throes of one of the world's deadliest coronavirus outbreaks with more than 3,000 fatalities. The US death toll has meanwhile surpassed Iran's, topping 4,000.
> 
> US forces should "respect the wishes of the Iraqi people and government and leave the country," the Iranian foreign ministry added.
> 
> The Patriot is Washington's principal anti-missile missile system.
> 
> Its deployment to Iraq comes after a spate of rocket and other attacks on bases and other facilities used by US personnel that Washington has blamed on Tehran-backed Shiite militias or Tehran itself.
> 
> One of the Patriot batteries was delivered to the Ain al-Asad in western Iraq last week and is now being assembled, a US defence official and an Iraqi military source said.
> 
> Ain al-Asad was hit by a retaliatory Iranian missile strike in January after Washington killed Tehran's foreign operations chief Major General Qasem Soleimani in a drone strike just outside Baghdad airport.
> 
> A second battery was deployed to a base in Arbil, capital of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region.
> 
> Two more are still in Kuwait, where Washington has rear bases for its operations in Iraq, the US official said.
> 
> Iraqi leaders have resisted US deployment of the advanced weapons system for fear that it would anger Iran and further ratchet up tensions between its main allies.
> 
> On Monday, Iraq's caretaker prime minister Adel Abdel Mahdi warned against any "offensive military action without the approval of the Iraqi government." He did not specifically mention the Patriot deployment.




no Iran sent a warning letter to Swiss embassy to give it to US even before Patriots



Oldman1 said:


> Is Iran willing to launch missile attacks against U.S. bases again if they attack the PMU?


if they feel they are losing power and that its serious then yes i believe they do but we have to remember Iran already fully equipped Iraq proxies with ballistic missile and maybe air defenses too.


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> if they feel they are losing power and that its serious then yes i believe they do but we have to remember Iran already fully equipped Iraq proxies with ballistic missile and maybe air defenses too.



That would be the biggest mistake of their life. Because it would give very hard evidence especially with militias equipped with SAMs and ballistic missiles that Iran is directly involved. Small rocket attacks is one thing. Ballistic missiles on TEL killing hundreds of troops? War...


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> That would be the biggest mistake of their life. Because it would give very hard evidence especially with militias equipped with SAMs and ballistic missiles that Iran is directly involved. Small rocket attacks is one thing. Ballistic missiles on TEL killing hundreds of troops? War...



Then so be it I guess, it really feels inevitable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> That would be the biggest mistake of their life. Because it would give very hard evidence especially with militias equipped with SAMs and ballistic missiles that Iran is directly involved. Small rocket attacks is one thing. Ballistic missiles on TEL killing hundreds of troops? War...


well that is why we have to wait and see after all you can not attack any other and much much powerful country just because you are under attack from an armed group just like Saudi Arabia they cant attack Iran just because there enemy suddenly has ballistic missiles that looks exactly as Iranian missiles.

so i think if US attacks it find it self fighting a group with missiles the day after it finds out the same group now has air defenses a day after that it finds the same group now has advanced drones and a cyber unit all of which will be constantly be resupplied by IRGC so IRGC will make a short war an endless war as *Saudi Arabia famously* once said *"Yemen war, it should have been a 1 year war if IRGC had not got involved"*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> well that is why we have to wait and see after all you can not attack any other and much much powerful country just because you are under attack from an armed group just like Saudi Arabia they cant attack Iran just because there enemy suddenly has ballistic missiles that looks exactly as Iranian missiles.
> 
> so i think if US attacks it find it self fighting a group with missiles the day after it finds out group now has air defenses a day after that it finds the same group now has advanced drones and a cyber unit all of with will be constantly be resupplied by IRGC so IRGC will make a short war an endless war as *Saudi Arabia famously* once said *"Yemen war, it should have been a 1 year war if IRGC had not got involved"*



This is the same mistake of Iran's thinking that we can't do anything. You think we wouldn't respond to embassy attacks? You lost your general because of that. What makes you think Trump won't do crap on attacking our bases again but this time with actual deaths? The U.S. military has been bombing PMU since they have been launching mortars and rocket attacks. Why is Iran willing to go so far now when it didn't back then?


----------



## Shawnee

Oldman1 said:


> This is the same mistake of Iran's thinking that we can't do anything. You think we wouldn't respond to embassy attacks? You lost your general because of that. What makes you think Trump won't do crap on attacking our bases again but this time with actual deaths? The U.S. military has been bombing PMU since they have been launching mortars and rocket attacks. Why is Iran willing to go so far now when it didn't back then?



What makes US look weak is prior history like leaving Afghanistan not like a winner. Against Taliban! It means you can do 9/11 and over time even win.

what choices does Trump have against a country with guided missiles, drones, etc and also with hidden nuclear and chemical power?
Can Trump claim a victory if mullahs flatten Israel?

Who will be the winner if everybody around reaches 0/0/0?
All the oil wells, refineries, foreign investments, gas pipelines under Mediterranean, factories, airports?
The country that does not have a proper airport and foreign investment or others?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> This is the same mistake of Iran's thinking that we can't do anything. You think we wouldn't respond to embassy attacks? You lost your general because of that. What makes you think Trump won't do crap on attacking our bases again but this time with actual deaths? The U.S. military has been bombing PMU since they have been launching mortars and rocket attacks. Why is Iran willing to go so far now when it didn't back then?



because of the same logic that i tolled you about you can not attack an other country because you are under attack from someone else you can not go to war with US when your general is liked in an other country at least not for the first time US had a chance to kill General. Qaani too but it did not if they knew Iran will not start a war then they will have done it. they know Iranian backed group killed their soldiers but they cant attack Iran just because there soldiers killed in another country even if an IRGC soldier has pulled the trigger.


----------



## Oldman1

Shawnee said:


> What makes US look weak is prior history like leaving Afghanistan not like a winner. Against Taliban! It means you can do 9/11 and over time even win.
> 
> what choices does Trump have against a country with guided missiles, drones, etc and also with hidden nuclear and chemical power?
> Can Trump claim a victory if mullahs flatten Israel?



The last thing any country wants to compare is U.S. fighting the Taliban and one fighting Iran. Because back then Iraq believe they could fight the U.S. because of the fighting in Vietnam against guerrilla warfare and lost. Iran is right there. Easy to see, easy to bomb. Not hiding in civilian clothing. Russia lost in Afghanistan, do you believe Russia's military should still be respected right now? Should the U.S. military be respected even now?


----------



## Shams313

Oldman1 said:


> This is the same mistake of Iran's thinking that we can't do anything. You think we wouldn't respond to embassy attacks? You lost your general because of that. What makes you think Trump won't do crap on attacking our bases again but this time with actual deaths? The U.S. military has been bombing PMU since they have been launching mortars and rocket attacks. Why is Iran willing to go so far now when it didn't back then?


Most probably urs actions become aggressive towards pmu since ISIS lose their grounds and its always USA's interest not to leave any proxy, aka pmu alive and roaming around, so sonner or later they will turn their laser at pmu, and for prevention or retaliation or strengthening their position, pmu must do some plan countering USA existance in iraq, so they forcing USA both in politically and militarily to leave iraq.

So,if pmu strike USA bases with BM as a retaliation, nothing wonder us. And iran can actively support them for terminating USA grounds in iraq.

And u cant last there for long.


----------



## Shawnee

Oldman1 said:


> The last thing any country wants to compare is U.S. fighting the Taliban and one fighting Iran. Because back then Iraq believe they could fight the U.S. because of the fighting in Vietnam against guerrilla warfare and lost. Iran is right there. Easy to see, easy to bomb. Not hiding in civilian clothing. Russia lost in Afghanistan, do you believe Russia's military should still be respected right now? Should the U.S. military be respected even now?



Are you sure Iran does not have nuke?
Is it gonna be like Yemen war again? Or Hizbullah war? Israel is all right there too.
Let’s not talk about nuke, since even VX works like a nuke.
What is the plan for infrastructures when everybody reaches 0-0-0?

Afghanistan case showed the lack of will inside US for long term wars and the ability to sugarcoat defeat. Iraq and Iran are very different cases.


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> because of the same logic that i tolled you about you can not attack an other country because you are under attack from someone else you can not go to war with US when your general is liked in an other country at least not for the first time US had a chance to kill General. Qaani too but it did not if they knew Iran will not start a war then they will have done it. they know Iranian backed group killed their soldiers but they cant attack Iran just because there soldiers killed in another country even if an IRGC soldier has pulled the trigger.



Thats the wrong mindset. You are pushing Trumps buttons. Your general is able to go around Iraq as he pleases for many years, but attacking the embassy was the last straw and he died for that, thinking U.S. won't respond or can't do anything. I can guarantee Trump will respond if you launch ballistic missile attacks again.


----------



## OldTwilight

Shawnee said:


> Long story short no stupid US general will tell you that he will attack you before he attacks you. You should leave your time and location of the attack a mystery.
> 
> It helps to save face for withdrawing troops to limited centers and decrease the chance of further rocket attacks by scaring them. It will be a bargaining chip in politics too.
> 
> You will be surprised to see how many mullahs and IRGC generals are cowards. They are not the same people when they were young. They calculate for months before anything. This tactic will probably help.


This is art of deception ...
They want we believe that they do nothing .


----------



## Oldman1

Shawnee said:


> Are you sure Iran does not have nuke?
> Is it gonna be like Yemen war again? Or Hizbullah war? Israel is all right there too.
> Let’s not talk about nuke, since even VX works like a nuke.
> What is the plan for infrastructures when everybody reaches 0-0-0?
> 
> Afghanistan case showed the lack of will inside US for long term wars and the ability to sugarcoat defeat. Iraq and Iran are very different cases.



No you saw Afghanistan case where the U.S. was fighting since 2001. Thats 19 years. 19 years of destruction. You want to see 19 years of bombing in Iran? Even if U.S. lost, its a Pyrrhic victory for Iran.


----------



## Shawnee

Trump just tweeted. World may forget COVID-19 soon.


----------



## Oldman1

Shams313 said:


> Most probably urs actions become aggressive towards pmu since ISIS lose their grounds and its always USA's interest not to leave any proxy, aka pmu alive and roaming around, so sonner or later they will turn their laser at pmu, and for prevention or retaliation or strengthening their position, pmu must do some plan countering USA existance in iraq, so they forcing USA both in politically and militarily to leave iraq.
> 
> So,if pmu strike USA bases with BM as a retaliation, nothing wonder us. And iran can actively support them for terminating USA grounds in iraq.
> 
> And u cant last there for long.



Aggressive towards PMU? They are the ones who started it all and keep attacking with launching mortars and rockets while we are busy fighting ISIS.



Shawnee said:


> Trump just tweeted. World may forget COVID-19 soon.



Just read that.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
49m

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245396884040097792Upon information and belief, Iran or its proxies are planning a sneak attack on U.S. troops and/or assets in Iraq. If this happens, Iran will pay a very heavy price, indeed!


----------



## Shawnee

Oldman1 said:


> No you saw Afghanistan case where the U.S. was fighting since 2001. Thats 19 years. 19 years of destruction. You want to see 19 years of bombing in Iran? Even if U.S. lost, its a Pyrrhic victory for Iran.



If Everybody reaches 0-0-0, the one who lost more will be the loser.
A Pyrrhic victory or a pyrrhic loss better than just loss. You keep your dignity that way. Do you agree?


----------



## Oldman1

Is Iran's leader going to tweet on Trump's? Say "you can't do anything?"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Mithridates said:


> actually they are changing their strategies. they will rely on smaller but numerous camps except of large and concentrated bases. also they will put them close to Iranian borders so in case of a military conflict they can strike deeper in.
> i'm wondering in this case how much each camp will be equipped?? and what kind of equipment will they have??


To be honest, i'm worried this strategy leaves US at a disadvantage on the ground in these scenarios because the moment a unit/group of US soldiers is too few in #, their vulnerability goes up ALOT imo against even decently well trained militia forces(and we are talking Iranian back or/and trained or/and supported). these soldiers cant manuevre or live on the ground in Iraq while carrying patriots along, but they will get missile attacks? US soldiers imo already face an uphill battle in the ratio of # of committed US soldier to # of PMU militia committed to fighting US. Those 5K US soldiers also cant be in the same needed place at the same time, so this is a low footprint for US troops in a country the size of Iraq. BUt even US defense secretary said it recently too during talks of a new campaign in IRaq, said a surge would be needed, and damn right it would. If This planned US offensive isnt short and effective, then US can say bye bye to competing with CHina in the south china sea. screenshot this pls.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Oldman1 said:


> Is Iran's leader going to tweet on Trump's? Say "you can't do anything?"



Twitter banned his account so he won’t.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Shawnee said:


> If Everybody reaches 0-0-0, the one who lost more will be the loser.
> A Pyrrhic victory or a pyrrhic loss better than just loss. You keep your dignity that way. Do you agree?



No there is a reason why Pyrrhic victory exists in the first place. Otherwise you just call it a victory.


----------



## Shawnee

Trump does not have the support of Americans to start another war in ME in the worst two weeks of Coronavirus.

Mullahs in Iran will like this war more.



Oldman1 said:


> No there is a reason why Pyrrhic victory exists in the first place. Otherwise you just call it a victory.



WWII was a Pyrrhic victory for UK but it was the best available choice. Better than loss.

Trump tweet got lost in Coronavirus news. CNN has not even mentioned it. It would be headline last month.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> No you saw Afghanistan case where the U.S. was fighting since 2001. Thats 19 years. 19 years of destruction. You want to see 19 years of bombing in Iran? Even if U.S. lost, its a Pyrrhic victory for Iran.



There it is again, this misguided idea that somehow the bombing of Iran will be as easy at it was in Afghanistan or Iraq. I guess all of Iran's military advancements and strategic military planning are for naught....

Long story short, it truly does remain to be seen how this conflict will play out when it comes down to blows. We don't know how much of a beating the U.S. is willing to take and how much Iran can endure. Also it's does bear repeating that American armed forces aren't fighting against a smaller lightly armed groups with limited hardware. Iran has a large arsenal that is well-protected and widespread ready to fire on military assets for quite some time with deadly accuracy and massive destructive power. The casualties for U.S. forces in the Middle East, especially in Iraq will be in the thousands within the first dew days if not hours. Moreover, Iran already knows it will get the brunt of the damage in such a conflict has accepted this.

This isn't a 'been there, done that' type of deal Oldman1, especially given the current healthcare crisis due to COVID-19 happening stateside.


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> Thats the wrong mindset. You are pushing Trumps buttons. Your general is able to go around Iraq as he pleases for many years, but attacking the embassy was the last straw and he died for that, thinking U.S. won't respond or can't do anything. I can guarantee Trump will respond if you launch ballistic missile attacks again.


as long as the missile attack from Iran is in response then he will not attack he may other attack if Iran attacks first but not an attack in Iran soil there beef if with IRGC not Iran army if they attack Iran soil then Army gets involved too and the have half million ground force and a well trained air force and the own set of missiles which IRGC does not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Oldman1 said:


> The last thing any country wants to compare is U.S. fighting the Taliban and one fighting Iran.


Actually we should, because this is directly related to when you said that US has been "bombing PMU"(Iranian Air Defense Systems).
Well the US was "bombing Taliban" for 19 years and still left a loser, so bombing any group doesn't mean crap in the long run. Iran is wearing down US in Iraq and playing for time and Iraqi politics to work in its favor. Qassem;s death still gave Iran so much regional momentum it never imagined it would have or achieve so powerfully. 

I will tell you this to your face as an American- US military TODAY, does not have the stamina, ability, reason, motivation, whatever else To stage a serious campaign on Iran. i can stand by that and bet money on it today. Screenshot this pls. Its jsut the facts. if you read the think tank papers, you will know Iran is too dense a nut for US to crack militarily, and the lack of an attempt is the best evidence of that. PS. i trade in facts, not emotions.



> Because back then Iraq believe they could fight the U.S. because of the fighting in Vietnam against guerrilla warfare and lost. Iran is right there. Easy to see, easy to bomb.


If Iran is easy to bomb then why haven't you ACTUALLY BOMBED in 40 years? I mean Iran gave Trump a reason too when Iranian took down the RQ sentinel? secret drone over its waters, Trump wanted to bomb, and called Iran to setup a fake bomb, and he got a NO, so no bombing even took place then. your comments are suitable in a hypothetical scenario,because the reality doesnt match it.


> Not hiding in civilian clothing.


Nobody is hiding. Iranian is harrassing US boats as we speak in the Persian Gulf so how tf has Iran been hiding? what we doing though here! u not serious! lol


> Russia lost in Afghanistan,


So did US.


> do you believe Russia's military should still be respected right now?


US congress testifies every year that Russian militaryt power is the biggest threat to US existence. nuff said.


> Should the U.S. military be respected even now?


Respect will get you a 19 year war with no win. play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

BlueInGreen2 said:


> Yeah, I don't think it's a _'war'_ that the U.S. wants but instead an expansion of operations aimed at obliterating PMU factions and their respective capabilities is most definitely in the works, at least in some capacity since we've seen this more or less playing out for quite some time now.
> 
> But one shouldn't mistake a war for a short-term conflict. Just my opinion but I do think the U.S. could engage in a short-term high intensity kinetic conflict with Iran over the Iraq stuff, (in-spite of the COVID-19 pandemic currently ravaging our country, meaning America) don't see exactly what's stopping the U.S.A from going this route. I would bet my bottom dollar that the consensus within Trump's ill-forged administration is that Iran is indeed well occupied with mitigating the COVID-19 virus and can't fully commit to a short-lived conflict since resources are supposedly strained and morale would subsequently be low and money is in short supply (again, supposedly).
> 
> Truth be told though man, I can't exactly understand why American armed forces are consolidating their forces in several key locations. This makes it considerably more easier for Iran to maximize casualties if it came down to blows. The fact that there is talk of these new bases being 'permanent' is quite concerning though especially since they're close to the Iranian border making them, again, an easy target for Iranian forces to destroy.
> 
> What do you think?


I think I found out why US is doing this. Today was the end of PMU ultimatum to US to honor Iraqi parliament demand that they should leave Iraq.

This is not an offensive arrangement. It is a defensive arrangement against PMU. By concentrating their forces in two bases guarded by Patriot system they can defend better against PMU. But if the target is Iran then I agree; I also can't understand what they are doing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shawnee said:


> Twitter banned his account so he won’t.


still active not banned.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244614114040741888


BlueInGreen2 said:


> There it is again, this misguided idea that somehow the bombing of Iran will be as easy at it was in Afghanistan or Iraq. I guess all of Iran's military advancements and strategic military are for naught....
> 
> Long story short, it truly does remain to be seen how this conflict will play out when it comes down to blows. We don't know how much of a beating the U.S. is willing to take and how much Iran can endure. Also it's does bear repeating that American armed forces aren't fighting against a smaller lightly armed groups with limited hardware. Iran has a large arsenal that is well-protected and widespread ready to fire on military assets for quite some time with deadly accuracy and massive destructive power. The casualties for U.S. forces in the Middle East, especially in Iraq will be in the thousands within the first dew days if not hours. Moreover, Iran already knows it will get the brunt of the damage in such a conflict has accepted this.
> 
> This isn't a 'been there, done that' type of deal Oldman1, especially given the current healthcare crisis due to COVID-19 happening stateside.


plus we don't know if Iran attacks US soil if its soil gets attacked directly in that magnitude that you are implying

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Arminkh said:


> I think I found out why US is doing this. Today was the end of PMU ultimatum to US to honor Iraqi parliament demand that they should leave Iraq.
> 
> This is not an offensive arrangement. It is a defensive arrangement against PMU. By concentrating their forces in two bases guarded by Patriot system they can defend better against PMU. But if the target is Iran then I agree; I also can't understand what they are doing.



A part of me hopes that this recent reorganization of U.S. armed forces in Iraq is somewhat apart of a possible with-drawl in the near-future. Having so many troops and equipment in several locations instead of many multiple locations is easier for mass-transit out of Iraq if the order is given but my gut doesn't tell me this is the case. In fact the U.S. does indeed look to be intent on staying _'permanently'_ in Iraq.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Maj. Gen. Safavi Assistant Commander in Chief: We advise US politicians and military to consider the consequences before any action / Resistance groups Iraq is ready to thwart possible mobilization of US troops and any US action will result in greater strategic defeat in Trump's record


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245389189216174082

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran to defend itself powerfully, the trolls will be able nothing

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

BlueInGreen2 said:


> A part of me hopes that this recent reorganization of U.S. armed forces in Iraq is somewhat apart of a possible with-drawl in the near-future. Having so many troops and equipment in several locations instead of many multiple locations is easier for mass-transit out of Iraq if the order is given but my gut doesn't tell me this is the case. In fact the U.S. does indeed look to be intent on staying _'permanently'_ in Iraq.



its not US fault every power does that who among us ( humans ) like to lose power especially if they worked hard for it?


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> its not US fault every power does that who among us ( humans ) like to lose power especially if they worked hard for it?



This is going to be a bit a of ramble, my apologies ahead of time.

I grew up in a family where I lost loved ones to war and my own mother lived through the Iran-Iraq war. It sincerely pains me to see the U.S.A constantly, and I mean absolutely non-stop be engaged in conflict after conflict after conflict, ad hominem... The stories both my father and mother told me of the bombs raining down, the family members being blown to bits, obliterated in some useless war just tore me up inside as I grew up. So today I see America as the *primary *demon of destruction going about from one nation to another, one people to another, one culture to another, spreading the disease of war and conflict for its own benefit; whether it be oil, gas, economic influence, protecting some Zealot religious state (Saudi Arabia, Israel) or just plain old empire building, I view it all as reprehensible, we humans should be pouring *all* our collective resources into equalizing humanity as a whole and advancing civilian science with the ultimate goal of eradicating all known disease from cancer to heart, subsequently extending life expectancy greatly whilst focusing on human expansion.....Look I know what I say is nothing short of a fever dream but hey, you gotta have some sort of optimism somewhere. And for the record, I don't just blame America, many other nations contribute to world-wide turmoil, Iran included.

Anyways, the last war in which Americans actually gave a shit about morals and what their forces were doing over seas was Vietnam. At least back then regular Americans had the gumption to spit in the faces of the returning GI's who killed millions of Laos, Cambodians and Vietnams over some stupid communism bullshit. Quite literally the United States bombed entire nations to the stone-age just to prove that they can, the reason holds no weight as the loss of human life outweighs any misguided gains. This is the sort of reckless abandon we are dealing with. Today's Americans are heartless, brainless morons who won't do jack-shit against the U.S. government's gallivanting. Americans are in the "thank you for your service" era, people just don't care or have drunken the MIC U.S armed forces propaganda of the 'City on the Hill' and 'Our troops are heroes' as well as the obvious American exceptionalism. More over, the Zombie hordes of American idiots are some the most repulsive low-IQ dullards one could come across, and it's not as if this is a small population no...it's the majority of Americans who are stupid like actually dumb. Respectively I put little stock in their ability to stop this nation from getting into more conflicts in the future. As long as they have their sex time, **** time, TV, entertainment, food, drugs, shitty low-paying job; they're right as rain...

I can only hope regular Iranians in Iran know the true extent of danger that they're in. America doesn't seek just to win, they want to destroy so it doesn't come back stronger, especially when it comes to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

Oldman1 said:


> Thats the wrong mindset. You are pushing Trumps buttons. Your general is able to go around Iraq as he pleases for many years, but attacking the embassy was the last straw and he died for that, thinking U.S. won't respond or can't do anything. I can guarantee Trump will respond if you launch ballistic missile attacks again.


And what happen to the CIA commander incharge of the ME? You can even announce his death, Gen Soleimani was baried with dignity and honor.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

I think this is the answer to the question of those potentially troubling regional us military movements in recent days

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245396884040097792So I doubt that these movements are preparations for a sneak attack on iran.
Naturally tho the chumpenfuhrer feels compelled to talk tough lest anybody think that he is weak

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

BlueInGreen2 said:


> This is going to be a bit a of ramble, my apologies ahead of time.
> 
> I grew up in a family where I lost loved ones to war and my own mother lived through the Iran-Iraq war. It sincerely pains me to see the U.S.A constantly, and I mean absolutely non-stop be engaged in conflict after conflict after conflict, ad hominem... The stories both my father and mother told me of the bombs raining down, the family members being blown to bits, obliterated in some useless war just tore me up inside as I grew up. So today I see America as the *primary *demon of destruction going about from one nation to another, one people to another, one culture to another, spreading the disease of war and conflict for its own benefit; whether it be oil, gas, economic influence, protecting some Zealot religious state (Saudi Arabia, Israel) or just plain old empire building, I view it all as reprehensible, we humans should be pouring *all* our collective resources into equalizing humanity as a whole and advancing civilian science with the ultimate goal of eradicating all known disease from cancer to heart, subsequently extending life expectancy greatly whilst focusing on human expansion.....Look I know what I say is nothing short of a fever dream but hey, you gotta have some sort of optimism somewhere. And for the record, I don't just blame America, many other nations contribute to world-wide turmoil, Iran included.
> 
> Anyways, the last war in which Americans actually gave a shit about morals and what their forces were doing over seas was Vietnam. At least back then regular Americans had the gumption to spit in the faces of the returning GI's who killed millions of Laos, Cambodians and Vietnams over some stupid communism bullshit. Quite literally the United States bombed entire nations to the stone-age just to prove that they can, the reason holds no weight as the loss of human life outweighs any misguided gains. This is the sort of reckless abandon we are dealing with. Today's Americans are heartless, brainless morons who won't do jack-shit against the U.S. government's gallivanting. Americans are in the "thank you for your service" era, people just don't care or have drunken the MIC U.S armed forces propaganda of the 'City on the Hill' and 'Our troops are heroes' as well as the obvious American exceptionalism. More over, the Zombie hordes of American idiots are some the most repulsive low-IQ dullards one could come across, and it's not as if this is a small population no...it's the majority of Americans who are stupid like actually dumb. Respectively I put little stock in their ability to stop this nation from getting into more conflicts in the future. As long as they have their sex time, **** time, TV, entertainment, food, drugs, shitty low-paying job; they're right as rain...
> 
> I can only hope regular Iranians in Iran know the true extent of danger that they're in. America doesn't seek just to win, they want to destroy so it doesn't come back stronger, especially when it comes to Iran.




agreed 1000% and i always said a country will not get scared until its main land get hit too that why when some one is in shock and dose not have control over it actions we slap him or her in the face so that he or she snap out of it nations are like that to we had 8 year of war we know a missile does not think it dose not care it just killes maybe fire and nightmare of a bombs or missile falling on your head every second maybe that is what Americans should feel and maybe then they came to their senses to not to invade other countries

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GWXP

Sineva said:


> I think this is the answer to the question of those potentially troubling regional us military movements in recent days
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245396884040097792So I doubt that these movements are preparations for a sneak attack on iran.
> Naturally tho the chumpenfuhrer feels compelled to talk tough lest anybody think that he is weak


Iran should be very careful at this moment....oil market is oversupplied and price of oil is very low due to global recession that is happening right now....

Due to oversupply of oil markets, US might not be deterred by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz at this moment.

US might view that a crisis in the Persian Gulf at this moment will lead to little spike in oil prices that will help troubled US shale oil industry that sufferes a lot due to current low oil prices.

Trump might believe that attack on Iran will help his reelection prospects while saving US shale oil industry from bankrupcy.

Currently US falls into recession and oil demand falls and oil becomes useless...there is oversupply....so major Iranian deterrence to close the Strait of Hormuz might not work now.

But next year, when US will start recovery period and cheap oil helps recovery and importance of the Strait of Hormuz will be there again

“The market is oversupplied in April to the tune of 25 million barrels per day. There’s nowhere to hide from this tsunami of oversupply.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/01/oil-markets-crude-output-in-focus.html

oversupply is 25mln barrels per day---for comparison Persian Gulf supplies 21mln barrels per day.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IAm

GWXP said:


> Iran should be very careful at this moment....oil market is oversupplied and price of oil is very low due to global recession that is happening right now....
> 
> Due to oversupply of oil markets, US might not be deterred by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz at this moment.
> 
> US might view that a crisis in the Persian Gulf at this moment will lead to little spike in oil prices that will help troubled US shale oil industry that sufferes a lot due to current low oil prices.
> 
> Trump might believe that attack on Iran will help his reelection prospects while saving US shale oil industry from bankrupcy.
> 
> Currently US falls into recession and oil demand falls and oil becomes useless...there is oversupply....so major Iranian deterrence to close the Strait of Hormuz might not work now.
> 
> But next year, when US will start recovery period and cheap oil helps recovery and importance of the Strait of Hormuz will be there again
> 
> “The market is oversupplied in April to the tune of 25 million barrels per day. There’s nowhere to hide from this tsunami of oversupply.”
> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/01/oil-markets-crude-output-in-focus.html
> 
> oversupply is 25mln barrels per day---for comparison Persian Gulf supplies 21mln barrels per day.



The US have not gone to war with Iran not because they fear the closure of the strait of Hormuz, NO, they fear their own defeat. Iran have all kinds of missiles to launch a heavy onslaught on US targets. US air defenses have not been tested by a potent enemy before, they are therefore not sure they can take safety in their air defenses. This is what is keeping them at bay.

US superpower is a myth, to maintain this myth they have to avoid attacking a potent enemy like Iran, if not the myth will be busted and like the proverbial porcupine everybody will know their weak underbelly. From the little I know it will be suicide for the US to confront Iran with the usual strike group. Their mighty war ships seems to be too big for Iranians missiles to miss. Their air bases will be saturated and turned into burning embers within hours and their stealth Jets will have no tarmac to take off. Their stealth Jets they so trust will be useless if they cannot defend their air bases. 

Iranians are very wise, no reliance on air bases, no mighty war ships, well disperse power without crippling targets. US war planners does not know how to deal with this force.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

IAm said:


> The US have not gone to war with Iran not because they fear the closure of the strait of Hormuz, NO, they fear their own defeat. Iran have all kinds of missiles to launch a heavy onslaught on US targets. US air defenses have not been tested by a potent enemy before, they are therefore not sure they can take safety in their air defenses. This is what is keeping them at bay.
> 
> US superpower is a myth, to maintain this myth they have to avoid attacking a potent enemy like Iran, if not the myth will be busted and like the proverbial porcupine everybody will know their weak underbelly. From the little I know it will be suicide for the US to confront Iran with the usual strike group. Their mighty war ships seems to be too big for Iranians missiles to miss. Their air bases will be saturated and turned into burning embers within hours and their stealth Jets will have no tarmac to take off. Their stealth Jets they so trust will be useless if they cannot defend their air bases.
> 
> Iranians are very wise, no reliance on air bases, no mighty war ships, well disperse power without crippling targets. US war planners does not know how to deal with this force.



Very well said. I don't think they are a myth, but their superpower status could be busted and broken if they attack Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> no Iran sent a warning letter to Swiss embassy to give it to US even before Patriots
> 
> 
> if they feel they are losing power and that its serious then yes i believe they do but we have to remember Iran already fully equipped Iraq proxies with ballistic missile and maybe air defenses too.



And US wiped their *** with that “warning letter”.

Iran is playing political theater at this point. No one takes it seriously. Lost all credibility on global stage.

They were going to “kick out” US out of Middle East. Now US deploying patriots in Iraq. They ain’t going anywhere.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> And US wiped their *** with that “warning letter”.
> 
> Iran is playing political theater at this point. No one takes it seriously. Lost all credibility on global stage.
> 
> They were going to “kick out” US out of Middle East. Now US deploying patriots in Iraq. They ain’t going anywhere.



well agreed as i said before no human like to lose but US is pulling an air craft carrier out of arabian sea


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> And US wiped their *** with that “warning letter”.
> 
> Iran is playing political theater at this point. No one takes it seriously. Lost all credibility on global stage.
> 
> They were going to “kick out” US out of Middle East. Now US deploying patriots in Iraq. They ain’t going anywhere.



I hope you don't come back to the site when you find that you're wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> And US wiped their *** with that “warning letter”.
> 
> Iran is playing political theater at this point. No one takes it seriously. Lost all credibility on global stage.
> 
> They were going to “kick out” US out of Middle East. Now US deploying patriots in Iraq. They ain’t going anywhere.





Stryker1982 said:


> I hope you don't come back to the site when you find that you're wrong.



“There are reports now that one of the two carriers present in the Middle East, the USS Harry S. Truman and the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower will be diverted to the Pacific. This has raised concerns that there could be a fight brewing for carriers between different regional commands”


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245865995551387654

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> “There are reports now that one of the two carriers present in the Middle East, the USS Harry S. Truman and the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower will be diverted to the Pacific. This has raised concerns that there could be a fight brewing for carriers between different regional commands”
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245865995551387654


Because USS Roosevelt is losing half of her crew due to Corona virus. As I mentioned US is not in a situation to look for trouble at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

Iran's major deterrence against US attack throughout decades ---was its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and do substantial damage to global economy---BUT RIGHT NOW AS GLOBAL ECONOMY IS IN RECESSION AND OIL MARKET IS OVERSUPPLIED-- *THIS MEAN OF DETERRENCE WON'T WORK*

3 month from now, pandemic will probably stop and all oil storage facilities in the world will be filled with oil

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...0-a-barrel-as-world-runs-out-of-storage-space

Current situation is different, and US can calculate that they can attack Iran in order to: 1) destroy its infrastructure and weaken its economy 2)destroy its nuclear program

How will Iran respond?

1) Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and attack Saudi oil infrastructure-----but currently, oil market is oversupplied by 25mln barrels of oil per day----loss of 21mln barrels of oil per day from the Persian Gulf will bring *balance to the oil market* and will increase oil price to 60$ per barrel which is a comfortable price for US shale oil industry.

Also Strait of Hormuz will be reopened after 1-2 month since the start of hostilities---and by that time Iranian military and infrastructure will be destroyed and Iran will not be a threat anymore

2) Iran will launch 2500 ballistic missiles doing some damage that Americans can tolerate--but US bombing campaign against Iranian infrastructure will do unbearable damage to Iran

By bombing Iran and destroying its infrastructure they can weaken Iran to the point when Iran will be unable to maintain its sphere of influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.---*AND THIS IS THE MAJOR GOAL*

Iran will be so weakened by massive bombing campaign, destruction of critical infrastructure and massive sanctions, that its sphere of influence throughout Middle East and its ability to threaten Arabian peninsula will collapse ...In addition they can destroy nuclear infrastructure.

Iranian response in the Strait of hormuz (that will be reopened after 1-2 month) will be insignificant to global economy in *current circumstances.*

The game has changed and this recession and lack of global demand for oil is a very dangerous time for Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

GWXP said:


> Iran's major deterrence against US attack throughout decades ---was its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and do substantial damage to global economy---BUT RIGHT NOW AS GLOBAL ECONOMY IS IN RECESSION AND OIL MARKET IS OVERSUPPLIED-- *THIS MEAN OF DETERRENCE WON'T WORK*
> 
> 3 month from now, pandemic will probably stop and all oil storage facilities in the world will be filled with oil
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/busines...0-a-barrel-as-world-runs-out-of-storage-space
> 
> Current situation is different, and US can calculate that they can attack Iran in order to: 1) destroy its infrastructure and weaken its economy 2)destroy its nuclear program
> 
> How will Iran respond?
> 
> 1) Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and attack Saudi oil infrastructure-----but currently, oil market is oversupplied by 25mln barrels of oil per day----loss of 21mln barrels of oil per day from the Persian Gulf will bring *balance to the oil market* and will increase oil price to 60$ per barrel which is a comfortable price for US shale oil industry.
> 
> Also Strait of Hormuz will be reopened after 1-2 month since the start of hostilities---and by that time Iranian military and infrastructure will be destroyed and Iran will not be a threat anymore
> 
> 2) Iran will launch 2500 ballistic missiles doing some damage that Americans can tolerate--but US bombing campaign against Iranian infrastructure will do unbearable damage to Iran
> 
> By bombing Iran and destroying its infrastructure they can weaken Iran to the point when Iran will be unable to maintain its sphere of influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.---*AND THIS IS THE MAJOR GOAL*
> 
> Iran will be so weakened by massive bombing campaign, destruction of critical infrastructure and massive sanctions, that its sphere of influence throughout Middle East and its ability to threaten Arabian peninsula will collapse ...In addition they can destroy nuclear infrastructure.
> 
> Iranian response in the Strait of hormuz (that will be reopened after 1-2 month) will be insignificant to global economy in *current circumstances.*
> 
> The game has changed and this recession and lack of global demand for oil is a very dangerous time for Iran.



Wishful thinking of a dying emperor. Continue wishing, there is no harm in wishing. You create your own hypothetical battlefield, let it go the way you want and win the way you want, but one thing is sure, in real battle no body will follow your script.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

GWXP said:


> Iran's major deterrence against US attack throughout decades ---was its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and do substantial damage to global economy---BUT RIGHT NOW AS GLOBAL ECONOMY IS IN RECESSION AND OIL MARKET IS OVERSUPPLIED-- *THIS MEAN OF DETERRENCE WON'T WORK*
> 
> 3 month from now, pandemic will probably stop and all oil storage facilities in the world will be filled with oil
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/busines...0-a-barrel-as-world-runs-out-of-storage-space
> 
> Current situation is different, and US can calculate that they can attack Iran in order to: 1) destroy its infrastructure and weaken its economy 2)destroy its nuclear program
> 
> How will Iran respond?
> 
> 1) Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and attack Saudi oil infrastructure-----but currently, oil market is oversupplied by 25mln barrels of oil per day----loss of 21mln barrels of oil per day from the Persian Gulf will bring *balance to the oil market* and will increase oil price to 60$ per barrel which is a comfortable price for US shale oil industry.
> 
> Also Strait of Hormuz will be reopened after 1-2 month since the start of hostilities---and by that time Iranian military and infrastructure will be destroyed and Iran will not be a threat anymore
> 
> 2) Iran will launch 2500 ballistic missiles doing some damage that Americans can tolerate--but US bombing campaign against Iranian infrastructure will do unbearable damage to Iran
> 
> By bombing Iran and destroying its infrastructure they can weaken Iran to the point when Iran will be unable to maintain its sphere of influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.---*AND THIS IS THE MAJOR GOAL*
> 
> Iran will be so weakened by massive bombing campaign, destruction of critical infrastructure and massive sanctions, that its sphere of influence throughout Middle East and its ability to threaten Arabian peninsula will collapse ...In addition they can destroy nuclear infrastructure.
> 
> Iranian response in the Strait of hormuz (that will be reopened after 1-2 month) will be insignificant to global economy in *current circumstances.*
> 
> The game has changed and this recession and lack of global demand for oil is a very dangerous time for Iran.


why we do that when we can hit Washington it self


----------



## GWXP

skyshadow said:


> why we do that when we can hit Washington it self


how? you have nukes or ICBM?


----------



## skyshadow

GWXP said:


> how? you have nukes or ICBM?


ICBM it is, we are not crazy to use nukes the only way we can hit US and put fear in there harts is to not use nukes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> They were going to “kick out” US out of Middle East. Now US deploying patriots in Iraq. They ain’t going anywhere.


Outside of Iran's opinions, US military IS reducing its footprint in the ME, because it has to dedicate alot and prepare for China. US wants to leave Afghnanistan. US military is also currently exhausted, due to multiple, sustained conflicts....i believe you only really look at the US military ON THE SURFACE. Deep down, everyhting isnt as good as it looks, and if u cant deduce that, then just wait for the evidence, we will get it soon. 

We know the US is afraid to strike Iran. that is clear today, because the US wont be able to do it cost free. hmm hmm..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

US will not risk attacking Iran, no, they won't do it. US will attack those that don't have potent strike force to hit them back. They attack only military with rusty riffles and IEDs, even with that they still struggles with them for years. They are likely to turn their aggression on PMU but if Iran arms PMU with air defenses they won't try. Air power is all they have and if their FF jets can't go on rampage they are doom.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran is so powerful with its integrated air defense system that the USA and its allies will bite the dust !! So the scenarios that the USA will crush Iran are in Hollywood films, not in real life !! There are people here on this forum who like Hollywood movies

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*@**RadarGudumluMuhimmat*


----------



## Oldman1

IAm said:


> And what happen to the CIA commander incharge of the ME? You can even announce his death, Gen Soleimani was baried with dignity and honor.



What CIA commander? Is there such a thing?



Shawnee said:


> Trump does not have the support of Americans to start another war in ME in the worst two weeks of Coronavirus.
> 
> Mullahs in Iran will like this war more.
> 
> 
> 
> WWII was a Pyrrhic victory for UK but it was the best available choice. Better than loss.
> 
> Trump tweet got lost in Coronavirus news. CNN has not even mentioned it. It would be headline last month.



The Mullahs have their own problems with the virus.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> There it is again, this misguided idea that somehow the bombing of Iran will be as easy at it was in Afghanistan or Iraq. I guess all of Iran's military advancements and strategic military planning are for naught....
> 
> Long story short, it truly does remain to be seen how this conflict will play out when it comes down to blows. We don't know how much of a beating the U.S. is willing to take and how much Iran can endure. Also it's does bear repeating that American armed forces aren't fighting against a smaller lightly armed groups with limited hardware. Iran has a large arsenal that is well-protected and widespread ready to fire on military assets for quite some time with deadly accuracy and massive destructive power. The casualties for U.S. forces in the Middle East, especially in Iraq will be in the thousands within the first dew days if not hours. Moreover, Iran already knows it will get the brunt of the damage in such a conflict has accepted this.
> 
> This isn't a 'been there, done that' type of deal Oldman1, especially given the current healthcare crisis due to COVID-19 happening stateside.



Bombing Iran is the easy part, ending the war is the hard one. The question is how long would Iran want to deal with this when they start another aggression to try to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. Launch more ballistic missiles in hopes U.S. won't respond? Take the casualties and leave?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Oldman1 said:


> What CIA commander? Is there such a thing?
> 
> 
> 
> The Mullahs have their own problems with the virus.
> 
> 
> 
> Bombing Iran is the easy part, ending the war is the hard one. The question is how long would Iran want to deal with this when they start another aggression to try to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. Launch more ballistic missiles in hopes U.S. won't respond? Take the casualties and leave?



Bombing anyone is the easy part. The key is what is next. U.S has never bombed Iran before. If the U.S does some bombing of something in Iran, even a very limited one, Iran has to respond in order to prevent the deterrence from being lost. Exactly how the Americans viewed their deterrence factor being lost before the assassination of sardar Soleimani. Post bombing, they feel they have recovered some form of deterrence.

If the U.S decides for whatever reason to attack Iran even in a limited fashion, they have to be prepared to deal with real retaliation this time in order for deterrence to be reserved on both sides. It's important for both sides to keep deterrence in order for peace to have a chance.


----------



## Aramagedon

Oldman1 said:


> What CIA commander? Is there such a thing?
> 
> 
> 
> The Mullahs have their own problems with the virus.
> 
> 
> 
> Bombing Iran is the easy part, ending the war is the hard one. The question is how long would Iran want to deal with this when they start another aggression to try to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. Launch more ballistic missiles in hopes U.S. won't respond? Take the casualties and leave?


Iran is the most successful country battling your made virus while your banana republic is the weakest state battling coronavirus:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Stryker1982 said:


> Bombing anyone is the easy part. The key is what is next. U.S has never bombed Iran before. If the U.S does some bombing of something in Iran, even a very limited one, Iran has to respond in order to prevent the deterrence from being lost. Exactly how the Americans viewed their deterrence factor being lost before the assassination of sardar Soleimani. Post bombing, they feel they have recovered some form of deterrence.
> 
> If the U.S decides for whatever reason to attack Iran even in a limited fashion, they have to be prepared to deal with real retaliation this time in order for deterrence to be reserved on both sides. It's important for both sides to keep deterrence in order for peace to have a chance.



We did bomb Iran, Operation Praying Mantis, Iran had enough of that. Iran knows the consequences.



Aramagedon said:


> Iran is the most successful country battling your made virus while your banana republic is the weakest state battling coronavirus:
> 
> View attachment 623124



Now you are just reaching.


----------



## Stryker1982

Oldman1 said:


> We did bomb Iran, Operation Praying Mantis, Iran had enough of that. Iran knows the consequences.



Using the 1980's as a sample for 2020 is simply gross negligence on your part. No military commander in the world is going to make decisions and plans based on events that took place nearly 40 years ago. The fact that you'd even use that as a piece of evidence, especially considering Iran was already in a major war with Saddam's Iraq is really ignorant and not even worth arguing about.

Are you going to use the Korean war now as an example of how the U.S Military can defeat China? Or will you be rational and observe changes over 40 years, emerging geopolitical factors, technological changes, weapon acquisitions, military preparations (on both sides). 

Iran was never going to open a two front war, and not because it didn't have the AshCMs to punish the U.S navy in the 80's. Using my same point you can even say, U.S is much more capable than the 80s' at intercepting AshCm's but it seems like you are still stuck in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

Stryker1982 said:


> Using the 1980's as a sample for 2020 is simply gross negligence on your part. No military commander in the world is going to make decisions and plans based on events that took place nearly 40 years ago. The fact that you'd even use that as a piece of evidence, especially considering Iran was already in a major war with Saddam's Iraq is really ignorant and not even worth arguing about.
> 
> Are you going to use the Korean war now as an example of how the U.S Military can defeat China? Or will you be rational and observe changes over 40 years, emerging geopolitical factors, technological changes, weapon acquisitions, military preparations (on both sides).
> 
> Iran was never going to open a two front war, and not because it didn't have the AshCMs to punish the U.S navy in the 80's. Using my same point you can even say, U.S is much more capable than the 80s' at intercepting AshCm's but it seems like you are still stuck in the past.



Using the Millennium Challenge 2002 would be a gross negligence on your part then and for many Iranian posters.


----------



## Raghfarm007

Oldman1 said:


> We did bomb Iran, Operation Praying Mantis, Iran had enough of that. Iran knows the consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are just reaching.



What are you fuktarded.... or just an Ameritard....forgot what happened 3 months ago already??


----------



## Oldman1

Raghfarm007 said:


> What are you fuktarded.... or just an Ameritard....forgot what happened 3 months ago already??



You forgot what happened to your general. Remember the consequences.


----------



## IAm

Oldman1 said:


> You forgot what happened to your general. Remember the consequences.


And you've forgotten what happen to *Michael D'Andrea, *the CIA Commander in-charge ME whose death you can't even announce. Remember the consequences. Remember your junk air defenses you so trust could not intercept a single Iranian missile. You aegis, patriot and thaad will be put to actual test and a single failure will spill the blood of 1000s of US soldiers into the sea and their fresh serve as lunch for the fishes, since the US is "wise" enough to put 5000 soldiers in one vessel to go and face Iranian AshCM/BM.



Oldman1 said:


> What CIA commander? Is there such a thing?


The CIA commander in-charge of the ME, *Michael D'Andrea *was killed together with his lieutenants, but US hid its to save face. You can show me evidence that Michael D'Andrea is still alive to prove me wrong and I will humbly accept it.


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> What CIA commander? Is there such a thing?
> 
> 
> 
> The Mullahs have their own problems with the virus.
> 
> 
> 
> Bombing Iran is the easy part, ending the war is the hard one. The question is how long would Iran want to deal with this when they start another aggression to try to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. Launch more ballistic missiles in hopes U.S. won't respond? Take the casualties and leave?



Again, you seem to be completely glossing over the fact that Iran has overtly accepted that it will take substantial losses in any future confrontation with U.S. armed forces. What we really should be questioning is America's tolerance for casualties in the modern era against an opponent more than capable of literally obliterating thousands of U.S. soldiers within the hour along with many mission critical infrastructures/assets that can't be easily replaced overnight being destroyed outright. These are the sorts of casualties Americans haven't seen in decades and it would be remiss not to bring up this potential reality, how is it going to look when Trump has to explain to the nation that 1,000s in the span of days have been killed? U.S.A has had an overall abysmal response to a measly virus since our president didn't take it seriously on the onset thinking this was all some conspiracy to _'sabotage' _his re-election campaign. I guess adding a war on top of that crap-cake would be fitting given all the bullshit that has happened thus far, his administration can *surely* handle Iran....

Also on your point about Soleimani's murder--The Trump's administrations reckless decision to kill Soleimani hasn't deterred Iran whatsoever and has in-turn upped Iran's resolve severely. Too bad those U.S. soldiers in Iraq have to used as sacrificial lambs all because Zionist Trump can't negotiate in earnest with the Iranians due to his unwavering love for Israel and want to be some sort of woeful _'tough guy'. _

Also i'll go ahead and say it since it seems not many people PDF want to acknowledge this but Trump exhibits what can quite easily be interpreted as a genuine hatred for Iran. His actions, words and policies are way over-the-top for someone in the self-entitled _'world leader'_ position and has only brought the prestige of America down due to his insufferable ego. Reprehensible in stature, contemptible as a person, Trump is a pretty good representative for what America has been for some time now; A bully who thinks its own shit doesn't stink.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Oldman1 said:


> We did bomb Iran, Operation Praying Manti



You see you try to hide facts

And what did Iran do after you attack us in 1980s ?? 

The only stupid person here is you trying to hide facts.

We attack your war ship immediately after that 

Search For *USS Samuel B. Roberts(FFG-58)*







You see retard every attack U.S curried out against IRIran in 1980s were answered back with twice more 

Even attack on Iran passenger plane was answered back 
Search the word *Lockerbie *
Which all investigators found the Lydia men innocent


So when would you American learning

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Oldman1 said:


> You forgot what happened to your general. Remember the consequences.



You seem to be too Ameritard to undrestand what consequence means..... as a consequence of your state terrorism.... you got plouged by Iranian missiles.... and hid the damage to save face..... it´s not Iran that has shown fear of attacking your terrorist armed forces, its your child murdering forces that showed they have total fear of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bokhari

GWXP said:


> Iran's major deterrence against US attack throughout decades ---was its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and do substantial damage to global economy---BUT RIGHT NOW AS GLOBAL ECONOMY IS IN RECESSION AND OIL MARKET IS OVERSUPPLIED-- *THIS MEAN OF DETERRENCE WON'T WORK*
> 
> 3 month from now, pandemic will probably stop and all oil storage facilities in the world will be filled with oil
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/busines...0-a-barrel-as-world-runs-out-of-storage-space
> 
> Current situation is different, and US can calculate that they can attack Iran in order to: 1) destroy its infrastructure and weaken its economy 2)destroy its nuclear program
> 
> How will Iran respond?
> 
> 1) Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and attack Saudi oil infrastructure-----but currently, oil market is oversupplied by 25mln barrels of oil per day----loss of 21mln barrels of oil per day from the Persian Gulf will bring *balance to the oil market* and will increase oil price to 60$ per barrel which is a comfortable price for US shale oil industry.
> 
> Also Strait of Hormuz will be reopened after 1-2 month since the start of hostilities---and by that time Iranian military and infrastructure will be destroyed and Iran will not be a threat anymore
> 
> 2) Iran will launch 2500 ballistic missiles doing some damage that Americans can tolerate--but US bombing campaign against Iranian infrastructure will do unbearable damage to Iran
> 
> By bombing Iran and destroying its infrastructure they can weaken Iran to the point when Iran will be unable to maintain its sphere of influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.---*AND THIS IS THE MAJOR GOAL*
> 
> Iran will be so weakened by massive bombing campaign, destruction of critical infrastructure and massive sanctions, that its sphere of influence throughout Middle East and its ability to threaten Arabian peninsula will collapse ...In addition they can destroy nuclear infrastructure.
> 
> Iranian response in the Strait of hormuz (that will be reopened after 1-2 month) will be insignificant to global economy in *current circumstances.*
> 
> The game has changed and this recession and lack of global demand for oil is a very dangerous time for Iran.


Highly one sided assessment of the situation. First Iran missiles are at least 100,000 plus secondly other than closing Hormuz and hitting oil they can hit all major us bases in region killing their soldiers along with hitting Israel and killing us troops in Syria. In addition us ships in region would be hit with anti ship missiles. Us strikes can be intercepted by AD secondly overall this thought of USA attack at this time is flawed as the military along with international environment including key USA allies does not suit such operations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

You have to be disconnected to think that the US will bomb facilitate Iran by achieving its objectives. It should be remembered that Iran is part of the club of the 5 biggest power in air defense system of the world !!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

yavar said:


> Even attack on Iran passenger plane was answered back
> Search the word *Lockerbie *
> Which all investigators found the Lydia men innocent


had nothing to do with Iran


----------



## Stryker1982

Oldman1 said:


> Using the Millennium Challenge 2002 would be a gross negligence on your part then and for many Iranian posters.



I never mentioned the Millennium Challenge in my post at all because I know that things have changed over that time period which is the exact point I am trying to make with you.


----------



## Kastor

Oldman1 said:


> We did bomb Iran, Operation Praying Mantis, Iran had enough of that. Iran knows the consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are just reaching.


That was then.....this is now, they have some very nice hardware waiting to see action if you dare try that again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Meanwhile in Iran, we are still abiding by the nuclear deal while maximum pressure is applied on us...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1249757273821495297

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1224837073825300482

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

Kastor said:


> That was then.....this is now, they have some very nice hardware waiting to see action if you dare try that again.



Try to sink one of our ships and see what happens. We dare you to try that again.



Raghfarm007 said:


> You seem to be too Ameritard to undrestand what consequence means..... as a consequence of your state terrorism.... you got plouged by Iranian missiles.... and hid the damage to save face..... it´s not Iran that has shown fear of attacking your terrorist armed forces, its your child murdering forces that showed they have total fear of Iran.



You seem really dumb. You didn't understand the consequences of your actions that led to your general's death when your leader tweeted on the President's twitter saying you can't do anything after attacking our embassy. You are starting to forget what happened on Operation Praying Mantis. You really are.



IAm said:


> And you've forgotten what happen to *Michael D'Andrea, *the CIA Commander in-charge ME whose death you can't even announce. Remember the consequences. Remember your junk air defenses you so trust could not intercept a single Iranian missile. You aegis, patriot and thaad will be put to actual test and a single failure will spill the blood of 1000s of US soldiers into the sea and their fresh serve as lunch for the fishes, since the US is "wise" enough to put 5000 soldiers in one vessel to go and face Iranian AshCM/BM.
> 
> 
> The CIA commander in-charge of the ME, *Michael D'Andrea *was killed together with his lieutenants, but US hid its to save face. You can show me evidence that Michael D'Andrea is still alive to prove me wrong and I will humbly accept it.



 You believe that BS?



BlueInGreen2 said:


> Again, you seem to be completely glossing over the fact that Iran has overtly accepted that it will take substantial losses in any future confrontation with U.S. armed forces. What we really should be questioning is America's tolerance for casualties in the modern era against an opponent more than capable of literally obliterating thousands of U.S. soldiers within the hour along with many mission critical infrastructures/assets that can't be easily replaced overnight being destroyed outright. These are the sorts of casualties Americans haven't seen in decades and it would be remiss not to bring up this potential reality, how is it going to look when Trump has to explain to the nation that 1,000s in the span of days have been killed? U.S.A has had an overall abysmal response to a measly virus since our president didn't take it seriously on the onset thinking this was all some conspiracy to _'sabotage' _his re-election campaign. I guess adding a war on top of that crap-cake would be fitting given all the bullshit that has happened thus far, his administration can *surely* handle Iran....
> 
> Also on your point about Soleimani's murder--The Trump's administrations reckless decision to kill Soleimani hasn't deterred Iran whatsoever and has in-turn upped Iran's resolve severely. Too bad those U.S. soldiers in Iraq have to used as sacrificial lambs all because Zionist Trump can't negotiate in earnest with the Iranians due to his unwavering love for Israel and want to be some sort of woeful _'tough guy'. _
> 
> Also i'll go ahead and say it since it seems not many people PDF want to acknowledge this but Trump exhibits what can quite easily be interpreted as a genuine hatred for Iran. His actions, words and policies are way over-the-top for someone in the self-entitled _'world leader'_ position and has only brought the prestige of America down due to his insufferable ego. Reprehensible in stature, contemptible as a person, Trump is a pretty good representative for what America has been for some time now; A bully who thinks its own shit doesn't stink.



No you should be questioning about Iran's ability to accept such substantial losses because you saw them fire missiles and didn't killed anyone over the death of their heroic general for many years. Equivalent to killing General MacArthur of his time. That should be enough to go to war over. Iran will have to explain that. Perhaps Iran is not willing to go to war over him that could lead to Iran's destruction.


----------



## Raghfarm007

Yeappp..... Ameritard to the core...... why talk about Opeartion Praying Mantis of 40 years ago, when Iran was preoccupied in war with Iraq.... when you can talk about Iranian missiles ploughing American air base 3 months ago...... maybe we should talk about the American civil war.... if you are so keen on bringing up irrelavent hisory.....

You got fked.... and your retarded Presidents threats of attacking 52 targets didn´t scare Iran.... but Iran´s threat of taking out all US sites in the region made you crap yourselves.... truth hurts when you live a lie.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ashool

Oldman1 said:


> Try to sink one of our ships and see what happens. We dare you to try that again.
> 
> 
> 
> You seem really dumb. You didn't understand the consequences of your actions that led to your general's death when your leader tweeted on the President's twitter saying you can't do anything after attacking our embassy. You are starting to forget what happened on Operation Praying Mantis. You really are.
> 
> 
> 
> You believe that BS?
> 
> 
> 
> No you should be questioning about Iran's ability to accept such substantial losses because you saw them fire missiles and didn't killed anyone over the death of their heroic general for many years. Equivalent to killing General MacArthur of his time. That should be enough to go to war over. Iran will have to explain that. Perhaps Iran is not willing to go to war over him that could lead to Iran's destruction.


oh brave us marine like that insect who cry like wh ore when irig arrest them in PERSIAN GULF lol go wash yourself and then come back dont forget al asad who came vertically cam back horizontally and have soft brain damage


----------



## Blue In Green

Oldman1 said:


> Try to sink one of our ships and see what happens. We dare you to try that again.
> 
> 
> 
> You seem really dumb. You didn't understand the consequences of your actions that led to your general's death when your leader tweeted on the President's twitter saying you can't do anything after attacking our embassy. You are starting to forget what happened on Operation Praying Mantis. You really are.
> 
> 
> 
> You believe that BS?
> 
> 
> 
> No you should be questioning about Iran's ability to accept such substantial losses because you saw them fire missiles and didn't killed anyone over the death of their heroic general for many years. Equivalent to killing General MacArthur of his time. That should be enough to go to war over. Iran will have to explain that. Perhaps Iran is not willing to go to war over him that could lead to Iran's destruction.



I don't and won't have to be questioning anything, America is the one who will have to be dealing with a nation that is willing to take it as far as it needs to go. So far America has been quite reluctant in striking Iranian soil whilst over the years the Iranians have killed 1,000s of American GI's and American mercenaries the region over all the while ruining American plans for regional domination for well over two decades now. Just because the U.S armed forces decides to bring in some measly Patriots into Iraq doesn't mean U.S. now has total Carte Blanche to do what it wants in Iraq completely unabated. Those Patriots really won't help if Iran decides to destroy them and the bases they protect btw, just an FYI.

There does indeed seem to be a certain limit to what the PMUs which are an *official* part of the Iraqi military and Iranian forces are willing to take before more severe responses, possibility leading to full-blown open warfare, are decided upon. For Iran that red line is quite open and crystal clear; if Iranian soil is attacked by America then it's gloves off. During the attack on Ayn Al-Assad, several more waves of missiles (ranging in the hundreds of BMs) were already prepared and ready to go if the U.S. military were to retaliate against Iranian assets on Iranian soil (guess what didn't happen?). To me and many others this is a sign that Iran has overtly accepted, like I elucidated before, its willingness to take whatever losses in order to protect the Iranian homeland. To make myself even more clear, and further delineate upon what it is I'm trying to get across to you. Iran most likely can't win an open conflict with American forces if the war lasts for too long, Iran knows that, we know that but they've prepared to engage the U.S. in ways that they can sustain a conflict in. Iran can really hurt American standing in the Middle East if a high-intensity short-duration conflict is initiated but if that drags out Iran will really be feeling the hurt. The United States simply has the bigger economy and pool of resources to use in long form factor engagement, coupled with the larger military, this will lead to a "victory" of some sort. Although that aim is seriously in question since Iran really isn't alone here, it has allies/proxies that have been well equipped and armed can/will create a big problem for the U.S. the region over if they decide to get involved (high likely-hood). That's neither here nor there though....You seem to be insinuating that Iran is afraid of the U.S. and the attack on Ayn Al-Assad was just some hollow face-saving attempt to get back at the U.S. for killing a well respected General. Fair enough, that is your stance, I don't think that is what went down but I respectively have a different perspective on it

P.S.: The purpose of the strike was meant to send a message, don't try and play Mr. Know-it-all and act like you know what the Iranians were thinking when they decided to overtly respond in kind to the murder of Soleimani. Iranian weapons work and are in abundance, ready to go. This much we know now, all that is left if for Iran to weed out the idiots within its command structure that lead to embarrassing events like the Plane downing and other stupid blunders amongst a litany of other issues in lack of professionalism Iran is plagued with.

P.S.S.: Oldman1.....Operation praying Mantis happened quite some time ago, what Iran has now in terms of offensive weaponry completely dwarfs what it had back then (I won't list them off since I don't think you care tbh). If the U.S. sinks 40 Iranian boats (or some other Arbitrary number) then America will be getting the same or more amount of retaliation back. Can't wait to see how Trump or some other sorry U.S. president will explain to the American nation that the Iranians have split in-half dozens of our warships and wiped out dozens of our bases overnight killing and wounded literally thousands in the span of a single night.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

Raghfarm007 said:


> Yeappp..... Ameritard to the core...... why talk about Opeartion Praying Mantis of 40 years ago, when Iran was preoccupied in war with Iraq.... when you can talk about Iranian missiles ploughing American air base 3 months ago...... maybe we should talk about the American civil war.... if you are so keen on bringing up irrelavent hisory.....
> 
> You got fked.... and your retarded Presidents threats of attacking 52 targets didn´t scare Iran.... but Iran´s threat of taking out all US sites in the region made you crap yourselves.... truth hurts when you live a lie.


I bet you he's not even American by birth...probably some Israeli living in the U.S.

This forum is littered with imposters, posing as Iranians and American etc......but they're mostly Israelis or they belong to one of the groups like FDD and UANI....monitoring these forums to glean some info or secret. Either way, no non-iranian would be on our forum without some kind of motive.

Fun fact: I actually got a call from one of them a couple of weeks ago when I outed the Adam Millstein guy.....I like it, let them waste their time and resources on me.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

Kastor said:


> I bet you he's not even American by birth...probably some Israeli living in the U.S.
> 
> This forum is littered with imposters, posing as Iranians and American etc......but they're mostly Israelis or they belong to one of the groups like FDD and UANI....monitoring these forums to glean some info or secret. Either way, no non-iranian would be on our forum without some kind of motive.
> 
> Fun fact: I actually got a call from one of them a couple of weeks ago when I outed the Adam Millstein guy.....I like it, let them waste their time and resources on me.



Whoa!! that's actually eerie man, who was it that you said was Adam Millstein again? They actually called you huh, I wonder what they said. 

Also lol, what's your take on me xD


----------



## TruthHurtz

Kastor said:


> I bet you he's not even American by birth...probably some Israeli living in the U.S.
> 
> This forum is littered with imposters, posing as Iranians and American etc......but they're mostly Israelis or they belong to one of the groups like FDD and UANI....monitoring these forums to glean some info or secret. Either way, no non-iranian would be on our forum without some kind of motive.
> 
> Fun fact: I actually got a call from one of them a couple of weeks ago when I outed the Adam Millstein guy.....I like it, let them waste their time and resources on me.



Explain the Adam Millstein thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

Oldman1 said:


> You believe that BS?


You can only prove it is BS by proving that the CIA commander is still alive. I repeat the CIA commander was kill together with 6 top officials but the US cannot even announce their death. If this is not true, it is easy to disprove. Let him come and say here I am and I will agree that I have believed BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

TruthHurtz said:


> Explain the Adam Millstein thing.



I'm also quite interested in this as well.


----------



## Kastor

Cthulhu is an Israeli agent either officially or with one of the many bullshit groups they operate here in the U.S. , I had suspected this before....but last time the genius posted an Israeli tweet from Adam Millstein (in hebrew to boot) on the coronavirus thread on this forum. If you guys don't know who Millstein is google "The Canary Mission". I jokingly told him tell Adam we know where he lives....a few days later I get a phone call from some guy who said he knew me and told me he met me at an airport, (a supposed real estate agent) and asks me about my job and asks me if I'm still in my title which of course was a mistake because the actual title he used was our official inhouse title that's not on my card....long story short I think they think I'm some kind of an Iranian agent....

PS: the Canary Project is a secret group that targets anti Israel and Palestinian sympathizers, they make up harmful stuff to discredit their target and try to get them fired from Academia or big companies that may impact the Israeli message, ex: impactful companies like FB, twitter, news outlets, and universities.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Blue In Green

Kastor said:


> Cthulhu is an Israeli agent either officially or with one of the many bullshit groups they operate here in the U.S. , I had suspected this before....but last time the genius posted an Israeli tweet from Adam Millstein (in hebrew to boot) on the coronavirus thread on this forum. If you guys don't know who Millstein is google "The Canary Mission". I jokingly told him tell Adam we know where he lives....a few days later I get a phone call from some guy who said he knew me and told me he met me at an airport, (a supposed real estate agent) and asks me about my job and asks me if I'm still in my title which of course was a mistake because the actual title he used was our official inhouse title that's not on my card....long story short I think they think I'm some kind of an Iranian agent....
> 
> PS: the Canary Project is a secret group that targets anti Israel and Palestinian sympathizers, they make up harmful stuff to discredit their target and try to get them fired from Academia or big companies that may impact the Israeli message, ex: impactful companies like FB, twitter, news outlets, and universities.



That's really terrifying, how in the hell did they even get your personal phone number? 

These fucking Israelis and their stooges all over the world are a menace to society I swear...sorry you had to go through that Kastor. Goes to show just how how much of 'enemy' Israel is to anyone that is against their agendas. Keep on the look out man, keep on the look out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Another artificial country that needs to be removed from the map. A country who's foundational pillars are that of terror, while Irans foundational pillars start from Cyrus.


----------



## Cthulhu

Kastor said:


> Cthulhu is an Israeli agent either officially or with one of the many bullshit groups they operate here in the U.S. , I had suspected this before....but last time the genius posted an Israeli tweet from Adam Millstein (in hebrew to boot) on the coronavirus thread on this forum. If you guys don't know who Millstein is google "The Canary Mission". I jokingly told him tell Adam we know where he lives....a few days later I get a phone call from some guy who said he knew me and told me he met me at an airport, (a supposed real estate agent) and asks me about my job and asks me if I'm still in my title which of course was a mistake because the actual title he used was our official inhouse title that's not on my card....long story short I think they think I'm some kind of an Iranian agent....
> 
> PS: the Canary Project is a secret group that targets anti Israel and Palestinian sympathizers, they make up harmful stuff to discredit their target and try to get them fired from Academia or big companies that may impact the Israeli message, ex: impactful companies like FB, twitter, news outlets, and universities.


When you talk about people, You might want to mention them, They might have something to say on this matter. Last time you outed yourself as an idiot here, Wasn't that enough? My question is still unanswered, Explain how you came to the conclusion that i'm an Israeli agent?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

@Oldman1 why ask for Iran to try and sink a US warship when YOU KNOW that in the next conflict US will lose the most ships to Iran that it ever has. EVen US planners know US ships will sink if they are either in the Persian GUlf or near it....dont spew lies and propaganda because of your pride.


----------



## Sina-1

Persian Gulf range: 800 km









Moragheb range: 400 km




۰
https://www.farsnews.ir/news/13990131000158/سامانه-های-راداری-خلیج-فارس-و-مراقب-رونمایی-شد

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Stryker1982

925boy said:


> @Oldman1 why ask for Iran to try and sink a US warship when YOU KNOW that in the next conflict US will lose the most ships to Iran that it ever has. EVen US planners know US ships will sink if they are either in the Persian GUlf or near it....dont spew lies and propaganda because of your pride.



Few hundred AshCM's launched along the coast would do the trick.

I don't know how many AshCM TELs Iran has or how they structure the batteries (4 TEL's per battery, with 2 missiles each? etc..) but Iran would need alot of TEL's manufactured to wipe out the 5th fleet. *A very achievable task with hard work and self-belief. 
*
Bonus points if Iran has Oniks/Yakhont missiles as rumored

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taher 2000



Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1251834362267668483

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## R Wing

Kastor said:


> Cthulhu is an Israeli agent either officially or with one of the many bullshit groups they operate here in the U.S. , I had suspected this before....but last time the genius posted an Israeli tweet from Adam Millstein (in hebrew to boot) on the coronavirus thread on this forum. If you guys don't know who Millstein is google "The Canary Mission". I jokingly told him tell Adam we know where he lives....a few days later I get a phone call from some guy who said he knew me and told me he met me at an airport, (a supposed real estate agent) and asks me about my job and asks me if I'm still in my title which of course was a mistake because the actual title he used was our official inhouse title that's not on my card....long story short I think they think I'm some kind of an Iranian agent....
> 
> PS: the Canary Project is a secret group that targets anti Israel and Palestinian sympathizers, they make up harmful stuff to discredit their target and try to get them fired from Academia or big companies that may impact the Israeli message, ex: impactful companies like FB, twitter, news outlets, and universities.



Pretty effective program --- but I'm glad that their ways are slowly getting exposed. Good on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Moragheb and Merjad-4 seems to be very similar, what's the differences between them?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The diversity of radars in Iran is impressive. It's phenomenal

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Philosopher. said:


> Moragheb and Merjad-4 seems to be very similar, what's the differences between them?


Sometimes i also get confused for iranian designs..

Several radars by Iran uses linear array antennas...

Can anyone explain, whats so much difference among em, meraj was pretty much good design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher. said:


> Moragheb and Merjad-4 seems to be very similar, what's the differences between them?





Shams313 said:


> Sometimes i also get confused for iranian designs..
> 
> Several radars by Iran uses linear array antennas...
> 
> Can anyone explain, whats so much difference among em, meraj was pretty much good design.



*Moragheb radar was the test bed for bigger Meraj radar back then its name was Qamar radar but now with upgraded version coming its name changed from Qamar to Moragheb*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *Moragheb radar was the test bed for bigger Meraj radar back then its name was Qamar radar but now with upgraded version coming its name changed from Qamar to Moragheb*



But Meraj-4 was developed from Qamar. I still don't see what differences this Moragheb has relative to Meraj-4. I know Meraj-4 is an AESA. Perhaps this Moragheb is a cheaper non-AESA system.


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher. said:


> But Meraj-4 was developed from Qamar. I still don't see what differences this Moragheb has relative to Meraj-4. I know Meraj-4 is an AESA. Perhaps this Moragheb is a cheaper non-AESA system.


well Moragheb is less powerful it has even lesser range then Meraj-4 and it can not identify as same amount of target as Meraj-4 can so it is cheaper to buy in exchange it uses less electricity and its more movable

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> well Moragheb is less powerful it has even lesser range then Meraj-4 and it can not identify as same amount of target as Meraj-4 can so it is cheaper to buy in exchange it uses less electricity and its more movable


but both of them have 400km range


----------



## PeeD

Moragheb is a PESA, apparently with TWT.

Irans TWT production quality has reached a point where it has sufficiently long lifetime

Thats why IRIADF has also got itself their Kavosh/Kasta variant that can operate "continuously".

Meraj is a more complex and expensive line-element AESA with solid state amplifiers.

Moragheb can replace TPS-43, in the role of mobile emergency replacement of static radar stations.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> but both of them have 400km range


meraj4 has 450 to 500 km range and it uses alot more energy

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

PeeD said:


> Moragheb is a PESA, apparently with TWT.
> 
> Irans TWT production quality has reached a point where it has sufficiently long lifetime
> 
> Thats why IRIADF has also got itself their Kavosh/Kasta variant that can operate "continuously".
> 
> Meraj is a more complex and expensive line-element AESA with solid state amplifiers.
> 
> Moragheb can replace TPS-43, in the role of mobile emergency replacement of static radar stations.


How do you come to the conclusion that Moragheb is a PESA?


----------



## PeeD

@AmirPatriot 

3D capable (so ESA), no visible cooling and the Meraj-4 which fills the role of an AESA.
In terms of reliability it may would make sense to have an AESA but with a good TWT and limited operation time PESA should be more cost effective.

Another point: IRIADF SSJ is unlikely to have the advanced capabilities of Shiraz electronic industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthHurtz

PeeD said:


> @AmirPatriot
> 
> 3D capable (so ESA), no visible cooling and the Meraj-4 which fills the role of an AESA.
> In terms of reliability it may would make sense to have an AESA but with a good TWT and limited operation time PESA should be more cost effective.
> 
> *Another point: IRIADF SSJ is unlikely to have the advanced capabilities of Shiraz electronic industry.*




???

They don't share resources?


----------



## PeeD

TruthHurtz said:


> ???
> 
> They don't share resources?



They do on subsystem level, like TWT but the overall system is developed independently. Here Shiraz electronic industries is simply way ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Such a beautiful system...
No of missile count per launcher in s350 is remarkable , but i wonder why Iranian design has few missile per launcher...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Shams313 said:


> Such a beautiful system...
> No of missile count per launcher in s350 is remarkable , but i wonder why iran has few missile per launcher...


The 9M96E2 missiles used in this are the same shorter ranged ones developed for the s400,these were intended to be used as a four to one replacement on an s400 tel so they had to be extremely compact and were literally crammed into their launch canisters.The original inspiration for this system was the korean-russian KM-Sam which used only 8 missiles.








When iran began designing the various new sam systems back in the late 2000s it followed the basic design templates that were used on other systems ie usually 4 missiles to a tel,in addition some of these like the 15th khordad and mersad 16 used preexisting airframes that were based on older non canisterised designs,and even with considerable redesign they were still on the larger side.
In short theres no reason why iran couldnt follow the exact same sort of design template as this system,for instance one option would be following the russian approach with the latest buk sams and canisterising the missiles on the 3rd of khordad,as this would potentially give you the option of doubling the sam loadout on the tel by using two rows of missiles ie 6 missiles rather than the current 3.Another option would be to follow the approach used on the s400 and have a shorter ranged missile that could be a 4 to 1 replacement for the existing sam tel loadout.
I`ve no doubt that even as we speak iran is designing the B-373b model with all sorts of upgrades and improvements and I imagine that that would be true of the other sam systems as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

The question is, would you rather have 8 missiles per 1 truck or spread them out and have 4 missiles per 2 trucks, and so on. What do you think is a more survivable system layout? As long as you're providing the same "kill zone" radius, then I'd rather have my missiles spread out.


----------



## Shams313

Philosopher. said:


> The question is, would you rather have 8 missiles per 1 truck or spread them out and have 4 missiles per 2 trucks, and so on. What do you think is a more survivable system layout? As long as you're providing the same "kill zone" radius, then I'd rather have my missiles spread out.


Two separate TELs costs a lot..besides missile system which has mid range and needs rapid response like aginst a squadron of arial threats needs more missiles....

It will take few minutes to empty the whole rounds...

Besides @Sineva said if 3rd khordad manages to carry 3 more missiles in another row it may solve rapid reloading problem as well as higher rounds available to fire. Every trucks costs a lot...


----------



## Philosopher

Shams313 said:


> Two separate TELs costs a lot..



When you're considering factors such as survivability, the cost of the TEL becomes less significant.




> besides missile system which has mid range and needs rapid response like aginst a squadron of arial threats needs more missiles....



We are *not reducing* the number of missiles here, we're simply spreading them out to increase the survivability.





> Besides said if 3rd khordad manages to carry 3 more missiles in another row it may solve rapid reloading problem as well as higher rounds available to fire. Every costs a lot...



The 3rd of Khordad TEL is quite a special one given how compact and mobile it is. My focus is not on it particularly, but generally speaking. But still, you have to ask yourself, why has Iran gone for 3 missiles per 3rd Khordad TEL when it could have gone for more?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

skyshadow said:


> well Moragheb is less powerful it has even lesser range then Meraj-4 and it can not identify as same amount of target as Meraj-4 can so it is cheaper to buy in exchange it uses less electricity and its more movable



Skyshadow, I appreciate you and Peed, Yavyar's knowledge about Iran's air defenses but the guy you're answering most likely lives in Tel Aviv.....so just don't give away anything that's not public.

Also a note to the Iranian defense industry officials and reporters:
stop showing every freaking thing on tv! Stop posting videos and pictures of secret locations and bunkers!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Kastor said:


> Skyshadow, I appreciate you and Peed, Yavyar's knowledge about Iran's air defenses but the guy you're answering most likely lives in Tel Aviv.....so just don't give away anything that's not public.
> 
> Also a note to the Iranian defense industry officials and reporters:
> stop showing every freaking thing on tv! Stop posting videos and pictures of secret locations and bunkers!



Where did you get that idea from that he probably lives in Tel Aviv

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Kastor said:


> Skyshadow, I appreciate you and Peed, Yavyar's knowledge about Iran's air defenses but the guy you're answering most likely lives in Tel Aviv.....so just don't give away anything that's not public.



You're accusing me of living in Tel Aviv?


----------



## Aspen

Sineva said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1251834362267668483



Impressive setup



skyshadow said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1224837073825300482



Look forward to seeing this system get deployed



Philosopher. said:


> The question is, would you rather have 8 missiles per 1 truck or spread them out and have 4 missiles per 2 trucks, and so on. What do you think is a more survivable system layout? As long as you're providing the same "kill zone" radius, then I'd rather have my missiles spread out.



I'd go for 4 missiles 2 trucks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Stryker1982 said:


> Where did you get that idea from that he probably lives in Tel Aviv



Harfe moft mizane. He just popped out of a hole and out of nowhere is making such an accusation. Of course the irony is, he himself apparently lives in the US. In reality anyone here could be not what they claim, but I've been here only for a few months and have dealt with so many Zionists etc that on a daily basis are constantly trying to spread propaganda against Iran. This is whilst people like him are hiding in a hole somewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kastor

Philosopher. said:


> Harfe moft mizane. He just popped out of a hole and out of nowhere is making such an accusation. Of course the irony is, he himself apparently lives in the US. In reality anyone here could be not what they claim, but I've been here only for a few months and have dealt with so many Zionists etc that on a daily basis are constantly trying to spread propaganda against Iran. This is whilst people like him are hiding in a hole somewhere.


I just read an article about Iran's radar, the analyst was in Tel-Aviv, I was making a point not to answer sensitive questions about the Radar systems, range, ops band, comparability etc...if you're offended, I apologize but if you really are Iranian than you will appreciate it.


----------



## Philosopher

Kastor said:


> I just read an article about Iran's radar, the analyst was in Tel-Aviv, I was making a point not to answer sensitive questions about the Radar systems, range, ops band, comparability etc...if you're offended, I apologize but if you really are Iranian than you will appreciate it.



You should not make accusation against specific members, instead talk generally. Specially when you accuse without any real reason. Man khodam chan bar inja ghoftan chiji sensitive post nakonim. Iranians here should already know to use only OSINT informations and not use anything else (assuming they even have access to such a thing). At the end of day, remember you're in a defence forum and people will ask questions. Sometimes I know the answers and I post them, other times I may ask myself.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

ashool said:


> oh brave us marine like that insect who cry like wh ore when irig arrest them in PERSIAN GULF lol go wash yourself and then come back dont forget al asad who came vertically cam back horizontally and have soft brain damage



Don't forget what happened to your navy. Don't need to see the Iranians crying.



BlueInGreen2 said:


> I don't and won't have to be questioning anything, America is the one who will have to be dealing with a nation that is willing to take it as far as it needs to go. So far America has been quite reluctant in striking Iranian soil whilst over the years the Iranians have killed 1,000s of American GI's and American mercenaries the region over all the while ruining American plans for regional domination for well over two decades now. Just because the U.S armed forces decides to bring in some measly Patriots into Iraq doesn't mean U.S. now has total Carte Blanche to do what it wants in Iraq completely unabated. Those Patriots really won't help if Iran decides to destroy them and the bases they protect btw, just an FYI.



And Iran is quite reluctant to strike American soil after killing thousands of Iranians in Syria and Iraq Not even striking back at Israel for the missile attacks against Iranians personnel. Iranian defense system won't help protect them either. It was after the death of your heroic general that you had to strike back, but only to cause no deaths cause you don't want to push it farther than losing your general and the head commander of the PMU.



> There does indeed seem to be a certain limit to what the PMUs which are an *official* part of the Iraqi military and Iranian forces are willing to take before more severe responses, possibility leading to full-blown open warfare, are decided upon. For Iran that red line is quite open and crystal clear; if Iranian soil is attacked by America then it's gloves off. During the attack on Ayn Al-Assad, several more waves of missiles (ranging in the hundreds of BMs) were already prepared and ready to go if the U.S. military were to retaliate against Iranian assets on Iranian soil (guess what didn't happen?). To me and many others this is a sign that Iran has overtly accepted, like I elucidated before, its willingness to take whatever losses in order to protect the Iranian homeland. To make myself even more clear, and further delineate upon what it is I'm trying to get across to you. Iran most likely can't win an open conflict with American forces if the war lasts for too long, Iran knows that, we know that but they've prepared to engage the U.S. in ways that they can sustain a conflict in. Iran can really hurt American standing in the Middle East if a high-intensity short-duration conflict is initiated but if that drags out Iran will really be feeling the hurt. The United States simply has the bigger economy and pool of resources to use in long form factor engagement, coupled with the larger military, this will lead to a "victory" of some sort. Although that aim is seriously in question since Iran really isn't alone here, it has allies/proxies that have been well equipped and armed can/will create a big problem for the U.S. the region over if they decide to get involved (high likely-hood). That's neither here nor there though....You seem to be insinuating that Iran is afraid of the U.S. and the attack on Ayn Al-Assad was just some hollow face-saving attempt to get back at the U.S. for killing a well respected General. Fair enough, that is your stance, I don't think that is what went down but I respectively have a different perspective on it



You know the gloves be off when you decided to start a war with the U.S. and not to mention its allies in the Middle East. Considering how much the Arab states hate Iran, you can bet they will help out. So you have more enemies to deal with.

.



> P.S.S.: Oldman1.....Operation praying Mantis happened quite some time ago, what Iran has now in terms of offensive weaponry completely dwarfs what it had back then (I won't list them off since I don't think you care tbh). If the U.S. sinks 40 Iranian boats (or some other Arbitrary number) then America will be getting the same or more amount of retaliation back. Can't wait to see how Trump or some other sorry U.S. president will explain to the American nation that the Iranians have split in-half dozens of our warships and wiped out dozens of our bases overnight killing and wounded literally thousands in the span of a single night.



Yes Operation Praying Mantis happened long time ago, but you know that the U.S. also increased its offensive weaponry thats different than what you saw in the 80s and 90s. I can tell you that.


----------



## Philosopher

Oldman1 said:


> Don't forget what happened to your navy.



You mean managing to sink a frigate that did not even have a CIWS? I am always amazed with you Americans bringing up something that happened in the 80's, a time when Iran was in middle of a war and it's defence capabilities were not even a fraction of what they are today. As for blasts from the past, how's this for one?

*Millennium Challenge 2002 | U.S. Lost a naval War With Iran 18 years ago*
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millennium-challenge-qassem-soleimani/




> Don't need to see the Iranians crying.



If we look at history, it would appear it is the soldiers of your army that have a tendency of being reduced to tears, I have never seen any Iranian soldier cry out of fear.


----------



## Oldman1

925boy said:


> @Oldman1 why ask for Iran to try and sink a US warship when YOU KNOW that in the next conflict US will lose the most ships to Iran that it ever has. EVen US planners know US ships will sink if they are either in the Persian GUlf or near it....dont spew lies and propaganda because of your pride.



The U.S. won't get the ships close to Iran's anti ship missiles you should know that if you were in U.S. Navy's shoes. What would you do if you were commanding the U.S. Fifth Fleet? And Iran losing ships is more significant because they have a smaller navy.



Philosopher. said:


> You mean managing to sink a frigate that did not even have a CIWS? I always amazed with you Americans bring up something that happened in the 80's, a time when Iran was in middle of a war and it's defence capabilities were all imports and not even a fraction of what they are today. As for blasts from the past, how's this for one?
> 
> *Millennium Challenge 2002 | U.S. Lost a naval War With Iran 18 years ago*
> https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millennium-challenge-qassem-soleimani/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we look at history, it would appear it is the soldiers of your army that have a tendency of being reduced to tears, I have never seen any Iranian soldier cry out of fear.



Exactly, in Operation Praying Mantis you never saw any Iranian cry out of fear. Because they couldn't.


----------



## Philosopher

Oldman1 said:


> Exactly, in Operation Praying Mantis you never saw any Iranian cry out of fear. Because they couldn't.



The point is not where they could or not, it's whether they would. Hence my original statement that crying seems to be the forte of your combatants.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Oldman1 said:


> Don't forget what happened to your navy. Don't need to see the Iranians crying.



~ 40mln people on food stamps
~ 30mln without health insurance
> 1mln infected with the covid-19 virus

mind your own business, you have enough problems at home


----------



## Oldman1

Philosopher. said:


> The point is not where they could or not, it's whether they would. Hence my original statement that crying seems to be the forte of your combatants.



So your Iranians soldiers never cried or died or taken prison?



Draco.IMF said:


> ~ 40mln people on food stamps
> ~ 30mln without health insurance
> > 1mln infected with the covid-19 virus
> 
> mind your own business, you have enough problems at home



Indeed, Iran does have enough problems at home.


----------



## Philosopher

Oldman1 said:


> So your Iranians soldiers never cried or died or taken prison?



Being taken prisoner and dying does not relate to your specific comment on crying. No, I have not seen an Iranian soldier crying when they were taken prisoners.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

IAm said:


> You can only prove it is BS by proving that the CIA commander is still alive. I repeat the CIA commander was kill together with 6 top officials but the US cannot even announce their death. If this is not true, it is easy to disprove. Let him come and say here I am and I will agree that I have believed BS.



You guys used an actor from Zero Dark Thirty as proof that the Iranians assassinated him.



Philosopher. said:


> Being taken prisoner and dying does not relate to your specific comment on crying. No, I have not seen an Iranian soldier crying when they were taken prisoners.



So no Iranian soldier would ever cry in war or conflict? I'm impressed.


----------



## Philosopher

Oldman1 said:


> So no Iranian soldier would ever cry in war or conflict? I'm impressed.



Different cultures. In Iran, martyrdom is something to be proud of, in your army, well, even being captured is enough for garments to be ruined. I suppose I should not be surprised that you cannot comprehend this difference, after all, you're from the same land as those troops.

Anyway, this thread is about *Iranian air defence*. Shall we not take it off topic further? If you want to compare tear production, feel free to continue in the appropriate thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Philosopher. said:


> Different cultures. In Iran, martyrdom is something to be proud of, in your army, well, even being captured is enough for garments to be ruined. I suppose I should not be surprised that you cannot comprehend this difference, after all, you're from the same land as those troops.
> 
> Anyway, this thread about is Iranian air defence. Shall we not take it off topic? If you want to compare tear production, feel free to continue in the appropriate thread.



But I'm curious why the Iranians who embraced martyrdom be captured as prisoners of war then? Thats a contradiction. Shouldn't they be proud to die?


----------



## Philosopher

Oldman1 said:


> But I'm curious why the Iranians who embraced martyrdom be captured as prisoners of war then? Thats a contradiction. Shouldn't they be proud to die?



*


> Anyway, this thread is about *Iranian air defence*. Shall we not take it off topic further? If you want to compare tear production, feel free to continue in the appropriate thread.


----------



## Beny Karachun

Philosopher. said:


> You mean managing to sink a frigate that did not even have a CIWS? I am always amazed with you Americans bringing up something that happened in the 80's, a time when Iran was in middle of a war and it's defence capabilities were not even a fraction of what they are today. As for blasts from the past, how's this for one?
> 
> *Millennium Challenge 2002 | U.S. Lost a naval War With Iran 18 years ago*
> https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a30392654/millennium-challenge-qassem-soleimani/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we look at history, it would appear it is the soldiers of your army that have a tendency of being reduced to tears, I have never seen any Iranian soldier cry out of fear.


No CIWS will help you.
You literally cited a military simulation, no battle has occured.

Iranians don't cry because they're dead.
The man probably has a family and was afraid, if he was killed you were all dead there in Iran.


----------



## zartosht

Kastor said:


> Skyshadow, I appreciate you and Peed, Yavyar's knowledge about Iran's air defenses but the guy you're answering most likely lives in Tel Aviv.....so just don't give away anything that's not public.
> 
> Also a note to the Iranian defense industry officials and reporters:
> stop showing every freaking thing on tv! Stop posting videos and pictures of secret locations and bunkers!



Iranians are masters of knowing what to reveal and what not to reveal.

people shouldn't think that as soon as something gets made, it immidiatly goes on tv for everyone to see.... Iran just put out a military satellite with zero notice... a project that takes a decade~

its a balance.. you need to show enough so that your enemies know you can defend yourself. and doesn't miscalculate itself into a war that both sides will lose.

but you don't want to show everything. you definitely want to keep some of your high end equipment a secret/surprise.. 

throwing in a couple of bluffs like qaher here and there actually serves a purpose as well.. to throw the enemy off guard... I firmly believe that a lot of calculation goes behind exactly what Iran reveals.. don't underestimate Iranian planners and think someone on an internet forum can give away state secrets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Beny Karachun said:


> No CIWS will help you.



I have quoted you in another thread. You're taking this thread off topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

Beny Karachun said:


> No CIWS will help you.
> You literally cited a military simulation, no battle has occured.
> 
> Iranians don't cry because they're dead.
> The man probably has a family and was afraid, if he was killed you were all dead there in Iran.



Yeah the most expensive and complex simulation in history. That ended up being rigged against the OpFor to make US military planners feel better.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

Beny Karachun said:


> You literally cited a military simulation, no battle has occured.



You vastly underestimate the importance of simulations. Sophisticated companies and nations use simulations all time as means for determining an imitation of an event. Most high-level decisions are made due to the results of simulations whether it is in manufacturing or warfare. 

But I don't expect you to understand what simulations are given your biases.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Beny Karachun said:


> The US has also simulated destroying the whole Iranian navy and airforce and bombing the hell out of Iran. Would you believe that simulation?



Yes of course. As long as all the appropriate parameters are there and not manipulated for political reasons. And every U.S simulation has political oriented inaccuracies. No known proper simulation like the Van ripper one exists.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Beny Karachun said:


> The US has also simulated destroying the whole Iranian navy and airforce and bombing the hell out of Iran. Would you believe that simulation? Simulations are only important when Iran wins, when the US wins, only then you agree that it's just a simulation.
> 
> 
> Ok cuck


seems like some one is up early for his job. you guys are committed to your job don't you??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Mithridates said:


> seems like some one is up early for his job. you guys are committed to your job don't you??


I didn't wake up lmao


----------



## Mithridates

Beny Karachun said:


> I didn't wake up lmao


Still, you work up to 4AM. it's impressive. how is the money??



Beny Karachun said:


> I didn't wake up lmao


Still, you work up to 4AM. it's impressive. how is the money??

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## LeGenD

@Beny Karachun

Please do not post offensive remarks.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259098573855227904

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259098573855227904


it's more likely an additional antenna.....maybe an iff system..............


----------



## Draco.IMF

DoubleYouSee said:


> it's more likely an additional antenna.....maybe an iff system..............



looks like an electrooptic sensor






I dont know if its exact the same system but it looks similar:







__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259194321464635393

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Blue In Green

What sort of capabilities does the EO sensor allow a SAM to have?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

BlueInGreen2 said:


> What sort of capabilities does the EO sensor allow a SAM to have?



one of its capabilities is passive detection = not traceable by anti radiation missiles/enemy radars...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> one of its capabilities is passive detection = not traceable by anti radiation missiles/enemy radars...



Also allows easier detection of Low RCS aircraft that radar may filter out as noise.

After all RQ-170 was likely found by irregularities in radar readings which was then confirmed via optical data as we saw in its capture video.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Aspen

Draco.IMF said:


> one of its capabilities is passive detection = not traceable by anti radiation missiles/enemy radars...



Thanks for the info

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

wonder why not put it on Bavar and 15th Khordad ,after all 3rd of Khoedad , 15th Khordad and Bavar-373 are future of our airdefense system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder why not put it on Bavar and 15th Khordad ,after all 3rd of Khoedad , 15th Khordad and Bavar-373 are future of our airdefense system


3rd khordad like assasin, need to be well equiped...
Others r like fighter or tanks to defend...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> 3rd khordad like assasin, need to be well equiped...
> Others r like fighter or tanks to defend...


nonsense back bone of our Airdefense would be Bavar-373 , it would be complemented with 3rd of Khordad and 15th of Khordad and for short range Tor-M1 and Oghab after it become ready
for oghab they probably use this




Bavar and 15th Khordad are long range system that certainly will benefit from this

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder why not put it on Bavar and 15th Khordad ,after all 3rd of Khoedad , 15th Khordad and Bavar-373 are future of our airdefense system


For something like the bavar 373 and possibly the 15th of khordad they`d probably use a separate dedicated optronic system,something similar to the Raad 1 and 2,tho its range is shorter than radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> wonder why not put it on Bavar and 15th Khordad ,after all 3rd of Khoedad , 15th Khordad and Bavar-373 are future of our airdefense system


look at the radar it already has an camera above it

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264192960469569538^ Two Vostok-E VHF radars near Isfahan

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264192960469569538^ Two Vostok-E VHF radars near Isfahan


Are those iranian copy or brought from russia.
Lately officials said there so many radar system yet to unveil, so...!!!


----------



## Philosopher

Shams313 said:


> Lately officials said there so many radar system yet to unveil, so...!!!



Unfortunately for Iranian military enthusiasts, so much of the strategic systems are hidden from public eye. You are right, the Iranian air defence commander said _many_ systems have not been revealed to the public. This is the norm in places like Iran, Russia et cetra. They will never reveal their entire hand.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taher 2000



Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Philosopher

Emad2000 said:


> View attachment 635056



Seems the system closest to the us (the viewers) in the picture has a more streamlined wing section compared to the other missiles. Clearly there are many versions of this missile. I remember many years ago Gen Hajizadeh said they will develop a 100km *and 200km* ranged missiles. I wonder if we could end up seeing a "super 3rd of khordad" like system with 200km ranged missiles. The 3rd of Khordad with its mobility and greatly reduced footprint has always impressed me greatly.


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> Seems the system closest to the us (the viewers) in the picture has a more streamlined wing section compared to the other missiles. Clearly there are many versions of this missile. I remember many years ago Gen Hajizadeh said they will develop a 100km *and 200km* ranged missiles. I wonder if we could end up seeing a "super 3rd of khordad" like system with 200km ranged missiles. The 3rd of Khordad with its mobility and greatly reduced footprint has always impressed me greatly.



we have Taer 1 , 2 , 2C , 2A , 3A and 3C missiles with 3C having 110 km range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> we have Taer 1 , 2 , 2C , 2A , 3A and 3C missiles with 3C having 110 km range



I think the main barrier for having a 200km range missiles on the 3rd of Khordad/RAAD system is the need for a new radar on the TELAR. But it is do able. Just imagine dozens of such a systems with 200km range SAMs scattered all over. Nightmare scenario for any airforce.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> I think the main barrier for having a 200km range missiles on the 3rd of Khordad/RAAD system is the need for a new radar on the TELAR. But it is do able. Just imagine dozens of such a systems with 200km range SAMs scattered all over. Nightmare scenario for any airforce.



agreed radar range is the key here, a fully carbon fiber Taer 3C would have have 170-200 km range give it or take

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

What sort of configuration are the 3rd of Khordads in?


----------



## Philosopher

BlueInGreen2 said:


> What sort of configuration are the 3rd of Khordads in?



Each battalion appears to be comprised of 4 TELARS each of which are linked to 2 missile launchers. Overall, each battalion is comprised of 12 units with missiles i.e 36 missiles overall (not taking reloading into account).

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> agreed radar range is the key here, a fully carbon fiber Taer 3C would have have 170-200 km range give it or take


but 3rd of khordad battalion come with bashir radar that can be used for longer range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> but 3rd of khordad battalion come with bashir radar that can be used for longer range.


yes but we are not talking about that so one unit may not have that range on it's radar .


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> agreed radar range is the key here, a fully carbon fiber Taer 3C would have have 170-200 km range give it or take



Cost prohibitive. Using that much carbon fiber would bring the cost per missile up greatly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267541255229190150

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267541255229190150



good start. It will take another decade (at least) to modernize Iran’s AD sites. Contrary to public belief building AD systems takes time and Iran is likely on the slower end of that compared to military Industrial powerhouses like Russia and China

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

Hack-Hook said:


> but 3rd of khordad battalion come with bashir radar that can be used for longer range.


Bashir is a search Radar and can't offer a fire control solution for SARH type missiles however it can guide a ARH missiles at long range if it could establish a Data-Link

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

I have written an article about Bavar-373 in the Defence Magazine section compiling the information we have so far. I hope you find it a good read.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iran...-leap-in-irans-air-defence-capability.670272/

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

Well my constructive wave interference theory had been refuted once high resolution images became available.

These are access hatches as the sides of the X-band engagement radar.
They may house a SLC antenna but I tend to fast access to the cooling system maintenance.

The mystery remains why Iran opted for a more expensive AESA solution for this "perfect for PESA" task.

Plus: My bi-static anti stealth seeker point, means not that it is per se superior to a ARH seeker solution. But if it is just on pair, the cost savings would speak for the SAGG solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

PeeD said:


> Plus: My bi-static anti stealth seeker point, means not that it is per se superior to a ARH seeker solution. But if it is just on pair, the cost savings would speak for the SAGG solution.



Are you aware of the any system that combines an active seeker capability with a semi-active capability such as SAGG? I.e dual active and semi-active capability.

Bavar-373 will naturally evolve. I think the interesting question is whether it will continue building on the current solutions or change them. The ex air defence commander commander seems to be rather confident about the great jump in Bavar's capability in next few years, watch the video at 20:55

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> The mystery remains why Iran opted for a more expensive AESA solution for this "perfect for PESA" task.
> .



Answer could be quiet simple: the more expensive solution made the defense industry more money and thus was pitched harder. 

While people like to think Iran’s defense industry is not for profit, it in fact is. So while you won’t see nearly as much waste as in USA defense industry, there is still jockeying for contracts as in other countries.


----------



## PeeD

Philosopher said:


> Are you aware of the any system that combines an active seeker capability with a semi-active capability such as SAGG? I.e dual active and semi-active capability.



Yes: S-350
But reason is not counter-VLO but over horizon counter-CM



TheImmortal said:


> Answer could be quiet simple: the more expensive solution made the defense industry more money and thus was pitched harder.



There is more to it. Russians are absolute fans of PESA solutions in engagement radars but for the S-500 they swiched.
It seems to be about very fast target tracking, because power and cost wise PESA are superior and the gain of AESAs are not suffciently higher to justify.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Yes: S-350
> But reason is not counter-VLO but over horizon counter-CM
> 
> 
> 
> There is more to it. Russians are absolute fans of PESA solutions in engagement radars but for the S-500 they swiched.
> It seems to be about very fast target tracking, because power and cost wise PESA are superior and the gain of AESAs are not suffciently higher to justify.



Again reason for switching in Russia could have been the same reason as Iran. Arms industrial lobbying. We don’t know the reason and I doubt either Russia or Iran will go on record and say why they choose what they did. 

But as military arms history has shown, military industrial complex has a lot of power in countries. Iran is no exception and as Israel said themselves that Iran’s arm industry is vast and in depth as well as much larger than Israel’s.


----------



## Beny Karachun

TheImmortal said:


> But as military arms history has shown, military industrial complex has a lot of power in countries. Iran is no exception and as Israel said themselves that Iran’s arm industry is vast and in depth as well as much larger than Israel’s.


Why would you put words into our mouth?


----------



## TheImmortal

Beny Karachun said:


> Why would you put words into our mouth?



Iran continues to produce missiles that can reach Israeli territory, Kochavi said, explaining the *Iranian military industry is much larger than all the military industries of Israel combined*, allowing for them to produce more precise and long-range rockets to threaten the Israeli home front.

In addition, *Quds forces in Syria as well as Hezbollah have spectrum barriers and advanced anti-aircraft missiles that can threaten Israeli jets*, which nonetheless continue to have freedom of operation across the Middle East.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.jpos...i-Conflict-with-Iran-a-possibility-612079/amp

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

TheImmortal said:


> Iran continues to produce missiles that can reach Israeli territory, Kochavi said, explaining the *Iranian military industry is much larger than all the military industries of Israel combined*, allowing for them to produce more precise and long-range rockets to threaten the Israeli home front.
> 
> In addition, *Quds forces in Syria as well as Hezbollah have spectrum barriers and advanced anti-aircraft missiles that can threaten Israeli jets*, which nonetheless continue to have freedom of operation across the Middle East.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.jpos...i-Conflict-with-Iran-a-possibility-612079/amp


Oh you mean by shere size. Yes, Iranian military industries employs more people and holds more factories. 

However, Iranian military technology is low grade in comparison to ours.


----------



## Philosopher

Beny Karachun said:


> Oh you mean by shere size. Yes, Iranian military industries employs more people and holds more factories.



I think it is obvious that by size they are referring to the sheer number of products and projects developed by Iran. Yes by extension that would require larger number of people and factories, but he was referring to the former, not latter.



> *is low grade in comparison to ours.*



And exactly how are you measuring this? Establish your definition and then give clear examples.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Beny Karachun said:


> Oh you mean by shere size. Yes, Iranian military industries employs more people and holds more factories.
> 
> However, Iranian military technology is low grade in comparison to ours.


 hahahahahahahaahah  Really anything !!


----------



## Beny Karachun

Philosopher said:


> I think it is obvious that by size they are referring to the sheer number of products and projects developed by Iran. Yes by extension that would require larger number of people and factories, but he was referring to the former, not latter.


Not number of products and projects.
Israel has way more of them. Iran's industry is mostly dedicated to manufacture ballistic missiles and rockets, rather than avionics, air to air missiles, radars, etc etc.



Philosopher said:


> And exactly how are you measuring this? Establish your definition and then give clear examples.


Just look at Iran's products and compare them to Israeli ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Beny Karachun said:


> Not number of products and projects.



Edit: I moved the conversation to *Iran chill thread* as this thread is about *Iranian Air Defence*. Let keep the topic on track and not derail them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Beny Karachun said:


> Oh you mean by shere size. Yes, Iranian military industries employs more people and holds more factories.
> 
> However, Iranian military technology is low grade in comparison to ours.


with spacial thanks to US Dollar and Tech Support in many fields .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

Just look at Iranian products and consider the fact that Iran is being subjected to some of the harshest sanctions known to man. Also without US funding and technology israel would have sh#t on a stick. That's the truth whether you like it or not.



Beny Karachun said:


> Not number of products and projects.
> Israel has way more of them. Iran's industry is mostly dedicated to manufacture ballistic missiles and rockets, rather than avionics, air to air missiles, radars, etc etc.
> 
> 
> Just look at Iran's products and compare them to Israeli ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GWXP

Beny Karachun said:


> However, Iranian military technology is low grade in comparison to ours.



This is an outdated myth....

Iran builds:

advanced medium and long range air defense systems (including 3rd Khordad, 15th Khordad and Bavar 373),

Hoveyzeh cruise missile with range of 1350km,

Ghadir anti-ship missile with range of 330km,

Fakour air-to-air missile with a range of 160km and speed of Mach 5,

various attack and civilian helicopters like modernized Ah-1 Cobra and Bell 214,

SLVs and liquid and solid fuel ballistic missiles of various ranges (Raad 500, Dezfoul, Khorramshahr),

Fajr 5 MLRS

RAAD and Toophan MRAPs

MANPADs

Yasin trainer aircraft

Kowsar supersonic trainer/light fighter (F-5 which is modernized to the point of 4th generation fighter)

Owj engine,

Fateh submarine

Frigates

In the near future we will see Iranian version of Pantsir and Tor, ramjet anti-ship missile, Sarir and Soroush heavy SLVs, 3000 ton trimaran, 7000ton Persian Gulf destroyer, 3000ton Besat submarine and Shahed 216 attack helicopter

*Israel doesn't have local analogues to any of these weapons, and you claim Israeli defense industry is more advanced---you are free to prove your claim*

All you build is: several UAVs, couple of short-range air-to air missiles, Merkava tank and David Sling --*all this with US made components*. (Iran's analogues to this are: many Iranian UAVs, Fakour air-to-air missile, Karrar tank and Bavar 373 and being under sanctions all components of these weapons are made in Iran)

You don't even build decent self-propelled howitzer comparable to Iranian Howeyzeh howitzer for example

The truth is that Israel is a tiny country with 6mln population that has reached its FULL POTENTIAL......Iran and other larger countries of the region, on the other hand, have a lot of room to develop in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Beny Karachun

GWXP said:


> This is an outdated myth....
> 
> Iran builds:
> 
> advanced medium and long range air defense systems (including 3rd Khordad, 15th Khordad and Bavar 373),
> 
> Hoveyzeh cruise missile with range of 1350km,
> 
> Ghadir anti-ship missile with range of 330km,
> 
> Fakour air-to-air missile with a range of 160km and speed of Mach 5,
> 
> various attack and civilian helicopters like modernized Ah-1 Cobra and Bell 214,
> 
> SLVs and liquid and solid fuel ballistic missiles of various ranges (Raad 500, Dezfoul, Khorramshahr),
> 
> Fajr 5 MLRS
> 
> RAAD and Toophan MRAPs
> 
> MANPADs
> 
> Yasin trainer aircraft
> 
> Kowsar supersonic trainer/light fighter (F-5 which is modernized to the point of 4th generation fighter)
> 
> Owj engine,
> 
> Fateh submarine
> 
> Frigates
> 
> In the near future we will see Iranian version of Pantsir and Tor, ramjet anti-ship missile, Sarir and Soroush heavy SLVs, 3000 ton trimaran, 7000ton Persian Gulf destroyer, 3000ton Besat submarine and Shahed 216 attack helicopter
> 
> *Israel doesn't have local analogues to any of these weapons, and you claim Israeli defense industry is more advanced---you are free to prove your claim*
> 
> All you build is: several UAVs, couple of short-range air-to air missiles, Merkava tank and David Sling --*all this with US made components*. (Iran's analogues to this are: many Iranian UAVs, Fakour air-to-air missile, Karrar tank and Bavar 373 and being under sanctions all components of these weapons are made in Iran)
> 
> You don't even build decent self-propelled howitzer comparable to Iranian Howeyzeh howitzer for example
> 
> The truth is that Israel is a tiny country with 6mln population that has reached its FULL POTENTIAL......Iran and other larger countries of the region, on the other hand, have a lot of room to develop in the future.


Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.

Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.

Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.

Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.


----------



## TruthHurtz

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.
> 
> Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.
> 
> Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.
> 
> Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.



Your entire military industry is subsidised by the west. Your Iron dome can't hit targets for sh1t and most of the other trash you make is manufactured in the US because your microfake-state doesn't have any meaningful industrial capability. Your small arms industry is just knock off Russian/Czech arms with only Latin american banana states and Narcos as customers.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

TruthHurtz said:


> Your entire military industry is subsidised by the west. Your Iron dome can't hit targets for sh1t and most of the other trash you make is manufactured in the US because your microfake-state doesn't have any meaningful industrial capability. Your small arms industry is just knock off Russian/Czech arms with only Latin american banana states and Narcos as customers.


Also thry got india..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GWXP

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.
> 
> Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.
> 
> Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.
> 
> Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.



You are believing an outdated myth.....Iran's defense industry inferiority was true some 10 years ago, but this is not the case today

1) Only because someone called Bavar 373 an "Iranian S-300" doesn't mean it is the same as S-300------its radars/missiles are totally different and there is *no evidence* that it is inferior to David's Sling (except your chest inflation). ------ As a recently developed system, Bavar 373 employs the newest 21st century technologies (unlike decades old S-300)

2) Python and Derby air-to-air missiles with their 20km and 50km range and a speed of Mach 3.5-------are absolutely *LOW TECH *compared to Fakour air-to-air missile with its 160km range and a speed of Mach 5

3) to your radars Iranian counter is-------- myriad of different radars with some being Meraj-4 AESA radar, Falaq radar, Ghamar 3D radar and myriad of others------and if anything---for every your radar Iran has Hormuz-2 anti-radiation ballistic missile *(while you don't have such a missile)*

4) Iron Dome with its primitive Tamir interceptor is designed specifically for short-range rockets and artillery shells, Iron Dome and Barak 8 is vastly *inferior* to real AD systems like 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad systems

5) Merkava which was devastated by Kornet ATGMs in 2006 can still be compared to Karrar tank

6) to your ATGMs and air-to-ground missiles Iran can counter------- a) Iranian copy of Spike b) Qaem-9 missile c) Heydar missile (12km) d) Shafaq missile (12km range) e) Sadid (10km) f) Qamar-e-Bani Hashem air-to-ground and air-to-air missile (12km) g) Dehlavie missile

7) to your UAVs Iran can counter------- Shahed-129, Fotros, Mohajer-6, Shahed-171, Kaman-12 UAV---and unlike your UAVs which *use foreign made engines*----Iran uses domestically built engines. Iranian UAVs and missiles proved themselves in Abqaiq attack

8) Regarding Arrow-3 ----------50% of it is built in USA so it is only *half-Israeli system*. Plus, in times of maneuvering warheads, aero-ballistic missiles and quasi-ballistic missiles, ABM systems with their hyperexpensive interceptors are a *total useless waste of money*.

_PLUS---- You don't have long-range cruise missiles, you have inferior anti-ship missiles, inferior air-to-air missiles, inferior MLRS, you don't build neither attack nor civilian helicopters, you don't build MANPADs/MRAPs/turbojet engines, you don't build self-propelled howitzers, you have less advanced ballistic missile and SLV technology, you don't build something like Yasin trainer or Kowsar fighter, you don't build submarines and frigates---you have no projects for destroyers/large catamarans/ramjet missiles/heavy SLVs/large submarines._

Regarding Iranian weapons exports----many of these weapons were unveiled only a couple of years ago and at first they will be produced for the Iranian army, plus sanctions limit number of customers of Iranian weapons----and in the end decision to purchase weapons from a foreign country is a (geo)political matter

I have showed you that Israeli defense industry is inferior to modern Iranian defense industry and* the truth is that it is tiny Israel that tries to inflate his chest.*

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Arminkh

GWXP said:


> You are believing an outdated myth.....Iran's defense industry inferiority was true some 10 years ago, but this is not the case today
> 
> 1) Only because someone called Bavar 373 an "Iranian S-300" doesn't mean it is the same as S-300------its radars/missiles are totally different and there is *no evidence* that it is inferior to David's Sling (except your chest inflation). ------ As a recently developed system, Bavar 373 employs the newest 21st century technologies (unlike decades old S-300)
> 
> 2) Python and Derby air-to-air missiles with their 20km and 50km range and a speed of Mach 3.5-------are absolutely *LOW TECH *compared to Fakour air-to-air missile with its 160km range and a speed of Mach 5
> 
> 3) to your radars Iranian counter is-------- myriad of different radars with some being Meraj-4 AESA radar, Falaq radar, Ghamar 3D radar and myriad of others------and if anything---for every your radar Iran has Hormuz-2 anti-radiation ballistic missile *(while you don't have such a missile)*
> 
> 4) Iron Dome with its primitive Tamir interceptor is designed specifically for short-range rockets and artillery shells, Iron Dome and Barak 8 is vastly *inferior* to real AD systems like 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad systems
> 
> 5) Merkava which was devastated by Kornet ATGMs in 2006 can still be compared to Karrar tank
> 
> 6) to your ATGMs and air-to-ground missiles Iran can counter------- a) Iranian copy of Spike b) Qaem-9 missile c) Heydar missile (12km) d) Shafaq missile (12km range) e) Sadid (10km) f) Qamar-e-Bani Hashem air-to-ground and air-to-air missile (12km) g) Dehlavie missile
> 
> 7) to your UAVs Iran can counter------- Shahed-129, Fotros, Mohajer-6, Shahed-171, Kaman-12 UAV---and unlike your UAVs which *use foreign made engines*----Iran uses domestically built engines. Iranian UAVs and missiles proved themselves in Abqaiq attack
> 
> 8) Regarding Arrow-3 ----------50% of it is built in USA so it is only *half-Israeli system*. Plus, in times of maneuvering warheads, aero-ballistic missiles and quasi-ballistic missiles, ABM systems with their hyperexpensive interceptors are a *total useless waste of money*.
> 
> _PLUS---- You don't have long-range cruise missiles, you have inferior anti-ship missiles, inferior air-to-air missiles, inferior MLRS, you don't build neither attack nor civilian helicopters, you don't build MANPADs/MRAPs/turbojet engines, you don't build self-propelled howitzers, you have less advanced ballistic missile and SLV technology, you don't build something like Yasin trainer or Kowsar fighter, you don't build submarines and frigates---you have no projects for destroyers/large catamarans/ramjet missiles/heavy SLVs/large submarines._
> 
> Regarding Iranian weapons exports----many of these weapons were unveiled only a couple of years ago and at first they will be produced for the Iranian army, plus sanctions limit number of customers of Iranian weapons----and in the end decision to purchase weapons from a foreign country is a (geo)political matter
> 
> I have showed you that Israeli defense industry is inferior to modern Iranian defense industry and* the truth is that it is tiny Israel that tries to inflate his chest.*


Enough body! Crushed him! Very nice and detailed reply.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## hussainb72

Guys I remember reading somewhere about Pakistan buying the Khordad 15 system, is that true? And if its true, how many systems did they buy?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

hussainb72 said:


> Guys I remember reading somewhere about Pakistan buying the Khordad 15 system, is that true? And if its true, how many systems did they buy?


I don't think the news are legit as we are under sanctions now and pakistan won't piss off US by showing interest. after UN arm embargo relived might be.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kurlang

hussainb72 said:


> Guys I remember reading somewhere about Pakistan buying the Khordad 15 system, is that true? And if its true, how many systems did they buy?


FAKE

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Qutb-ud-din Aybak

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.
> 
> Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.
> 
> Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.
> 
> Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.


atleast they didn't used aid money to build these weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aramagedon

*A video that all of Persian speakers should watch:





*


Beny Karachun said:


> Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.
> 
> Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.
> 
> Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.
> 
> Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.


Your Zionist estimates worth as much as horse fart. You're no match for Hamas, and Hezbollah a small paramilitary group kicked in your arse in 2006 and they evicted you from South of Lebanon in 2000.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

GWXP said:


> You are believing an outdated myth.....Iran's defense industry inferiority was true some 10 years ago, but this is not the case today
> 
> 1) Only because someone called Bavar 373 an "Iranian S-300" doesn't mean it is the same as S-300------its radars/missiles are totally different and there is *no evidence* that it is inferior to David's Sling (except your chest inflation). ------ As a recently developed system, Bavar 373 employs the newest 21st century technologies (unlike decades old S-300)
> 
> 2) Python and Derby air-to-air missiles with their 20km and 50km range and a speed of Mach 3.5-------are absolutely *LOW TECH *compared to Fakour air-to-air missile with its 160km range and a speed of Mach 5
> 
> 3) to your radars Iranian counter is-------- myriad of different radars with some being Meraj-4 AESA radar, Falaq radar, Ghamar 3D radar and myriad of others------and if anything---for every your radar Iran has Hormuz-2 anti-radiation ballistic missile *(while you don't have such a missile)*
> 
> 4) Iron Dome with its primitive Tamir interceptor is designed specifically for short-range rockets and artillery shells, Iron Dome and Barak 8 is vastly *inferior* to real AD systems like 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad systems
> 
> 5) Merkava which was devastated by Kornet ATGMs in 2006 can still be compared to Karrar tank
> 
> 6) to your ATGMs and air-to-ground missiles Iran can counter------- a) Iranian copy of Spike b) Qaem-9 missile c) Heydar missile (12km) d) Shafaq missile (12km range) e) Sadid (10km) f) Qamar-e-Bani Hashem air-to-ground and air-to-air missile (12km) g) Dehlavie missile
> 
> 7) to your UAVs Iran can counter------- Shahed-129, Fotros, Mohajer-6, Shahed-171, Kaman-12 UAV---and unlike your UAVs which *use foreign made engines*----Iran uses domestically built engines. Iranian UAVs and missiles proved themselves in Abqaiq attack
> 
> 8) Regarding Arrow-3 ----------50% of it is built in USA so it is only *half-Israeli system*. Plus, in times of maneuvering warheads, aero-ballistic missiles and quasi-ballistic missiles, ABM systems with their hyperexpensive interceptors are a *total useless waste of money*.
> 
> _PLUS---- You don't have long-range cruise missiles, you have inferior anti-ship missiles, inferior air-to-air missiles, inferior MLRS, you don't build neither attack nor civilian helicopters, you don't build MANPADs/MRAPs/turbojet engines, you don't build self-propelled howitzers, you have less advanced ballistic missile and SLV technology, you don't build something like Yasin trainer or Kowsar fighter, you don't build submarines and frigates---you have no projects for destroyers/large catamarans/ramjet missiles/heavy SLVs/large submarines._
> 
> Regarding Iranian weapons exports----many of these weapons were unveiled only a couple of years ago and at first they will be produced for the Iranian army, plus sanctions limit number of customers of Iranian weapons----and in the end decision to purchase weapons from a foreign country is a (geo)political matter
> 
> I have showed you that Israeli defense industry is inferior to modern Iranian defense industry and* the truth is that it is tiny Israel that tries to inflate his chest.*


1) Well, once you prove your airdefenses are worth something, maybe I'll believe you.

2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.

3) Your radars are worthless compared to worlrd class Elta radars such as Green Pine for example.

4) Empty words. Iron Dome has over 90 percent success rate against extremely fast and short ranged rockets while yours have none.


5) Devastated my ***, it only proved that even without APS it can handle itself well against ATGMs with only 5 Merkavas destroyed, 2 of them are Mk4 being destroyed by massive IEDs that no tank would have survived. Your Karrar is nothing but a glorified T-72.

6) Spike is superior to anything you have to offer.

7) Yeah we use foreign made engines just as Iran uses foreign made weapons, are your F-14s made in Iran? No, then shut up. It's no excuse, when we handle your *** you're gonna cry "without the US we would have won"? Actually I bet you will do exactly that.

8) No, it only renders your ballistic missiles, and probably even satellites, a waste of money. Arrow 3 is the most advanced system of its class and.

Whatever lying rubbish you wrote next, I won't even reply because with all your alleged strength you still are being treated like a mop.


----------



## Aramagedon

@Serpentine

this guy is derailing this thread.

Kindly delete the offtopics in last 3 pages. Thank you.



Beny Karachun said:


> 1) Well, once you prove your airdefenses are worth something, maybe I'll believe you.
> 
> 2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
> Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.
> 
> 3) Your radars are worthless compared to worlrd class Elta radars such as Green Pine for example.
> 
> 4) Empty words. Iron Dome has over 90 percent success rate against extremely fast and short ranged rockets while yours have none.
> 
> 
> 5) Devastated my ***, it only proved that even without APS it can handle itself well against ATGMs with only 5 Merkavas destroyed, 2 of them are Mk4 being destroyed by massive IEDs that no tank would have survived. Your Karrar is nothing but a glorified T-72.
> 
> 6) Spike is superior to anything you have to offer.
> 
> 7) Yeah we use foreign made engines just as Iran uses foreign made weapons, are your F-14s made in Iran? No, then shut up. It's no excuse, when we handle your *** you're gonna cry "without the US we would have won"? Actually I bet you will do exactly that.
> 
> 8) No, it only renders your ballistic missiles, and probably even satellites, a waste of money. Arrow 3 is the most advanced system of its class and.
> 
> Whatever lying rubbish you wrote next, I won't even reply because with all your alleged strength you still are being treated like a mop.


You thieves are nothing without west support. 1.8 billion Muslims can throw you to hell anytime.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mithridates

Beny Karachun said:


> 2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
> Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.


just a short note: AMRAAM was way inferior to phoenix and still some models of it are.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Beny Karachun said:


> 1) Well, once you prove your airdefenses are worth something, maybe I'll believe you.
> 
> 2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
> Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.
> 
> 3) Your radars are worthless compared to worlrd class Elta radars such as Green Pine for example.
> 
> 4) Empty words. Iron Dome has over 90 percent success rate against extremely fast and short ranged rockets while yours have none.
> 
> 
> 5) Devastated my ***, it only proved that even without APS it can handle itself well against ATGMs with only 5 Merkavas destroyed, 2 of them are Mk4 being destroyed by massive IEDs that no tank would have survived. Your Karrar is nothing but a glorified T-72.
> 
> 6) Spike is superior to anything you have to offer.
> 
> 7) Yeah we use foreign made engines just as Iran uses foreign made weapons, are your F-14s made in Iran? No, then shut up. It's no excuse, when we handle your *** you're gonna cry "without the US we would have won"? Actually I bet you will do exactly that.
> 
> 8) No, it only renders your ballistic missiles, and probably even satellites, a waste of money. Arrow 3 is the most advanced system of its class and.
> 
> Whatever lying rubbish you wrote next, I won't even reply because with all your alleged strength you still are being treated like a mop.


Did u faced a superior system so far?

Iron dome was built to intercept DIY fireworks... not missile or guided rockets, or anything targating it...

Okay, arrow and david sling has no operational histoty, but patriot, 3rd khordad, buk and pantasir has in recent years.

Green pine nerver faced what it was deainged to face..so far DIY fireworks and Russian old junks craps (over israel, syria and neighbours ).

Recently patriot failed in ain al asad and aramco, but It's no wise speculated things about ur system based on patriot..

Copying the apperence and design has nothing to do with copying the full system, even python design was derived or inspired by aim-9x sidewinde. Its may apperently looks fakur and aim54 are the same but every thing inside is changed from seeker to senors, electronics and Algorithms. Its also a trap to copy 100% of ur rival's system.

And for merkava, is nothing but a nice looking junk that u can offer.

Yes u have good electronics industry derived from USA but that doesn't colclude u develops superior system. And only indians feels so much fantasy over ur toys. Others just enjoys.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## QWECXZ

Beny Karachun said:


> 1) Well, once you prove your airdefenses are worth something, maybe I'll believe you.
> 
> 2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
> Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.
> 
> 3) Your radars are worthless compared to worlrd class Elta radars such as Green Pine for example.
> 
> 4) Empty words. Iron Dome has over 90 percent success rate against extremely fast and short ranged rockets while yours have none.
> 
> 
> 5) Devastated my ***, it only proved that even without APS it can handle itself well against ATGMs with only 5 Merkavas destroyed, 2 of them are Mk4 being destroyed by massive IEDs that no tank would have survived. Your Karrar is nothing but a glorified T-72.
> 
> 6) Spike is superior to anything you have to offer.
> 
> 7) Yeah we use foreign made engines just as Iran uses foreign made weapons, are your F-14s made in Iran? No, then shut up. It's no excuse, when we handle your *** you're gonna cry "without the US we would have won"? Actually I bet you will do exactly that.
> 
> 8) No, it only renders your ballistic missiles, and probably even satellites, a waste of money. Arrow 3 is the most advanced system of its class and.
> 
> Whatever lying rubbish you wrote next, I won't even reply because with all your alleged strength you still are being treated like a mop.



1) The MQ-4C incident proved the effectiveness of our air defense systems.

2) AIM54 Phoenix missile was used by F14 Tomcats. Only Iran and the US were operators of the F14 and the US decided to discard all their F14s and their spare parts in 2005 to prevent Iran from accessing them through the black market. So, there's no surprise that nobody operates Phoenix missiles anymore as nobody except Iran and the US had it in the first place.

3) What makes Green Pine superior to the radars Iran has? Be specific. Iran has OTH radars that cover as far as Western Europe.





4) That's your claim. Our claim is more like 30%.


Wikipedia said:


> According to Israeli officials, of the approximately 1,000 missiles and rockets fired into Israel by Hamas from the beginning of Operation Pillar of Defense up to 17 November 2012, Iron Dome identified two thirds as not posing a threat and intercepted 90 percent of the remaining 300.


So, it let 67% of the rockets pass and intercepted only 90% of those rockets that it could lock on successfully. So, its success rate is more like 27% then.

5) Please. The reputation of your Merkava tanks was lost forever after the 2006 war. Launch a new war against Hezbollah if you think you can handle them better this time.

6) Too bad that we have replicated Spike: https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/29187

7) You can't build your engines. End of the story.

8) Wait 10 to 20 years and you will see which one is a waste of money.

I think I have explained to you the situation before. Israel is like a subject on a surgery table where the doctor just enjoys placing his knife on him. We are literally operating on you without anesthesia through our proxies. You can throw a punch or kicks once in a while for survival, but at the end of the day, it is you who is on the operating table. And our knife is getting closer and closer to your chest to take your heart out. Now keep throwing your punches and kicks. The situation is still the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beny Karachun

Aramagedon said:


> You thieves are nothing without west support. 1.8 billion Muslims can throw you to hell anytime


Yeah seems like the Shia-Sunni divide won't allow that to happen



QWECXZ said:


> 1) The MQ-4C incident proved the effectiveness of our air defense systems.
> 
> 2) AIM54 Phoenix missile was used by F14 Tomcats. Only Iran and the US were operators of the F14 and the US decided to discard all their F14s and their spare parts in 2005 to prevent Iran from accessing them through the black market. So, there's no surprise that nobody operates Phoenix missiles anymore as nobody except Iran and the US had it in the first place.
> 
> 3) What makes Green Pine superior to the radars Iran has? Be specific. Iran has OTH radars that cover as far as Western Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4) That's your claim. Our claim is more like 30%.
> 
> So, it let 67% of the rockets pass and intercepted only 90% of those rockets that it could lock on successfully. So, its success rate is more like 27% then.
> 
> 5) Please. The reputation of your Merkava tanks was lost forever after the 2006 war. Launch a new war against Hezbollah if you think you can handle them better this time.
> 
> 6) Too bad that we have replicated Spike: https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/29187
> 
> 7) You can't build your engines. End of the story.
> 
> 8) Wait 10 to 20 years and you will see which one is a waste of money.
> 
> I think I have explained to you the situation before. Israel is like a subject on a surgery table where the doctor just enjoys placing his knife on him. We are literally operating on you without anesthesia through our proxies. You can throw a punch or kicks once in a while for survival, but at the end of the day, it is you who is on the operating table. And our knife is getting closer and closer to your chest to take your heart out. Now keep throwing your punches and kicks. The situation is still the same.


1) USSR Shot down a similarily sized U-2 flying at higher altitude (21.3km) at around the same speed in 1960, this was no achievement.

2) Yeah, doesn't change my point, this missile is retired, the missile's velocity and range is the same as the AIM-54, it doesn't mean the AIM54 or Fakour is better than systems with lesser range or speed. Your planes will be shot down like flies if we fought, you wouldn't detect the F-35 and the F15s and F16s will easily jam all your missiles.

3) OTH radars may only be useful for providing information on ballistic missile threat, no guidance, no specifics.

Green Pine has huge range, guidance ability, and it can transmit so many watts of power to it's target it's essentially also an electronic warfare device that can fry anything it looks at.

4) You measure accuracy percentage by shots hit divided by shots fired times 100. In that regard, the systems accuracy is 90%.

The Iron Dome has a system that calculates the trajectory of the incoming rockets and checks if it endangers populated areas. A very smart and cost effective measure. 

5) Hezbollah puppets and Iran remain quiet when we bomb them. Merkavas are more protected than ever.

6) Your cheap, low quality alleged replications will never reach our level.

7) It's not cost effective. So we don't. We have the expertise to.

8) Let's count how many Qassem Sulimanis will be killed and how many times we will bomb your forces all over the Middle East by then.

Yes of course, you are letting us bomb you for your amusement.



Shams313 said:


> Did u faced a superior system so far?
> 
> Iron dome was built to intercept DIY fireworks... not missile or guided rockets, or anything targating it...
> 
> Okay, arrow and david sling has no operational histoty, but patriot, 3rd khordad, buk and pantasir has in recent years.
> 
> Green pine nerver faced what it was deainged to face..so far DIY fireworks and Russian old junks craps (over israel, syria and neighbours ).
> 
> Recently patriot failed in ain al asad and aramco, but It's no wise speculated things about ur system based on patriot..
> 
> Copying the apperence and design has nothing to do with copying the full system, even python design was derived or inspired by aim-9x sidewinde. Its may apperently looks fakur and aim54 are the same but every thing inside is changed from seeker to senors, electronics and Algorithms. Its also a trap to copy 100% of ur rival's system.
> 
> And for merkava, is nothing but a nice looking junk that u can offer.
> 
> Yes u have good electronics industry derived from USA but that doesn't colclude u develops superior system. And only indians feels so much fantasy over ur toys. Others just enjoys.


There are no superior systems compared to ours.

Iron Dome effectively thwarts rocket threats, your Fajar 5 is definitely not a firework, but the Iron Dome can intercept it. It can also target drones flying not in a straight line. Iron Dome can intercept manuevering targets too.

Arrow 2 intercepted S-200 missile fired from Syria upon F-16s.
Davids Sling successfully intercepted many targets in missile tests.

BUK and Pantsirs were humiliated by Israeli and Turkish drones on more than a dozen occassions.

Green Pine detected every missile launch, jet and drone flying hundreds of kilometers away from Israeli borders, including your supposed stealthy RQ170 copy that penetrated Israeli territroy and got shot down.

Davids Sling replaces the Patriot, the mistake of the Saudis doesn't reflect upon our capability.

Python isn't derived from AIM9, different design and capability. 
I doubt your Fakur will be of any use against our airforce. 160 kilometers range is against a Boeing 747 sized target flying in a straight line towards the missile.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Beny Karachun said:


> 2) Your Fakour is just a copy of a decades old AIM54 Phoenix missile that no one uses anymore and has the same characteristics as the old missile. You think the AIM54/Fakour is more advanced than a Python 5 or a I-Derby-ER or the AMRAAM that replaced the AIM54, just because it has more range and higher maximum speed?
> Those values are worthless if the missile misses the target.


two complete different missile , the similarity between two system is as deep as their skin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

Beny Karachun said:


> Yeah seems like the Shia-Sunni divide won't allow that to happen
> 
> 
> 1) USSR Shot down a similarily sized U-2 flying at higher altitude (21.3km) at around the same speed in 1960, this was no achievement.
> 
> 2) Yeah, doesn't change my point, this missile is retired, the missile's velocity and range is the same as the AIM-54, it doesn't mean the AIM54 or Fakour is better than systems with lesser range or speed. Your planes will be shot down like flies if we fought, you wouldn't detect the F-35 and the F15s and F16s will easily jam all your missiles.
> 
> 3) OTH radars may only be useful for providing information on ballistic missile threat, no guidance, no specifics.
> 
> Green Pine has huge range, guidance ability, and it can transmit so many watts of power to it's target it's essentially also an electronic warfare device that can fry anything it looks at.
> 
> 4) You measure accuracy percentage by shots hit divided by shots fired times 100. In that regard, the systems accuracy is 90%.
> 
> The Iron Dome has a system that calculates the trajectory of the incoming rockets and checks if it endangers populated areas. A very smart and cost effective measure.
> 
> 5) Hezbollah puppets and Iran remain quiet when we bomb them. Merkavas are more protected than ever.
> 
> 6) Your cheap, low quality alleged replications will never reach our level.
> 
> 7) It's not cost effective. So we don't. We have the expertise to.
> 
> 8) Let's count how many Qassem Sulimanis will be killed and how many times we will bomb your forces all over the Middle East by then.
> 
> Yes of course, you are letting us bomb you for your amusement.



1) And you think that the USSR didn't have good air defense systems? What's your point exactly?

2) That doesn't matter. Mithridates gave you a good response. AIM-260 JATM is based on AIM-120 AMRAAM. There's a 2000 kilometer distance between Tehran and Tel Aviv. There's no way that Israel can use its F16s and F15s against Iran. And talking about stealth jet fighters in absolute terms is meaningless. Even an F22 jet fighter at a distance of 50 kilometers won't be stealth anymore. And I'm not even talking about Chinese radars like JY-27 that have detected F22 earlier. Germans have successfully detected F35 as well.

3) It depends on the radar. Iran's Sepehr OTH radar is an early warning system that covers as far as Western Europe. Iran's Ghadir 3D phased array radar can detect jet fighters at a maximum range of 1,100 kilometers and at a maximum altitude of 300 kilometers. It can detect stealth jet fighters at a distance of 600 kilometers.

4) We were talking about the success rate I think and it should be measured as the number of successful interceptions over the number of rockets/missiles fired at you. If a potential enemy fires 100 missiles at you and your system fails to lock on 99 missiles but locks on one missile and destroys it successfully, the success rate of your system won't be 100%, but rather 1%.

5) Because we have a long term strategy for our presence in Syria. We won't let your noise distract us from our objectives in Syria.

6) That's just your claim. You have nothing to support it. We have previously replicated your drones and US drones and Israeli officials and experts have confirmed that our replicas were indeed sophisticated.

7) You are receiving billions of dollars of aid and compensation from countries like the US and Germany. So money is not an issue for you because you won't pay for it. Israel has a mentality of independence because you believe there's always a chance that you guys get persecuted again. You know very well that you can't rely on anyone else but yourself. Sorry, I don't buy that. You may be very well capable of producing different types of engines if you invest in it and the US transfers the technology to you, but as of now, you can't.

8) Losing 7 to 10 Iranian soldiers in Syria and one general (which was killed by the US, not you) is totally worth it in our opinion. Soleimani was very well aware that he could get killed in action one day. He didn't mind it at all. That's the benefit of having an army with a strong ideology.

No, we are letting you bomb deserts in Syria and pretend you are making bold moves for your leaders to save face and stay happy with your nonexistent achievements. Meanwhile, we are improving our military presence in the region as well as our defense industries for the higher goals and objectives we have.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GWXP

Beny Karachun said:


> It's no excuse, when we handle your *** you're gonna cry "without the US we would have won"? Actually I bet you will do exactly that.


Again Israeli chest inflation...."our tanks and AD systems are the best in the world bla bla bla"-----too bad they are unable to handle Hezbollah

How about 6 powerplants in tiny Israel producing 50% of electricity and 5 desalination plants producing 50% of water.........

The truth is that even some third rate Iranian proxy (let's say) based in Iraq can devastate your economy and society using some 50-70 precise Iranian ballistic missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## IAm

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Bavar 373 is no better than the S-300 which we had proven useless against our attacks, and it's absolutely nothing compared to the David's Sling.
> 
> Your copies of 30 year old Russian, Chinese and American missiles, helicopters and jets aren't impressive.
> 
> Your midget submarines have no chance against modern western ones.
> 
> Stop inflating your chest. Your military industry has no customers but Hezbollah and your proxies, with or without sanctions.


Destruction of AD system does not means it is useless. There is no invincible AD system anywhere. Any AD system can be attacked and destroyed even if it performs with 100% accuracy and there is nothing like 100% accuracy in any AD system. David Sling even if it is 100% accurate, it still has a limited number of interceptor missiles to fire. after exhausting it missiles it will be destroyed with ease. All it takes is to fire more than it can intercept and destroy it even if it is 100% accurate. I think you are over exited.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Shams313

Beny Karachun said:


> There are no superior systems compared to ours.


u r no salesman, right?? 



Beny Karachun said:


> Iron Dome effectively thwarts rocket threats, your Fajar 5 is definitely not a firework, but the Iron Dome can intercept it. It can also target drones flying not in a straight line. Iron Dome can intercept manuevering targets too.


and every day Hamas was firing fajr 5?? the unguided and one of the cheap rocket of Iranian arsenal have.
I doubt Iran ever supplied a lot of those toys to Hamas. if in case Iran supplied a guided one to Palestine for testing, i wonder how many rockets iron dom has to lauch to terminate it.



Beny Karachun said:


> Arrow 2 intercepted S-200 missile fired from Syria upon F-16s.
> Davids Sling successfully intercepted many targets in missile tests.


first, u admitted ur super f16 was intercepted by old junk s200. I wonder. which uses very low-end mechanical radar and electronics and guidance system solely developed tankers and scare the enemy. and so far one f16 was destroyed and if it's done by s200 then we don't have to any further conversation.
s300/400: well done old man.


Beny Karachun said:


> BUK and Pantsirs were humiliated by Israeli and Turkish drones on more than a dozen occassions.


nothing lasts forever, they did their job batteling with knives against armed cavalry. if they had their fellas covering their asses...by the way u r lucky, it's bcz Syria and Libya.


Beny Karachun said:


> Green Pine detected every missile launch, jet and drone flying hundreds of kilometers away from Israeli borders, including your supposed stealthy RQ170 copy that penetrated Israeli territroy and got shot down.


shahed 170: I haven't passed the laboratory tests and i got destroyed?? Nani??


Beny Karachun said:


> Davids Sling replaces the Patriot, the mistake of the Saudis doesn't reflect upon our capability.


yes, I already told u I won't speculate things over Aramco incidents, wait until David slings got visited.


Beny Karachun said:


> Python isn't derived from AIM9, different design and capability.


of course , apparently they look same, or Israelis engineers stated developing from 9x sidewinder scratches.


Beny Karachun said:


> I doubt your Fakur will be of any use against our airforce. 160 kilometers range is against a Boeing 747 sized target flying in a straight line towards the missile.


there were no third country that operated aim-54 phoniex. so should wait until u see those stuff in actions.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beny Karachun

QWECXZ said:


> 1) And you think that the USSR didn't have good air defense systems? What's your point exactly?
> 
> 2) That doesn't matter. Mithridates gave you a good response. AIM-260 JATM is based on AIM-120 AMRAAM. There's a 2000 kilometer distance between Tehran and Tel Aviv. There's no way that Israel can use its F16s and F15s against Iran. And talking about stealth jet fighters in absolute terms is meaningless. Even an F22 jet fighter at a distance of 50 kilometers won't be stealth anymore. And I'm not even talking about Chinese radars like JY-27 that have detected F22 earlier. Germans have successfully detected F35 as well.
> 
> 3) It depends on the radar. Iran's Sepehr OTH radar is an early warning system that covers as far as Western Europe. Iran's Ghadir 3D phased array radar can detect jet fighters at a maximum range of 1,100 kilometers and at a maximum altitude of 300 kilometers. It can detect stealth jet fighters at a distance of 600 kilometers.
> 
> 4) We were talking about the success rate I think and it should be measured as the number of successful interceptions over the number of rockets/missiles fired at you. If a potential enemy fires 100 missiles at you and your system fails to lock on 99 missiles but locks on one missile and destroys it successfully, the success rate of your system won't be 100%, but rather 1%.
> 
> 5) Because we have a long term strategy for our presence in Syria. We won't let your noise distract us from our objectives in Syria.
> 
> 6) That's just your claim. You have nothing to support it. We have previously replicated your drones and US drones and Israeli officials and experts have confirmed that our replicas were indeed sophisticated.
> 
> 7) You are receiving billions of dollars of aid and compensation from countries like the US and Germany. So money is not an issue for you because you won't pay for it. Israel has a mentality of independence because you believe there's always a chance that you guys get persecuted again. You know very well that you can't rely on anyone else but yourself. Sorry, I don't buy that. You may be very well capable of producing different types of engines if you invest in it and the US transfers the technology to you, but as of now, you can't.
> 
> 8) Losing 7 to 10 Iranian soldiers in Syria and one general (which was killed by the US, not you) is totally worth it in our opinion. Soleimani was very well aware that he could get killed in action one day. He didn't mind it at all. That's the benefit of having an army with a strong ideology.
> 
> No, we are letting you bomb deserts in Syria and pretend you are making bold moves for your leaders to save face and stay happy with your nonexistent achievements. Meanwhile, we are improving our military presence in the region as well as our defense industries for the higher goals and objectives we have.


1) I'm saying you did something less impressive than what a Soviet SAM system managed to do in 1960, it doesn't prove anything at all.

2) The JY27 claim is so foolish, first of all American F22s don't fly over Venezuela, and even if they did the only way that JY27 can detect an F22 is with fuel tanks or luneberg lens. Same about F-35.

3) You wish your radar could detect stealthy airplanes from 600 kilometers. Anyways, Green Pine is better. 

4) Why would a missing rocket be intercepted? Foolish logic. 

5) Believe me, we also have one.

6) Sophisticated my ***. 

7) First of all, it's good to have allies. 
Second of all, money from Germany is mostly coming to holocaust survivors. 
Third of all, aid money comprises of around a percent of our annual GDP. 

I) 7-10 Every month or so. Whatever, live in the illusion that it's all part of a 4D chess move, just stop talking about destroying us when we are the ones bombing you.


IAm said:


> Destruction of AD system does not means it is useless. There is no invincible AD system anywhere. Any AD system can be attacked and destroyed even if it performs with 100% accuracy and there is nothing like 100% accuracy in any AD system. David Sling even if it is 100% accurate, it still has a limited number of interceptor missiles to fire. after exhausting it missiles it will be destroyed with ease. All it takes is to fire more than it can intercept and destroy it even if it is 100% accurate. I think you are over exited.





GWXP said:


> Again Israeli chest inflation...."our tanks and AD systems are the best in the world bla bla bla"-----too bad they are unable to handle Hezbollah
> 
> How about 6 powerplants in tiny Israel producing 50% of electricity and 5 desalination plants producing 50% of water.........
> 
> The truth is that even some third rate Iranian proxy (let's say) based in Iraq can devastate your economy and society using some 50-70 precise Iranian ballistic missiles.


How about we nuke you? You make too much noise out of conventional weapons. There's only so much damage they could make, and even if Iran had thousands of ballistic missiles that can reach Israel from Iranian territory (And they have hundreds at best) you couldn't destroy Israel.



IAm said:


> Destruction of AD system does not means it is useless. There is no invincible AD system anywhere. Any AD system can be attacked and destroyed even if it performs with 100% accuracy and there is nothing like 100% accuracy in any AD system. David Sling even if it is 100% accurate, it still has a limited number of interceptor missiles to fire. after exhausting it missiles it will be destroyed with ease. All it takes is to fire more than it can intercept and destroy it even if it is 100% accurate. I think you are over exited.


It usually does when the air defense is supposed to excel against drones and defend SAMs against munitions fired at it. You don't have more ballistic missiles that can reach us, than we have interceptors.


----------



## GWXP

Beny Karachun said:


> How about we nuke you? You make too much noise out of conventional weapons. There's only so much damage they could make, and even if Iran had thousands of ballistic missiles that can reach Israel from Iranian territory (And they have hundreds at best) you couldn't destroy Israel.


Today you have that nuclear advantage....that is true.

But how about surviving in the long run while being a tiny state surrounded by massive powers?

In the end you are a tiny state with 9mln (6mln Jews+3mln Arabs) people....

Egypt will have 150mln people by 2050. Turkey will have 100mln and Iran will have 105mln people by 2050.

*Military luck of previous decades is not guaranteed in the future (especially if US will cease supporting you in the long-run).
*
Historically you took advantage of backwardness and weakness of the ME countries but this will not be the case in the future

Iran can become a nuclear armed state in this decade......And enjoying nuclear deterrence it can attack your small infrastructure with high-precision missiles, while the only thing you will be able to do is to cry for US's help and protection

*Don't be stupid...look at the broader strategic situation in the Middle East in the long-run.*


1) I can imagine year 2035 in which Turkey has nuclear weapons and a powerful navy capable of imposing a naval blockade on the ports of Haifa and Ashdod thus devastating your economy.

2) We can assume that by that time Muslim Brotherhood will take power in Egypt.

3) Add to this Hezbollah and Iran with ability to attack your tiny civilian infrastructure with precise missiles while enjoying nuclear deterrence and your long-term survival perspectives is under serious question.

The more you postpone just peace with the Palestinians the more your tiny state's long-term survival prospects in the ME becomes doubtful

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

Cant believe you guys still argue with Beny the Uber-Troll

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Blue In Green

Draco.IMF said:


> Cant believe you guys still argue with Beny the Uber-Troll



I don't understand it either, Benny isn't here to conduct cordial back-and-forth. He wants to gloat whilst putting down Iran, Iranians and the Iranian military. 

Moreover, guys.....This Benny **** really doesn't care for Iran and has hatred for Iranians in general (along with many others I'm assuming). You're literally wasting your own time by typing long-winded (but true) responses to this idiot. He doesn't care for what any of you have to say, *at all. 
*
As far as I'm concerned he should have been banned from the Iranians Subsection of PDF along with many other brain-let rabble-rousers permanently long-ago but I guess that's just something the mods of PDF don't care about. Can't win em' all....

Anyways, I'll say this next piece in farsi in hopes it will resonate with you guys more deeply. Apologies for my atrocious farsi, I'm not exactly a native speaker lol.

_Bachehah, toro khoda bah een haroomzadeh harf nakoon, agalan mah ensanhah ke ghalbemoon hanooz sia nashoodeh mitoonim harfeh worthwhile behaineh hamdigeh begim. 

Een "Benny" aslan namikhad bah mah kenar biyad. _

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beny Karachun

GWXP said:


> Today you have that nuclear advantage....that is true.
> 
> But how about surviving in the long run while being a tiny state surrounded by massive powers?
> 
> In the end you are a tiny state with 9mln (6mln Jews+3mln Arabs) people....
> 
> Egypt will have 150mln people by 2050. Turkey will have 100mln and Iran will have 105mln people by 2050.
> 
> *Military luck of previous decades is not guaranteed in the future (especially if US will cease supporting you in the long-run).
> *
> Historically you took advantage of backwardness and weakness of the ME countries but this will not be the case in the future
> 
> Iran can become a nuclear armed state in this decade......And enjoying nuclear deterrence it can attack your small infrastructure with high-precision missiles, while the only thing you will be able to do is to cry for US's help and protection
> 
> *Don't be stupid...look at the broader strategic situation in the Middle East in the long-run.*
> 
> 
> 1) I can imagine year 2035 in which Turkey has nuclear weapons and a powerful navy capable of imposing a naval blockade on the ports of Haifa and Ashdod thus devastating your economy.
> 
> 2) We can assume that by that time Muslim Brotherhood will take power in Egypt.
> 
> 3) Add to this Hezbollah and Iran with ability to attack your tiny civilian infrastructure with precise missiles while enjoying nuclear deterrence and your long-term survival perspectives is under serious question.
> 
> The more you postpone just peace with the Palestinians the more your tiny state's long-term survival prospects in the ME becomes doubtful



Israel was surrounded by way bigger,united hostile Muslim nations throughout all of its existence.
Now the Muslim world is more divided than ever, and we have peace with most of our neighbors anyways.

Anyways, I don't believe Iran will ever gain the ability to destroy Israel, and even if it did and it tried, we sure as hell taking them down with us.


----------



## Philosopher

Members are talking this thread off topic. This thread is for *Iranian Air Defence*. If you wish to discuss these other matters, then take it to Iranian Chill thread or another thread that is appropriate. Henceforth, off topic posts will be reported.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 925boy

GWXP said:


> Again Israeli chest inflation...."our tanks and AD systems are the best in the world bla bla bla"-----too bad they are unable to handle Hezbollah
> 
> How about 6 powerplants in tiny Israel producing 50% of electricity and 5 desalination plants producing 50% of water.........
> 
> The truth is that even some third rate Iranian proxy (let's say) based in Iraq can devastate your economy and society using some 50-70 precise Iranian ballistic missiles.


ISRAEL IS BAD AT LAND WARFARE. The moment Israeli troops have to fight man to man on the ground, Israelis start dying fast and losing morale. We saw it in 2006. Even my dad, he always yells and tells me - "those Israelis dunno how to fight" and he's right. They always have to use some technology like UAVs, or ground robots...and at that same time their keyboard warriors on PDF will tell you the IDF are the bravest army in the world. I dont understand their logic.

@Shams313 cheers for your smart point about whether Israel had ever faced a quality enemy, cuz Israel has been fighting terrorists and paramilitary forces only for decades now..so Israeli military isnt all its hyped up to be.

OK, back on topic- The Iranian Bavar, Khordad,etc systems really have shut off lots of Iranian airspace to adversary aircraft. I dont believe any anti-Iran country can have 1 plane survive in Iranian airspace now..they must fly in in large #s i bet in order to not be sniped out completely b4fore completing some bombing missions. People say that S300, Bavar 373, Khordad, S400, etc are fake weapons. well if they are fake weaposn why dont NATO top secret invisible crap F35 and f-22 go and fly inside their radar envelope? It doesnt make sense. if these systems are really crap then why didint Israeli F16s fly in 100s over Saudi to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities?? they didnt cuz they couldnt. the AD net would have caught too-many-to-lose # of planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Yankee-stani

925boy said:


> ISRAEL IS BAD AT LAND WARFARE. The moment Israeli troops have to fight man to man on the ground, Israelis start dying fast and losing morale. We saw it in 2006. Even my dad, he always yells and tells me - "those Israelis dunno how to fight" and he's right. They always have to use some technology like UAVs, or ground robots...and at that same time their keyboard warriors on PDF will tell you the IDF are the bravest army in the world. I dont understand their logic.
> 
> @Shams313 cheers for your smart point about whether Israel had ever faced a quality enemy, cuz Israel has been fighting terrorists and paramilitary forces only for decades now..so Israeli military isnt all its hyped up to be.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

The systems was revealed a few years ago, but still an interesting one. It is called the "Yavar" project. It is an electronic warfare system used to detect and disrupt anti-radiation missiles (and possible anti radiation drones)










A good thread regarding it:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1272434163954733057

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## NaCon

925boy said:


> ISRAEL IS BAD AT LAND WARFARE. The moment Israeli troops have to fight man to man on the ground, Israelis start dying fast and losing morale. We saw it in 2006. Even my dad, he always yells and tells me - "those Israelis dunno how to fight" and he's right. They always have to use some technology like UAVs, or ground robots...and at that same time their keyboard warriors on PDF will tell you the IDF are the bravest army in the world. I dont understand their logic.
> .


the know how to fight and they are one of the best fighting forces in the world. Ethnic divisions and there classifications in the army as well as their society make it more prawn to moral break down and for reasons how the country was established and the foundations of the state they cant enter a war and sustain heavy casualties there will be uproar and that will rock the entire state to its foundations.



NaCon said:


> the know how to fight and they are one of the best fighting forces in the world. Ethnic divisions and there classifications in the army as well as their society make it more prawn to moral break down and for reasons how the country was established and the foundations of the state they cant enter a war and sustain heavy casualties there will be uproar and that will rock the entire state to its foundations.


A society that is not willing to sacrifice lives for their existence will face existential threat


----------



## 925boy

IAm said:


> Destruction of AD system does not means it is useless. There is no invincible AD system anywhere. Any AD system can be attacked and destroyed even if it performs with 100% accuracy and there is nothing like 100% accuracy in any AD system. David Sling even if it is 100% accurate, it still has a limited number of interceptor missiles to fire. after exhausting it missiles it will be destroyed with ease. All it takes is to fire more than it can intercept and destroy it even if it is 100% accurate. I think you are over exited.


EVen the Iron dome is not accurate because:

1) Iron dome doesnt intercept every missile, even those that wil hit Israeli citizens or infrastructure
2) EVen the missiles and rockets that Iron dome hits, it doesnt always hit the warhead, so sometimes, it hits the missile, but missile will fall and destroy something because the warhead is still intact, dropping over Israeli people and territory
3)Iron dome cant handle saturation attacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

interesting....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273673459227336706

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Messerschmitt

Check out the new video on Hajizadeh's Telegram channel: https://telegram.me/hajizadeh_org

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

radar blurred....

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Philosopher

IRGC released a new video regarding "Sevome Khordad" system:

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## QWECXZ

Philosopher said:


> A new video released regarding Sevome Khordad system, a must watch:


Is this the same video that @Messerschmitt was talking about? I don't have telegram.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Some snip shots from the Video:



























QWECXZ said:


> Is this the same video that @Messerschmitt was talking about? I don't have telegram.



Yes, it is.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Blue In Green

Philosopher said:


> Some snip shots from the Video:
> 
> View attachment 642859
> 
> View attachment 642848
> View attachment 642849
> View attachment 642850
> View attachment 642851
> View attachment 642852
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it is.
> 
> View attachment 642858
> View attachment 642856
> View attachment 642857



This is just the best, it feels like we all got a gift we didn't necessarily deserve lol!

Thank you to everyone posting photos, videos and any related material!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

Sevome Khordad vs UAV. Poor thing never had a chance.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Draco.IMF

They produce 3rd Khordad like cookies

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Philosopher

Sevome Khordad on the naval vessel:

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Philosopher

What a scenery:

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## 925boy

Philosopher said:


> Some snip shots from the Video:
> View attachment 642864
> 
> View attachment 642849
> 
> View attachment 642866
> 
> View attachment 642865
> 
> View attachment 642850
> 
> View attachment 642852
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it is.
> 
> View attachment 642858
> View attachment 642856
> View attachment 642857


"Fake weapons" believers must be rejoicing at this. smh.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Shams313

Draco.IMF said:


> They produce 3rd Khordad like cookies


Yess, more cookies plz.
Pack em and sent em here and there...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

Global hawk strike moment video released:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273788331168608256

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1085329/تصاویر-دیده-نشده-از-لحظه-سرنگونی-پهپاد-آمریکایی

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

Philosopher said:


> Sevome Khordad on the naval vessel:
> 
> View attachment 642887
> View attachment 642888



Any opinions why they placed the 3rd Khordad on a vessel?


----------



## Sineva

Philosopher said:


> Sevome Khordad vs UAV. Poor thing never had a chance.
> 
> View attachment 642860
> View attachment 642861
> View attachment 642862
> View attachment 642863


Heres a gif animation of the sequence.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## sahureka2

Draco.IMF said:


> Any opinions why they placed the 3rd Khordad on a vessel?



interesting article that offers some answers

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1085399/چرا-آمریکایی-ها-۲-بار-به-شناور-شهید-سیاوشی-نزدیک-شدند

in this article some interesting news, it is not in English, I used an automatic translator for the part of the article that can answer the user question "Draco.IMF"






"..............._However, in the first place, the shipment of the 3rd of Khordad system with its marine vessel, which is a small-scale vessel that is more affected by the sea waves, shows that the preparations for the full development of the 3rd of Khordad naval model are being prepared. .

Creating the ability to operate from the sea and navigating the sea requires observing certain points in the system. Aside from the requirements for the operation of a radar and missile system in harsh sea environments, which are characterized by high and constant humidity, radar performance in tracking targets while the platform is constantly fluctuating due to sea waves with different ranges and frequencies. It is very important. This requires modifications to the system software in addition to hardware improvements.

On the other hand, the firing of the missile from the 3rd of Khordad system installed on the vessel also shows the necessary software and hardware changes in the missile, especially its searcher, so that the unstable conditions of the platform do not prevent the correct firing of the missile.

According to this hot test of the 3rd of Khordad system, the IRGC experts have done their job in complete news silence, and after making sure that it is correct, they have shown pictures of this important achievement.

Also, from the images published from the 3rd of Khordad system on the vessel of Shahid Siavashi, it can be understood that this system has been tested and tested several times and can be distinguished by the difference between the missiles (in the first photo and the photo from the moment of firing).

As mentioned, the main part of the 3rd of Khordad system is a radar carrier, crew chamber and three defense missiles. As a result, the system is small enough to fit in a marine vessel that, if the floating model is developed, becomes even smaller by removing the vehicle.

The use of air defense missiles on the 3rd of Khordad with a range of more than 100 km on IRGC naval vessels has on the one hand created a risk factor for enemy birds to better protect IRGC vessels in offensive operations and on the other hand a mobile naval platform for This system creates an advanced and valuable way to expand its performance beyond the coast.

In fact, if the naval vessel carrying the June 3 system in most parts of the Persian Gulf is about 80 to 110 kilometers from the coast of Iran, this system will be able to engage with targets on the southern shores of the Persian Gulf.

Due to the very high range of Iranian radar surveillance systems and early warning, it is possible to move missile defense systems farther from the shore by sea vessels; The Navy is also pursuing the Dena, which is scheduled to be operational in the South Fleet in the near future.

Increased air defense capability in medium to long range and high altitude by missiles such as Sayad-2 and 3 and missiles of the 3rd of Khordad system, an important event in the country's defense field both in the present to increase deterrence and in times of conflict A potential military is crucial to the ability to strike at an enemy air fleet.

Increasing the number of naval air defense systems and completing its various links from short to long range is a complementary factor in the above efforts to achieve a reliable naval defense, which is hoped to be developed by developing a marine model of other air defense systems. It will be realized soon. Due to the very high range of Iranian radar surveillance systems and early warning, it will be possible to move missile defense systems farther from the coast by sea vessels; The Navy is also pursuing the Dena, which is scheduled to be operational in the South Fleet in the near future.

Increased air defense capability in medium to long range and high altitude by missiles such as Sayad-2 and 3 and missiles of the 3rd of Khordad system, an important event in the country's defense field both in the present to increase deterrence and in times of conflict A potential military is crucial to the ability to strike at an enemy air fleet.

Increasing the number of naval air defense systems and completing its various links from short to long range is a complementary factor in the above efforts to achieve a reliable naval defense, which is hoped to be developed by developing a marine model of other air defense systems. "_

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

Very interesting, in a part of the clip you can see the missile diving at target from the top. This system in which the missile is at a higher angle relative to the target increases the likelihood of the low RCS targets to be detected due to their relatively higher RCS from these differing angles:








__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273802240193683456

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273805225820856320

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## scimitar19

It wouldn't be a surprise if this missile could launch from submarines off shores from Gulf of Oman as long as you have illumination target from the Iranian coast!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> Very interesting, in a part of the clip you can see the missile diving at target from the top. This system in which the missile is at a higher angle relative to the target increases the likelihood of the low RCS targets to be detected due to their relatively higher RCS from these differing angles:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273802240193683456
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1273805225820856320


also top attack capability means your missile due to higher altitude, always has energy to counter maneuverable targets. also the missile due to it's position is immune to +9g maneuvers that in most of the times pilots do to dodge the incoming missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

925boy said:


> "Fake weapons" believers must be rejoicing at this. smh.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 643119

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## hussainb72

Philosopher said:


>


There is a chance the 3rd of Khordad system was placed on the vessel to test it in sea conditions. That means that the system might be used on future warships. Isnt the IRGC building a new vessel? It might be equipped with a VLS launched version of the 3rd of Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hussainb72

hussainb72 said:


> There is a chance the 3rd of Khordad system was placed on the vessel to test it in sea conditions. That means that the system might be used on future warships. Isnt the IRGC building a new vessel? It might be equipped with a VLS launched version of the 3rd of Khordad.


So this was true, the IRGC tested the 3rd of Khordad's naval variant, as well as a test for firing while moving. This test shows that the 3rd of Khordad can be used on warships as well as used on the ground while moving, but I think that the vehicle itself would need some changes.

https://www.farsnews.ir/amp/13990331000122?__twitter_impression=true

Also the IRGC said that they are entering the long range naval air defence field.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

*Seems IRGC is working on their own very long range air defence! Hopefully we will see the "super Sevome Khordad" with 200km range that I wished for.

IRGC Commander: Iran to Build Long-Range Air Defense Systems*

TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Air Defense Force Brigadier General Reza Shaban announced IRGC plans to manufacture long-range high-altitude air defense systems.
"We are in possession of home-made low-altitude air defense systems and they have passed the tests very successfully, and there are now very good plans to build long-range high-altitude air defense shields and God willing, we will witness manufacturing different such systems in the near future," General Shaban told FNA on Saturday.

"Today, we have high capabilities in building radars, including Bashir, Qadir and other radars and they will enter the operational stage of the IRGC Air Defense Force gradually," he added.

"Actually, we are able to design any needed radar and we have gained self-sufficiency in this field," General Shaban said.

Iran has produced different powerful missile defense shields in recent years, including Third of Khordad.

A year after a US intruding drone was shot down over the Southern coasts of Iran by the IRGC Aerospace Force, new images of the naval version of the missile system were released for the first time.

The system has been stationed on the IRGC Shahid Siavoshi frigate and is capable of target lock and missile fire with the frigate on the move.

Third of Khordad missile system, that has been 100% mass produced by the experts of the IRGC Aerospace Force, is the same system which shot down on June 20, 2019 the highly advanced MQ-4C Triton drone of the American terrorists in Iran’s territorial waters South of the country near Kouh-e Mobarak region at an altitude of 50 thousand feet.

This system was unveiled for the first time during the visit of Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei. It is capable of engaging and intercepting 4 active targets at each round and has been assigned for countering tactical and strategic aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles and drones and can also shoot down its targets under electronic warfare conditions.

Last year, IRGC Aerospace Force Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh had informed of designing and making a missile system that, unlike the existing systems in the world, can trace, lock, engage and intercept targets on a moving platform.

The Third of Khordad Air Defense Shield fires Taer-2 Missiles which have also been developed and mass produced at the IRGC Aerospace Force. Third of Khordad defense shield is also capable of launching Sayyad-2 missiles with a range of 75 kilometers.

These images have for the first time shown the production phases and production line of the system at the industrial sections of the IRGC Aerospace in which there are young men and women working to this end.

Shahid Siavoshi frigate of the IRGC Naval Force, which carries the Third of Khordad missile system, has been domestically made and it is the same frigate which had an encounter with the USS Vella Gulf warship of the US Fifth Fleet on March 7, 2020 while patrolling the Persian Gulf and forced it to move away.

On June 20 last year, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force announced that it used the Iran-made short-range and mid-altitude 'Third of Khordad' missile defense shield to bring down the US spy drone over the country's Southern coasts, releasing videos that showed the flight path of the plane as well as the moment it was brought down.

The incident marked the first direct Iranian attack on US assets and came amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran. The downing of the $220mln drone was also the latest in an escalating series of incidents in the Persian Gulf since mid-May, including suspected attacks on six tankers that the US blamed on Iran. Tehran has denied any involvement in the incidents.

https://en.farsnews.ir/newstext.aspx?nn=13990331000399

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

Philosopher said:


> *Seems IRGC is working on their own very long range air defence! Hopefully we will see the "super Sevome Khordad" with 200km range that I wished for.
> 
> IRGC Commander: Iran to Build Long-Range Air Defense Systems*
> 
> TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Air Defense Force Brigadier General Reza Shaban announced IRGC plans to manufacture long-range high-altitude air defense systems.
> "We are in possession of home-made low-altitude air defense systems and they have passed the tests very successfully, and there are now very good plans to build long-range high-altitude air defense shields and God willing, we will witness manufacturing different such systems in the near future," General Shaban told FNA on Saturday.
> 
> "Today, we have high capabilities in building radars, including Bashir, Qadir and other radars and they will enter the operational stage of the IRGC Air Defense Force gradually," he added.
> 
> "Actually, we are able to design any needed radar and we have gained self-sufficiency in this field," General Shaban said.
> 
> Iran has produced different powerful missile defense shields in recent years, including Third of Khordad.
> 
> A year after a US intruding drone was shot down over the Southern coasts of Iran by the IRGC Aerospace Force, new images of the naval version of the missile system were released for the first time.
> 
> The system has been stationed on the IRGC Shahid Siavoshi frigate and is capable of target lock and missile fire with the frigate on the move.
> 
> Third of Khordad missile system, that has been 100% mass produced by the experts of the IRGC Aerospace Force, is the same system which shot down on June 20, 2019 the highly advanced MQ-4C Triton drone of the American terrorists in Iran’s territorial waters South of the country near Kouh-e Mobarak region at an altitude of 50 thousand feet.
> 
> This system was unveiled for the first time during the visit of Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei. It is capable of engaging and intercepting 4 active targets at each round and has been assigned for countering tactical and strategic aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles and drones and can also shoot down its targets under electronic warfare conditions.
> 
> Last year, IRGC Aerospace Force Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh had informed of designing and making a missile system that, unlike the existing systems in the world, can trace, lock, engage and intercept targets on a moving platform.
> 
> The Third of Khordad Air Defense Shield fires Taer-2 Missiles which have also been developed and mass produced at the IRGC Aerospace Force. Third of Khordad defense shield is also capable of launching Sayyad-2 missiles with a range of 75 kilometers.
> 
> These images have for the first time shown the production phases and production line of the system at the industrial sections of the IRGC Aerospace in which there are young men and women working to this end.
> 
> Shahid Siavoshi frigate of the IRGC Naval Force, which carries the Third of Khordad missile system, has been domestically made and it is the same frigate which had an encounter with the USS Vella Gulf warship of the US Fifth Fleet on March 7, 2020 while patrolling the Persian Gulf and forced it to move away.
> 
> On June 20 last year, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force announced that it used the Iran-made short-range and mid-altitude 'Third of Khordad' missile defense shield to bring down the US spy drone over the country's Southern coasts, releasing videos that showed the flight path of the plane as well as the moment it was brought down.
> 
> The incident marked the first direct Iranian attack on US assets and came amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran. The downing of the $220mln drone was also the latest in an escalating series of incidents in the Persian Gulf since mid-May, including suspected attacks on six tankers that the US blamed on Iran. Tehran has denied any involvement in the incidents.
> 
> https://en.farsnews.ir/newstext.aspx?nn=13990331000399


Maybe the final version of the Alamolhoda project?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Messerschmitt said:


> Maybe the final version of the Alamolhoda project?



That is a very good possibility. Perhaps we will finally see the Sadid-630 missile:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


>


what is this??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Mithridates said:


> what is this??


You beat me to it bro, What is it? Oghab?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Release for the first time!
Image of a Sayad-2 missile equipped with an infrared seeker*








Mithridates said:


> what is this??





mohammad45 said:


> You beat me to it bro, What is it? Oghab?



it's a photoshop version of the oghab

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *Release for the first time!
> Image of a Sayad-2 missile equipped with an infrared seeker*



This is a great news. Now we know this system can work in purely passive mode too. This Sevome Khordad gets better by the day.







-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Some more pictures of the Sadid-630:






Also, looking at the below Alam Al hoda system:






You can see what appears to be a Fateh-110. I recall back in the old IMF, we speculated that Iran could eventually develop a 'super long ranged" surface to air missile based on either the Fateh-110 or Sadid-630. Obviously such a system would be relatively less maneuverable and thus used primarily for larger targets such as AWACS. Think of it as the IRGC's equivalent to the 40N6E missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## hussainb72

Philosopher said:


> Some more pictures of the Sadid-630:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, looking at the below Alam Al hoda system:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can see what appears to be a Fateh-110. I recall back in the old IMF, we speculated that Iran could eventually develop a 'super long ranged" surface to air missile based on either the Fateh-110 or Sadid-630. Obviously such a system would be relatively less maneuverable and thus used primarily for larger targets such as AWACS. Think of it as the IRGC's equivalent to the 40N6E missile.


What about an ASAT missile? It might be useable as an ASAT against LEO sats if it can reach around 400km or 500km. But I am not sure if the Fateh 110 has such a capability. I think it can be converted into one if the warhead was changed into a kinetic kill vehicle that has a booster.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

hussainb72 said:


> What about an ASAT missile? It might be useable as an ASAT against LEO sats if it can reach around 400km or 500km. But I am not sure if the Fateh 110 has such a capability. I think it can be converted into one if the warhead was changed into a kinetic kill vehicle that has a booster.



After the revealing of the Salman TVC system, an Iranian ASAT is just a matter of time. Gen Hajizadeh himself mentioned ASAT during the unveiling ceremony of Salman. In terms of which missiles they will use as the base, there are many choices. ASAT weapons are a key weapon in my eyes because in a potential future conflict, our enemies' satellites should be one of the first targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

سردار شبان: سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود/ تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف
فرمانده پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه در گفتگوی تفصیلی با خبرگزاری فارس، ابعاد مختلف ماجرای سرنگونی پهپاد آمریکایی و برنامه‌های پدافند هوایی سپاه را تشریح کرد.





گروه امنیتی دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس- محمد شلتوکی: ۳۰ خرداد ۱۳۹۸ جهان شاهد اتفاقی تاریخی بود؛ درحالیکه دولت آمریکا با اقداماتی نمایشی از جمله اعزام ناو هواپیمابر و بمب‌افکن به منطقه در پی القای سایه‌ای سنگین از جنگ بر سر کشور برای کشاندن ایران به پای میز مذاکره و امتیازگیری بود، پهپاد MQ-4C تروریست‌های آمریکایی که بر فراز دریای عمان و در نزدیکی تنگه هرمز در حال پرواز بود، تنها پس از چند مایل تجاوز به فضای آب‌های سرزمینی جمهوری اسلامی ایران مورد اصابت موشک سامانه پدافندی «سوم خرداد» نیروی هوافضای سپاه قرار گرفت و سرنگون شد.

اثرات و برکات اقدام قاطع ایران ساقط کردن پهپاد آمریکایی و پس از آن توقیف نفتکش انگلیسی، آنچنان اثری برجای گذاشت که علاوه بر عقب‌‎نشینی مفتضحانه و بی‌سروصدای نیروهای آمریکایی از منطقه و باطل شدن گزینه سایه جنگ، به اذعان تحلیلگران مسائل امنیت ملی، تراز قدرت جمهوری اسلامی ایران به طرز چشمگیری افزایش یافت.

از سوی دیگر، سرنگونی این پهپاد در ارتفاع بیش از ۵۲ هزارپایی از سطح زمین و توسط یک سامانه پدافندی صددرصد بومی که تمامی مراحل ساخت آن در داخل کشور و توسط نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام شده است، از دیگر نکات و موضوعاتی بود که مورد توجه قرار گرفت.

سردار رضا شبان فرمانده پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه است که از اسفندماه ۱۳۹۸ مسئولیت این فرماندهی به وی واگذار شده است. او پیش از این معاونت هماهنگ‌کننده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) و در مقطع پیش از آن هم فرماندهی پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه را بر عهده داشته است.






به بهانه سالروز سرنگونی پهپاد فوق پیشرفته آمریکایی، در واپسین روزهای بهار میهمان او در دفتر کارش بودیم تا در اولین گفتگوی رسانه‌ای وی، ابعاد مختلف قدرت پدافند هوایی سپاه را به بحث و گفتگو بگذاریم.

مهمترین محورهای این گفتگو به شرح زیر است:

** پیشرفت پدافند هوایی سپاه با حضور سردار حاجی‌زاده شتاب گرفت

** در حوزه‌های مختلف پدافندی توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی داریم

** پدافند هوایی سپاه در سراسر کشور حضور دارد

** نمونه‌های اولیه سامانه سوم خرداد با نمونه‌های فعلی تفاوت‌های عملیاتی جدی دارد

** تمام مراحل طراحی و ساخت سوم خرداد در نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام می‌شود

** تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف

** سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود

** قادر به طراحی و ساخت هر نوع راداری هستیم

** سامانه‌های پدافندی‌مان برخوردار از آخرین فناوری‌های مقابله با جنگ الکترونیک است

** با کمترین هزینه پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید می‌کنیم

** با تکیه به جوانان و قطع امید از خارج به همه اهداف‌مان می‌رسیم

** دشمنان باید نگاهشان به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد

مشروح این گفتگو را در ادامه بخوانید:

** پیشرفت پدافند هوایی سپاه با حضور سردار حاجی‌زاده شتاب گرفت

فارس: تا پیش از هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد آمریکایی در ۳۰ خرداد ۱۳۹۸، توانمندی های پدافند هوایی سپاه برای عموم چندان شناخته شده نبود؛ در حالی که این موضوع ثابت کرد علاوه بر حوزه‌های موشکی، پهپادی و ... سپاه در پدافند هوایی نیز به یک سطح بسیار بالایی از توانمندی رسیده است؛ روند این تقویت توان پدافندی سپاه را تشریح بفرمایید؛ کار از چه زمانی شروع شد و چه مراحلی را طی کرد؟

سردار شبان: بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم- پدافند هوایی از زمان تاسیس تا به امروز فراز و نشیب های بسیار زیادی داشت. به ویژه از زمانی که سردار حاجی‌زاده فرمانده محترم نیروی هوافضای سپاه مسئولیت پدافند را بر عهده گرفتند، از آن زمان شاهد پیشرفت‌های متعددی در حوزه پدافند هوایی بودیم چراکه با ورود ایشان و طراحی و ترسیم یک نقشه راه در حوزه پدافند هوایی، کار شروع شد.

در آن زمان جهاد خودکفایی نیروی هوافضا وجود داشت، اما در حوزه پدافند هوایی طرح‌های زیادی را در اختیار نداشتند که بحمدالله با گذشت زمان و تدبیر و نگاه راهبردی که فرمانده محترم نیرو داشتند، پروژه‌های مختلفی در حوزه تولید سلاح‌های بومی، متناسب با تهدید و نیازمندی‌های پدافند هوایی سپاه طراحی و در جهاد خودکفایی سپاه و صنعت تولید شد که امروز شاهد بالندگی تجهیزات پدافند هوایی هستیم.

در حوزه‌های مختلف هم برنامه‌های بسیار زیادی وجود داشت؛ از جمله در حوزه کشف و شناسایی اهداف، سامانه‌‌های راداری در باندهای مختلف فرکانسی و همچنین سامانه‌های موشکی که امروز بعنوان نمونه‌ می‌توان به سامانه سوم خرداد، طبس و ... اشاره کرد که مورد افتخار همه است و امروز در سطح پدافند هوایی به کارگیری می‌شود و قدرت بازدارندگی را برای کشور فراهم کرده است.








** در حوزه‌های مختلف پدافندی توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی داریم

فارس: سال گذشته نمایشگاهی توسط نیروی هوافضای سپاه تحت عنوان شکار کرکس‌ها برپا شد که در آن پهپادهای غنیمتی به نمایش در آمده بودند، شکار برخی از این پهپادها رسانه ای شده بود، اما بخش اعظمی از پهپادهای به نمایش درآمده برای نخستین بار بود که شکار آنها علنی می‌شد، این موضوع حاکی از یک حرکت چراغ خاموش پدافند هوایی سپاه طی سال های گذشته بود، از ابعاد شکارهای متنوع سپاه در حوزه پهپادهای متخاصم برایمان بگویید.

سردار شبان: با گذشت سال‌ها در نیروی هوافضای سپاه و بخش پدافند، به قابلیت‌های بسیار خوبی دست پیدا کرده ایم که شاهد مثال آن همین پهپادهایی است که توسط پدافند مورد اصابت قرار گرفت و یا برخی از آنها هم سالم به غنیمت گرفته شد. این حاکی از توانمندی‌هایی است که طی سال‌های گذشته ایجاد شده و می‌توانیم امروز به جرأت بگوییم که در حوزه‌های مختلف دارای توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی و حرف برای گفتن هستیم که نمونه‌های آن هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد هرمس و همین پهپاد MQ-4C بود.

** پدافند هوایی سپاه در سراسر کشور حضور دارد

فارس: امروز پدافند هوایی سپاه چه ماموریتی را در حوزه پدافندی انجام می‌دهد و در چه پهنه ای از کشور استقرار دارد؟

سردار شبان: پدافند نیروی هوافضای سپاه بخشی از پدافند هوایی کشور است که تحت کنترل عملیاتی شبکه یکپارچه پدافند هوایی کشور قرار دارد و در عرصه‌های مختلف ماموریت‌های متنوعی را در حوزه کشف، شناسایی و درگیری بر عهده دارد. از سویی در شبکه و در موارد و نقاط مختلفی که از سوی ستادکل نیروهای مسلح ماموریتی واگذار شود نیز در سراسر کشور ماموریت خود را انجام می‌دهد.








** نمونه‌های اولیه سامانه سوم خرداد با نمونه‌های فعلی تفاوت‌های عملیاتی جدی دارد

فارس: پس از هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد متجاوز آمریکایی یکی از دستاوردهایی که تبدیل به نماد پدافند هوایی سپاه و بلکه پدافند هوایی کشور شد، سامانه بومی سوم خرداد بود که با شلیک آن پهپاد ترایتون ساقط شد. گرچه تاکنون برخی مسائل درباره این سامانه مطرح شده است، اما تاکنون روایت جامعی از چگونگی تولید و به کارگیری این سامانه وجود نداشته، چگونگی دستیابی نیروی هوافضای سپاه به این فناوری را تشریح بفرمایید.

سردار شبان: سطح و کیفیت تهدید دائماً در حال تغییر است و منطق بر این است که توانمندی‌ها و قابلیت‌های پدافندی هم متناسب با این تهدیدات هر روز تغییر کند. ما در یک مقطع زمانی به این نتیجه رسیدیم که سطح تهدید متناسب با تجهیزاتی که در اختیار داریم نیست و نیازمند سلاح‌ها و ابزارهای جدیدتری برای مقابله با این تهدیدات هستیم. لذا با بررسی های فنی و عملیاتی و اطلاعاتی که انجام داده بودیم، نقطه شروع سامانه سوم خرداد و ایضا طبس به وجود آمد و طی مراحلی در چند سال طراحی سامانه با توجه به الگوها و مشخصات فنی و عملیاتی که برای مقابله با تهدیدات موجود در ذهن داشتیم انجام شد.

بدین ترتیب نمونه اول سامانه ساخته و تست شد و به این نتیجه رسیدیم که این سامانه بر اساس فرضیاتی که داشتیم، می‌تواند پاسخگوی تهدیدات امروز برای ما باشد. البته این را هم باید بگویم که بر روی این سامانه هر روز ارتقاءهای متفاوتی صورت می‌گیرد و همین امروز که صحبت می‌کنیم، نمونه اولی که ساخته شده با نمونه‌ای که امروز تحویل می‌گیریم تفاوت‌های بسیار جدی در مشخصات فنی و عملیاتی سامانه دارد که این مرهون شناخت درست تهدید و پیاده سازی نیازمندی‌ها روی این سامانه بوده که باعث شده امروز به سطح بسیار خوب و قابل قبولی در حوزه تولید تجهیزات بومی برسیم.

** تمام مراحل طراحی و ساخت سوم خرداد در نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام می‌شود

فارس: ساخت این سامانه تماماً در نیروی هوافضا صورت گرفته است؟

سردار شبان: بله- تمام این تسلیحات و سامانه‌های موجود مانند سوم خرداد، طبس و رادارها و سامانه‌های دیگر، مبدأ شروع آن و طراحی و ساخت و تولید و بکارگیری آن در مجموعه پدافند نیروی هوافضا و سازمان جهاد خودکفایی انجام می‌شود.








** تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف

فارس: سامانه پدافندی سوم خرداد به نظر می رسد بستر و پلتفرم بسیار خوبی برای توسعه و تجهیز به قابلیت های جدید و بهتر باشد، اخیرا نیز تصاویری منتشر شد که حاکی از عملیاتی شدن نسخه دریایی این سامانه بود که قابلیت های رزمی چشمگیری برای نیروهای مسلح فراهم می‌کند، از برنامه‌هایی که برای توسعه این سامانه اجرا شده و یا در دست اجرا است برای مان بفرمایید.

سردار شبان: طراحی و ساخت و تولید سامانه‌های پدافندی از یک پیچیدگی بسیار خاصی برخوردار است و نیازمند فناوری روز است. ما بر اساس نیازمندی‌هایی که در حوزه تهدید عرض کردم و تغییرات و ارتقاء‌هایی که روی سامانه های مختلف ایجاد می‌کنیم، به این نتیجه رسیدیم که نیازمندیم در حوزه دفاع هوایی بر روی شناور هم یک سلاح متناسب و درخوری داشته باشیم. کارشناسان فنی می‌دانند چه می‌گویم؛ طراحی چنین سیستمی که بر روی یک شناور قرار بگیرد و در حال حرکت بتواند شلیک کند دارای پیچیدگی بسیار زیادی است که بحمدالله با بهره‌گیری از دانش فنی عزیزان‌مان در سپاه توانستیم به این فناوری دست پیدا کنیم و سامانه‌ای را طراحی کنیم که بتواند در حال حرکت بر روی شناور شلیک داشته باشد و الحمدالله تست موفقی را هم داشتیم و توانستیم هدف را مورد اصابت قرار دهیم.

امروز ما حتی از این بخش هم عبور کردیم و ارتقاءها و موضوعات دیگری را هم در سامانه خواهیم داشت که به تناسب زمان رونمایی خواهد شد.

** سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود

فارس: یکی از نکاتی که در خصوص پدافند هوایی سپاه مطرح می‌شود، ورود به موضوع پدافند برد و ارتفاع بلند است چراکه آنچه تاکنون از توان پدافندی سپاه دیده شده، در حوزه برد و ارتفاع کوتاه و متوسط بوده است، آیا سپاه برنامه‌ای برای ورود به موضوع پدافند برد/ارتفاع بلند دارد؟

سردار شبان: قاعدتا بر اساس تعاریفی که در پدافند هوایی وجود دارد، در حوزه‌های کشف، درگیری و انهدام نیازمندی در سطوح مختلف وجود دارد. ما هم در سطح ارتفاع پست، ارتفاع متوسط و ارتفاع بالا نیازمند برخورداری از سامانه‌های پدافندی هستیم. این امروز نقطه شروعش انجام شده. در حوزه ارتفاع پست هم دارای سامانه‌های بومی هستیم که تست‌های بسیار موفقی را گذرانده‌ایم و در ارتفاع بالا و برد بلند هم که یکی از نیازمندی‌های ضروری پدافند هوایی است، طرح‌های بسیار خوبی وجود دارد که انشالله در آینده نزدیک شاهد ورود سامانه‌های متنوعی در این بخش خواهیم بود.

** قادر به طراحی و ساخت هر نوع راداری هستیم

فارس: در حوزه حساسه ها و رادارها هم سپاه طی سال‌های گذشته دستاوردهای قابل توجهی داشته است؛ رادارهای برد بلند قدیر، رادار بشیر و ... نمونه هایی از این موضوع هستند.

سردار شبان: ما در حوزه راداری وابستگی زیادی داشتیم؛ اما با گذشت زمان و توجه جدّی به این بخش باعث شد که ما به ساخت رادارها در باندهای فرکانسی متنوع و برد و ارتفاع‌های متفاوت ورود کنیم. امروز ما از برد خیلی کم تا برد بسیار زیاد توانایی ساخت رادار را داریم از جمله رادار بشیر، رادار قدیر و رادارهای دیگری که با گذشت زمان وارد مدار عملیاتی پدافند سپاه می‌شود.

امروز ما در سطح و تراز کشورهای صاحب فناوری ساخت رادارهای پیچیده هستیم و امروز از این مرحله هم عبور کرده‌ایم و برای همه نیازمندی‌هایمان در حوزه کشف و شناسایی، با دانش فنی عزیزانمان توانسته‌ایم انواع رادارها را بسازیم و بکارگیری کنیم. در واقع قادریم هر نوع رادار مورد نیاز خودمان را طراحی کنیم و بحمدالله در این بحث به خودکفایی رسیدیم.








** سامانه‌های پدافندی‌مان برخوردار از آخرین فناوری‌های مقابله با جنگ الکترونیک است

فارس: در موضوع پدافند هوایی همواره یکی از چالش‌ها موضوع سرکوب دفاع هوایی است که تکنیکی شناخته شده در جهان است؛ امروزه از تجهیزات گسترده جنگ الکترونیک برای سرکوب دفاع هوایی طرف مقابل استفاده می‌شود، جنگ الکترونیک نیز در ارتباطی تنگاتنگ با بحث پدافند هوایی قرار دارد، در این زمینه چه اقداماتی در مجموعه پدافند هوایی سپاه صورت گرفته است؟

سردار شبان: مصون سازی سامانه‌های پدافند هوایی در مقابل تهاجم الکترونیکی دشمن یکی از اساسی‌ترین کلیدواژه‌هایی است که مورد توجه قرار می‌گیرد؛ چراکه در غیر این صورت سامانه کارایی خود را در مقابل این تهدیدات نخواهد داشت. بالطبع ما در این حوزه هم ورود کردیم و سامانه‌های جدیدی را که می‌سازیم برخوردار از آخرین فناوری و روش‌های مقابله با تهاجم الکترونیکی دشمن است. این قابلیت‌ها را در میدان به کرّات تست کرده‌ایم که بسیار موفق و قابل قبول بوده است.

** با کمترین هزینه پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید می‌کنیم

فارس: یکی از نکاتی که راجع به سامانه‌های پدافندی مطرح می‌شود، هزینه‌های آنهاست و در منطقه ما هم مرتبا شاهد عقد قراردادهایی با مبالغ نجومی میان کشورهای مرتجع منطقه با کشورهای غربی برای دریافت سامانه‌های پدافندی هستیم که البته در موارد متعددی عدم کارآمدی آنها ثابت شده است؛ از سویی یکی از ویژگی‌های تسلیحات ما هزینه‌های تولید بسیار پایین نسبت به رقبای خارجی است؛ آیا این موضوع کم بودن هزینه درست است؟

سردار شبان: همان‌گونه که اشاره کردم سامانه‌های پدافندی نیازمند یک فناوری بسیار پیچیده است و بالطبع دارای قیمت و هزینه‌های بسیار بالایی است. شاهد هستید که کشورهای مختلفی دارای خریدهای متعدد تجهیزاتی و سلاحی هستند که وقتی به اعداد و ارقام آنها رجوع می‌کنیم می‌بینیم اعداد بسیار قابل ملاحظه و بالایی است.

از آنجایی که سامانه‌هایی مثل سوم خرداد، طبس و ...چون تولید خودمان و بومی است، ما سعی کردیم در قیمت تمام شده به یک قیمت بسیار پایین‌تر از قیمت‌هایی که امروز در دنیا روال است برسیم چراکه تکنولوژی و فناوری این سامانه‌ها دست خودمان است و خودمان طراحی کردیم. این موضوع در حالی است که بکارگیری این سامانه برای ما هیچ مشکلی ندارد و هیچ نوع وابستگی هم به خارج از کشور نداریم. از سویی ما می بینیم کشورهایی که میلیاردها دلار سلاح و تجهیزات خریداری می‌کنند، حتی در به کارگیری آن هم وابسته هستند!

به طور کلی در به کارگیری، تولید و هزینه‌ها می‌توانیم بگوییم که اصلا قابل مقایسه نیستم و بحمدالله توانسته‌ایم با کمترین هزینه‌ها، پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید کنیم. امروز وقتی به اعداد و ارقام و آمارهایی که جزو خریدهای تسلیحاتی کشورهای متعددی است نگاه کنید و با هزینه‌های بخش دفاع کشورمان مقایسه کنید متوجه می‌شود اعداد آنها اعداد بسیار بالایی است که اصلا قابل مقایسه نیست؛ اما در عین حال تسلیحات ما با کمترین هزینه در تراز تسلیحات پیشرفته دنیا است که این یکی از ویژگی‌های خاص ما در نظام مقدس جمهوری اسلامی ایران در تولید نیازمندی های دفاعی است.

امروز با اتکاء به خداوند متعال، اتکاء به دانش داخلی و اتکاء به جوانان‌مان که می‌توانند هر کاری را شروع کنند و به سرانجام برسانند، تمام نیازمندی‌هایمان را می‌توانیم در داخل تولید کنیم، مشروط بر اینکه اعتقاد و نگاهمان به توان داخلی باشد نه خارجی. نگاه به خارج مساوی است با وابستگی و هزینه‌های بالا. مادامیکه نگاه به خارج باشد باید سرمایه های کشورمان را در قبال چیزهای کم ارزشی که وابستگی‌های زیادی دارد صرف کنیم.

با اتکا به این ویژگی‌ها توانسته‌ایم هم در حوزه نظامی و هم در حوزه صنعت، نانوفناوری و ... به پیشرفت‌های بسیار چشمگیری دست پیدا کنیم و این برای کشور ما که امروز در تحریم‌های بسیار شدیدی که از سوی کشورهای غربی به ویژه آمریکا جنایتکار قرار دارد بسیار ارزشمند است.

** با تکیه به جوانان و قطع امید از خارج به همه اهداف‌مان می‌رسیم

فارس: در تصاویری که از مجموعه خط تولید سامانه پدافندی سوم خرداد منتشر شد، شاهد حضور پررنگ جوانان در تولید این سامانه بودیم، حتی بانوانی نیز در آنجا مشغول به فعالیت و به نوعی دست‌اندرکار تولید این سامانه بودند؛ نقش جوانان و نیروی انسانی در دستیابی به چنین موفقیت‌ها و فناوری‌هایی چیست؟

سردار شبان: مادامیکه تکیه بر نیروی انسانی داخلی، متعهد و انقلابی داشته باشیم، می‌توانیم با اعتماد و تکیه به آنها و قطع امید از خارج کشورمان به همه اهداف و نیازمندی‌های‌مان برسیم.

حداقل من در حوزه سلاح و تجهیزات پدافند عرض می‌کنم که ما امروز زیرساخت‌های لازم و کافی را به کمک همین جوانان توانستیم تولید کنیم و لازمه‌اش این است که به این جوانان مومن و انقلابی باور و اعتماد داشته باشیم چراکه اینها می توانند هر کاری را در هر سطحی انجام دهند مشروط بر اینکه نگاهمان به آنها باشد و نگاهمان را از خارج قطع کنیم . رمز پیروزی ما همین است.






حضرت آقا در فرامین‌شان مکررا به این موضوع اشاره کردند و مادامیکه ما به آن عمل کردیم، موفق بودیم و به نتیجه رسیدیم. حتی در فناوری های بسیار پیچیده ای که در اختیار معدود کشورهای دنیا قرار دارد هم پیشرفت کردیم، در حوزه هسته‌ای، نانوفناوری و تولید سلاح‌های پیچیده و پیشرفته پدافندی، ما فقط با این نگاه در این موقعیت قرار گرفتیم.

** دشمنان باید نگاهشان به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد

این مسیر باز است و در آینده نزدیک شاهد پیشرفت‌های بسیار زیادی خواهیم بود که لازمه‌اش فقط نگاه به داخل، نگاه به توانمندی ها و دانش فنی خودمان و بهره گیری از جوانان انقلابی، مومن و بانگیزه است که اینها اداره کننده کشورمان خواهند بود. اگر کار را به جوانان بسپاریم مطمئن باشید که به خوبی و حتی بهتر از چیزی که مد نظر هست کشور اداره می شود.

تحریم ها و تهدیدها هم مادامی‌که نگاهمان به داخل باشد هیچ تأثیری نخواهد داشت؛ آمریکایی‌ها هم در موضوع ۳۰ خرداد و سرنگونی پهپاد فوق پیشرفته شان به این نتیجه رسیده اند که جمهوری اسلامی ایران به توان بسیار بالایی دست یافته است.

به دشمنان هم می‌گوییم که باید نگاهشان نسبت به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد. ایران کشوری مقتدر در منطقه و فرامنطقه است و بدانند که اگر فکر خطایی در تجاوز و تهدید به کشورمان داشته باشند، ما قطعا ایستاده‌ایم و محکم پاسخ‌شان را خواهیم داد و بدانید که امنیت ملی برای ما خط قرمز است.

گزارش تصویری این گفتگو را در اینجا مشاهده کنید.

انتهای پیام/

https://www.farsnews.ir/news/13990331000122/سردار-شبان-سپاه-وارد-عرصه-پدافند-هوایی-برد-بلند-می‌شود-تست-موفق

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


>


Its a good photoshop,but I think that if iran was going to go to all of the trouble and effort to reverse engineer the tor we would also see some considerable reengineering as well to improve its shortcomings ie radar.
Personally I think that irans days of reverse/reengineering other countries ad systems are now a thing of the past,especially considering irans own levels of design and production experience and capability with this sort of thing.I think that from now on these will all be fully indigenous systems,tho it is fun to speculate....
One thing from the tor that would be worth copying would be the vertical sam and its magazine for the interceptors,that is quite an ingenious design with other potential applications such as naval air defence or even the carriage of other weapons types ie long range anti tank or loitering nlos types.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## triangle

Philosopher said:


> After the revealing of the Salman TVC system, an Iranian ASAT is just a matter of time. Gen Hajizadeh himself mentioned ASAT during the unveiling ceremony of Salman. In terms of which missiles they will use as the base, there are many choices. ASAT weapons are a key weapon in my eyes because in a potential future conflict, our enemies' satellites should be one of the first targets.



And it wouldn't surprise me if the Noor satelite is going to be the target during an ASAT test


----------



## Iskander

Philosopher said:


> This is a great news. Now we know this system can work in purely passive mode too. This Sevome Khordad gets better by the day.


This missile looks like American AIM-97 Seekbat missile project so there is a possibility that the missile utilize two combined modes of guidance

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## triangle

Iskander said:


> This missile looks like American AIM-97 Seekbat missile project so there is a possibility that the missile utilize two combined modes of guidance



Funnily enough, If they put that blunt nosed seeker on a sayyed-2 missile, it would be almost the same missile as the AIM-97.

Interesting thread on the possible development of a super LRSAM to take on high-value targets from long range, such as tankers, AWACS, ISR etc.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274256993910435840
Also interesting is a BAVAR-373 prototype which had an 8x8 Zoljanah truck carrying a tracking radar like on the S-300V. This protoype would have most likely used SARH guidance and not SAGG like on the production BAVAR-373


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274329326863945731
@Philosopher @AmirPatriot

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Philosopher

triangle said:


> Also interesting is a BAVAR-373 prototype which had an 8x8 Zoljanah truck carrying a track radar like on the S-300V. This protoype would have most likely used SARH guidance and not SAGG like on the produciton BAVAR-373
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274329326863945731
> @Philosopher @AmirPatriot



Very good find. I wonder how far they went with the rest of those Bavar-373 prototypes. As the user mentioned, this system could have been taken over by the IRGC and they may develop it. This may be one of the long range air defence the IRGC is referring to when they said they are working on such systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## triangle

Philosopher said:


> سردار شبان: سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود/ تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف
> فرمانده پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه در گفتگوی تفصیلی با خبرگزاری فارس، ابعاد مختلف ماجرای سرنگونی پهپاد آمریکایی و برنامه‌های پدافند هوایی سپاه را تشریح کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> گروه امنیتی دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس- محمد شلتوکی: ۳۰ خرداد ۱۳۹۸ جهان شاهد اتفاقی تاریخی بود؛ درحالیکه دولت آمریکا با اقداماتی نمایشی از جمله اعزام ناو هواپیمابر و بمب‌افکن به منطقه در پی القای سایه‌ای سنگین از جنگ بر سر کشور برای کشاندن ایران به پای میز مذاکره و امتیازگیری بود، پهپاد MQ-4C تروریست‌های آمریکایی که بر فراز دریای عمان و در نزدیکی تنگه هرمز در حال پرواز بود، تنها پس از چند مایل تجاوز به فضای آب‌های سرزمینی جمهوری اسلامی ایران مورد اصابت موشک سامانه پدافندی «سوم خرداد» نیروی هوافضای سپاه قرار گرفت و سرنگون شد.
> 
> اثرات و برکات اقدام قاطع ایران ساقط کردن پهپاد آمریکایی و پس از آن توقیف نفتکش انگلیسی، آنچنان اثری برجای گذاشت که علاوه بر عقب‌‎نشینی مفتضحانه و بی‌سروصدای نیروهای آمریکایی از منطقه و باطل شدن گزینه سایه جنگ، به اذعان تحلیلگران مسائل امنیت ملی، تراز قدرت جمهوری اسلامی ایران به طرز چشمگیری افزایش یافت.
> 
> از سوی دیگر، سرنگونی این پهپاد در ارتفاع بیش از ۵۲ هزارپایی از سطح زمین و توسط یک سامانه پدافندی صددرصد بومی که تمامی مراحل ساخت آن در داخل کشور و توسط نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام شده است، از دیگر نکات و موضوعاتی بود که مورد توجه قرار گرفت.
> 
> سردار رضا شبان فرمانده پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه است که از اسفندماه ۱۳۹۸ مسئولیت این فرماندهی به وی واگذار شده است. او پیش از این معاونت هماهنگ‌کننده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم‌الانبیاء(ص) و در مقطع پیش از آن هم فرماندهی پدافند هوایی نیروی هوافضای سپاه را بر عهده داشته است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> به بهانه سالروز سرنگونی پهپاد فوق پیشرفته آمریکایی، در واپسین روزهای بهار میهمان او در دفتر کارش بودیم تا در اولین گفتگوی رسانه‌ای وی، ابعاد مختلف قدرت پدافند هوایی سپاه را به بحث و گفتگو بگذاریم.
> 
> مهمترین محورهای این گفتگو به شرح زیر است:
> 
> ** پیشرفت پدافند هوایی سپاه با حضور سردار حاجی‌زاده شتاب گرفت
> 
> ** در حوزه‌های مختلف پدافندی توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی داریم
> 
> ** پدافند هوایی سپاه در سراسر کشور حضور دارد
> 
> ** نمونه‌های اولیه سامانه سوم خرداد با نمونه‌های فعلی تفاوت‌های عملیاتی جدی دارد
> 
> ** تمام مراحل طراحی و ساخت سوم خرداد در نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام می‌شود
> 
> ** تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف
> 
> ** سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود
> 
> ** قادر به طراحی و ساخت هر نوع راداری هستیم
> 
> ** سامانه‌های پدافندی‌مان برخوردار از آخرین فناوری‌های مقابله با جنگ الکترونیک است
> 
> ** با کمترین هزینه پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید می‌کنیم
> 
> ** با تکیه به جوانان و قطع امید از خارج به همه اهداف‌مان می‌رسیم
> 
> ** دشمنان باید نگاهشان به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد
> 
> مشروح این گفتگو را در ادامه بخوانید:
> 
> ** پیشرفت پدافند هوایی سپاه با حضور سردار حاجی‌زاده شتاب گرفت
> 
> فارس: تا پیش از هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد آمریکایی در ۳۰ خرداد ۱۳۹۸، توانمندی های پدافند هوایی سپاه برای عموم چندان شناخته شده نبود؛ در حالی که این موضوع ثابت کرد علاوه بر حوزه‌های موشکی، پهپادی و ... سپاه در پدافند هوایی نیز به یک سطح بسیار بالایی از توانمندی رسیده است؛ روند این تقویت توان پدافندی سپاه را تشریح بفرمایید؛ کار از چه زمانی شروع شد و چه مراحلی را طی کرد؟
> 
> سردار شبان: بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم- پدافند هوایی از زمان تاسیس تا به امروز فراز و نشیب های بسیار زیادی داشت. به ویژه از زمانی که سردار حاجی‌زاده فرمانده محترم نیروی هوافضای سپاه مسئولیت پدافند را بر عهده گرفتند، از آن زمان شاهد پیشرفت‌های متعددی در حوزه پدافند هوایی بودیم چراکه با ورود ایشان و طراحی و ترسیم یک نقشه راه در حوزه پدافند هوایی، کار شروع شد.
> 
> در آن زمان جهاد خودکفایی نیروی هوافضا وجود داشت، اما در حوزه پدافند هوایی طرح‌های زیادی را در اختیار نداشتند که بحمدالله با گذشت زمان و تدبیر و نگاه راهبردی که فرمانده محترم نیرو داشتند، پروژه‌های مختلفی در حوزه تولید سلاح‌های بومی، متناسب با تهدید و نیازمندی‌های پدافند هوایی سپاه طراحی و در جهاد خودکفایی سپاه و صنعت تولید شد که امروز شاهد بالندگی تجهیزات پدافند هوایی هستیم.
> 
> در حوزه‌های مختلف هم برنامه‌های بسیار زیادی وجود داشت؛ از جمله در حوزه کشف و شناسایی اهداف، سامانه‌‌های راداری در باندهای مختلف فرکانسی و همچنین سامانه‌های موشکی که امروز بعنوان نمونه‌ می‌توان به سامانه سوم خرداد، طبس و ... اشاره کرد که مورد افتخار همه است و امروز در سطح پدافند هوایی به کارگیری می‌شود و قدرت بازدارندگی را برای کشور فراهم کرده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ** در حوزه‌های مختلف پدافندی توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی داریم
> 
> فارس: سال گذشته نمایشگاهی توسط نیروی هوافضای سپاه تحت عنوان شکار کرکس‌ها برپا شد که در آن پهپادهای غنیمتی به نمایش در آمده بودند، شکار برخی از این پهپادها رسانه ای شده بود، اما بخش اعظمی از پهپادهای به نمایش درآمده برای نخستین بار بود که شکار آنها علنی می‌شد، این موضوع حاکی از یک حرکت چراغ خاموش پدافند هوایی سپاه طی سال های گذشته بود، از ابعاد شکارهای متنوع سپاه در حوزه پهپادهای متخاصم برایمان بگویید.
> 
> سردار شبان: با گذشت سال‌ها در نیروی هوافضای سپاه و بخش پدافند، به قابلیت‌های بسیار خوبی دست پیدا کرده ایم که شاهد مثال آن همین پهپادهایی است که توسط پدافند مورد اصابت قرار گرفت و یا برخی از آنها هم سالم به غنیمت گرفته شد. این حاکی از توانمندی‌هایی است که طی سال‌های گذشته ایجاد شده و می‌توانیم امروز به جرأت بگوییم که در حوزه‌های مختلف دارای توانمندی‌های قابل توجهی و حرف برای گفتن هستیم که نمونه‌های آن هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد هرمس و همین پهپاد MQ-4C بود.
> 
> ** پدافند هوایی سپاه در سراسر کشور حضور دارد
> 
> فارس: امروز پدافند هوایی سپاه چه ماموریتی را در حوزه پدافندی انجام می‌دهد و در چه پهنه ای از کشور استقرار دارد؟
> 
> سردار شبان: پدافند نیروی هوافضای سپاه بخشی از پدافند هوایی کشور است که تحت کنترل عملیاتی شبکه یکپارچه پدافند هوایی کشور قرار دارد و در عرصه‌های مختلف ماموریت‌های متنوعی را در حوزه کشف، شناسایی و درگیری بر عهده دارد. از سویی در شبکه و در موارد و نقاط مختلفی که از سوی ستادکل نیروهای مسلح ماموریتی واگذار شود نیز در سراسر کشور ماموریت خود را انجام می‌دهد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ** نمونه‌های اولیه سامانه سوم خرداد با نمونه‌های فعلی تفاوت‌های عملیاتی جدی دارد
> 
> فارس: پس از هدف قرار گرفتن پهپاد متجاوز آمریکایی یکی از دستاوردهایی که تبدیل به نماد پدافند هوایی سپاه و بلکه پدافند هوایی کشور شد، سامانه بومی سوم خرداد بود که با شلیک آن پهپاد ترایتون ساقط شد. گرچه تاکنون برخی مسائل درباره این سامانه مطرح شده است، اما تاکنون روایت جامعی از چگونگی تولید و به کارگیری این سامانه وجود نداشته، چگونگی دستیابی نیروی هوافضای سپاه به این فناوری را تشریح بفرمایید.
> 
> سردار شبان: سطح و کیفیت تهدید دائماً در حال تغییر است و منطق بر این است که توانمندی‌ها و قابلیت‌های پدافندی هم متناسب با این تهدیدات هر روز تغییر کند. ما در یک مقطع زمانی به این نتیجه رسیدیم که سطح تهدید متناسب با تجهیزاتی که در اختیار داریم نیست و نیازمند سلاح‌ها و ابزارهای جدیدتری برای مقابله با این تهدیدات هستیم. لذا با بررسی های فنی و عملیاتی و اطلاعاتی که انجام داده بودیم، نقطه شروع سامانه سوم خرداد و ایضا طبس به وجود آمد و طی مراحلی در چند سال طراحی سامانه با توجه به الگوها و مشخصات فنی و عملیاتی که برای مقابله با تهدیدات موجود در ذهن داشتیم انجام شد.
> 
> بدین ترتیب نمونه اول سامانه ساخته و تست شد و به این نتیجه رسیدیم که این سامانه بر اساس فرضیاتی که داشتیم، می‌تواند پاسخگوی تهدیدات امروز برای ما باشد. البته این را هم باید بگویم که بر روی این سامانه هر روز ارتقاءهای متفاوتی صورت می‌گیرد و همین امروز که صحبت می‌کنیم، نمونه اولی که ساخته شده با نمونه‌ای که امروز تحویل می‌گیریم تفاوت‌های بسیار جدی در مشخصات فنی و عملیاتی سامانه دارد که این مرهون شناخت درست تهدید و پیاده سازی نیازمندی‌ها روی این سامانه بوده که باعث شده امروز به سطح بسیار خوب و قابل قبولی در حوزه تولید تجهیزات بومی برسیم.
> 
> ** تمام مراحل طراحی و ساخت سوم خرداد در نیروی هوافضای سپاه انجام می‌شود
> 
> فارس: ساخت این سامانه تماماً در نیروی هوافضا صورت گرفته است؟
> 
> سردار شبان: بله- تمام این تسلیحات و سامانه‌های موجود مانند سوم خرداد، طبس و رادارها و سامانه‌های دیگر، مبدأ شروع آن و طراحی و ساخت و تولید و بکارگیری آن در مجموعه پدافند نیروی هوافضا و سازمان جهاد خودکفایی انجام می‌شود.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ** تست موفق سامانه سوم خرداد در دریا و اصابت به هدف
> 
> فارس: سامانه پدافندی سوم خرداد به نظر می رسد بستر و پلتفرم بسیار خوبی برای توسعه و تجهیز به قابلیت های جدید و بهتر باشد، اخیرا نیز تصاویری منتشر شد که حاکی از عملیاتی شدن نسخه دریایی این سامانه بود که قابلیت های رزمی چشمگیری برای نیروهای مسلح فراهم می‌کند، از برنامه‌هایی که برای توسعه این سامانه اجرا شده و یا در دست اجرا است برای مان بفرمایید.
> 
> سردار شبان: طراحی و ساخت و تولید سامانه‌های پدافندی از یک پیچیدگی بسیار خاصی برخوردار است و نیازمند فناوری روز است. ما بر اساس نیازمندی‌هایی که در حوزه تهدید عرض کردم و تغییرات و ارتقاء‌هایی که روی سامانه های مختلف ایجاد می‌کنیم، به این نتیجه رسیدیم که نیازمندیم در حوزه دفاع هوایی بر روی شناور هم یک سلاح متناسب و درخوری داشته باشیم. کارشناسان فنی می‌دانند چه می‌گویم؛ طراحی چنین سیستمی که بر روی یک شناور قرار بگیرد و در حال حرکت بتواند شلیک کند دارای پیچیدگی بسیار زیادی است که بحمدالله با بهره‌گیری از دانش فنی عزیزان‌مان در سپاه توانستیم به این فناوری دست پیدا کنیم و سامانه‌ای را طراحی کنیم که بتواند در حال حرکت بر روی شناور شلیک داشته باشد و الحمدالله تست موفقی را هم داشتیم و توانستیم هدف را مورد اصابت قرار دهیم.
> 
> امروز ما حتی از این بخش هم عبور کردیم و ارتقاءها و موضوعات دیگری را هم در سامانه خواهیم داشت که به تناسب زمان رونمایی خواهد شد.
> 
> ** سپاه وارد عرصه پدافند هوایی برد بلند می‌شود
> 
> فارس: یکی از نکاتی که در خصوص پدافند هوایی سپاه مطرح می‌شود، ورود به موضوع پدافند برد و ارتفاع بلند است چراکه آنچه تاکنون از توان پدافندی سپاه دیده شده، در حوزه برد و ارتفاع کوتاه و متوسط بوده است، آیا سپاه برنامه‌ای برای ورود به موضوع پدافند برد/ارتفاع بلند دارد؟
> 
> سردار شبان: قاعدتا بر اساس تعاریفی که در پدافند هوایی وجود دارد، در حوزه‌های کشف، درگیری و انهدام نیازمندی در سطوح مختلف وجود دارد. ما هم در سطح ارتفاع پست، ارتفاع متوسط و ارتفاع بالا نیازمند برخورداری از سامانه‌های پدافندی هستیم. این امروز نقطه شروعش انجام شده. در حوزه ارتفاع پست هم دارای سامانه‌های بومی هستیم که تست‌های بسیار موفقی را گذرانده‌ایم و در ارتفاع بالا و برد بلند هم که یکی از نیازمندی‌های ضروری پدافند هوایی است، طرح‌های بسیار خوبی وجود دارد که انشالله در آینده نزدیک شاهد ورود سامانه‌های متنوعی در این بخش خواهیم بود.
> 
> ** قادر به طراحی و ساخت هر نوع راداری هستیم
> 
> فارس: در حوزه حساسه ها و رادارها هم سپاه طی سال‌های گذشته دستاوردهای قابل توجهی داشته است؛ رادارهای برد بلند قدیر، رادار بشیر و ... نمونه هایی از این موضوع هستند.
> 
> سردار شبان: ما در حوزه راداری وابستگی زیادی داشتیم؛ اما با گذشت زمان و توجه جدّی به این بخش باعث شد که ما به ساخت رادارها در باندهای فرکانسی متنوع و برد و ارتفاع‌های متفاوت ورود کنیم. امروز ما از برد خیلی کم تا برد بسیار زیاد توانایی ساخت رادار را داریم از جمله رادار بشیر، رادار قدیر و رادارهای دیگری که با گذشت زمان وارد مدار عملیاتی پدافند سپاه می‌شود.
> 
> امروز ما در سطح و تراز کشورهای صاحب فناوری ساخت رادارهای پیچیده هستیم و امروز از این مرحله هم عبور کرده‌ایم و برای همه نیازمندی‌هایمان در حوزه کشف و شناسایی، با دانش فنی عزیزانمان توانسته‌ایم انواع رادارها را بسازیم و بکارگیری کنیم. در واقع قادریم هر نوع رادار مورد نیاز خودمان را طراحی کنیم و بحمدالله در این بحث به خودکفایی رسیدیم.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ** سامانه‌های پدافندی‌مان برخوردار از آخرین فناوری‌های مقابله با جنگ الکترونیک است
> 
> فارس: در موضوع پدافند هوایی همواره یکی از چالش‌ها موضوع سرکوب دفاع هوایی است که تکنیکی شناخته شده در جهان است؛ امروزه از تجهیزات گسترده جنگ الکترونیک برای سرکوب دفاع هوایی طرف مقابل استفاده می‌شود، جنگ الکترونیک نیز در ارتباطی تنگاتنگ با بحث پدافند هوایی قرار دارد، در این زمینه چه اقداماتی در مجموعه پدافند هوایی سپاه صورت گرفته است؟
> 
> سردار شبان: مصون سازی سامانه‌های پدافند هوایی در مقابل تهاجم الکترونیکی دشمن یکی از اساسی‌ترین کلیدواژه‌هایی است که مورد توجه قرار می‌گیرد؛ چراکه در غیر این صورت سامانه کارایی خود را در مقابل این تهدیدات نخواهد داشت. بالطبع ما در این حوزه هم ورود کردیم و سامانه‌های جدیدی را که می‌سازیم برخوردار از آخرین فناوری و روش‌های مقابله با تهاجم الکترونیکی دشمن است. این قابلیت‌ها را در میدان به کرّات تست کرده‌ایم که بسیار موفق و قابل قبول بوده است.
> 
> ** با کمترین هزینه پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید می‌کنیم
> 
> فارس: یکی از نکاتی که راجع به سامانه‌های پدافندی مطرح می‌شود، هزینه‌های آنهاست و در منطقه ما هم مرتبا شاهد عقد قراردادهایی با مبالغ نجومی میان کشورهای مرتجع منطقه با کشورهای غربی برای دریافت سامانه‌های پدافندی هستیم که البته در موارد متعددی عدم کارآمدی آنها ثابت شده است؛ از سویی یکی از ویژگی‌های تسلیحات ما هزینه‌های تولید بسیار پایین نسبت به رقبای خارجی است؛ آیا این موضوع کم بودن هزینه درست است؟
> 
> سردار شبان: همان‌گونه که اشاره کردم سامانه‌های پدافندی نیازمند یک فناوری بسیار پیچیده است و بالطبع دارای قیمت و هزینه‌های بسیار بالایی است. شاهد هستید که کشورهای مختلفی دارای خریدهای متعدد تجهیزاتی و سلاحی هستند که وقتی به اعداد و ارقام آنها رجوع می‌کنیم می‌بینیم اعداد بسیار قابل ملاحظه و بالایی است.
> 
> از آنجایی که سامانه‌هایی مثل سوم خرداد، طبس و ...چون تولید خودمان و بومی است، ما سعی کردیم در قیمت تمام شده به یک قیمت بسیار پایین‌تر از قیمت‌هایی که امروز در دنیا روال است برسیم چراکه تکنولوژی و فناوری این سامانه‌ها دست خودمان است و خودمان طراحی کردیم. این موضوع در حالی است که بکارگیری این سامانه برای ما هیچ مشکلی ندارد و هیچ نوع وابستگی هم به خارج از کشور نداریم. از سویی ما می بینیم کشورهایی که میلیاردها دلار سلاح و تجهیزات خریداری می‌کنند، حتی در به کارگیری آن هم وابسته هستند!
> 
> به طور کلی در به کارگیری، تولید و هزینه‌ها می‌توانیم بگوییم که اصلا قابل مقایسه نیستم و بحمدالله توانسته‌ایم با کمترین هزینه‌ها، پیشرفته‌ترین سامانه‌ها را تولید کنیم. امروز وقتی به اعداد و ارقام و آمارهایی که جزو خریدهای تسلیحاتی کشورهای متعددی است نگاه کنید و با هزینه‌های بخش دفاع کشورمان مقایسه کنید متوجه می‌شود اعداد آنها اعداد بسیار بالایی است که اصلا قابل مقایسه نیست؛ اما در عین حال تسلیحات ما با کمترین هزینه در تراز تسلیحات پیشرفته دنیا است که این یکی از ویژگی‌های خاص ما در نظام مقدس جمهوری اسلامی ایران در تولید نیازمندی های دفاعی است.
> 
> امروز با اتکاء به خداوند متعال، اتکاء به دانش داخلی و اتکاء به جوانان‌مان که می‌توانند هر کاری را شروع کنند و به سرانجام برسانند، تمام نیازمندی‌هایمان را می‌توانیم در داخل تولید کنیم، مشروط بر اینکه اعتقاد و نگاهمان به توان داخلی باشد نه خارجی. نگاه به خارج مساوی است با وابستگی و هزینه‌های بالا. مادامیکه نگاه به خارج باشد باید سرمایه های کشورمان را در قبال چیزهای کم ارزشی که وابستگی‌های زیادی دارد صرف کنیم.
> 
> با اتکا به این ویژگی‌ها توانسته‌ایم هم در حوزه نظامی و هم در حوزه صنعت، نانوفناوری و ... به پیشرفت‌های بسیار چشمگیری دست پیدا کنیم و این برای کشور ما که امروز در تحریم‌های بسیار شدیدی که از سوی کشورهای غربی به ویژه آمریکا جنایتکار قرار دارد بسیار ارزشمند است.
> 
> ** با تکیه به جوانان و قطع امید از خارج به همه اهداف‌مان می‌رسیم
> 
> فارس: در تصاویری که از مجموعه خط تولید سامانه پدافندی سوم خرداد منتشر شد، شاهد حضور پررنگ جوانان در تولید این سامانه بودیم، حتی بانوانی نیز در آنجا مشغول به فعالیت و به نوعی دست‌اندرکار تولید این سامانه بودند؛ نقش جوانان و نیروی انسانی در دستیابی به چنین موفقیت‌ها و فناوری‌هایی چیست؟
> 
> سردار شبان: مادامیکه تکیه بر نیروی انسانی داخلی، متعهد و انقلابی داشته باشیم، می‌توانیم با اعتماد و تکیه به آنها و قطع امید از خارج کشورمان به همه اهداف و نیازمندی‌های‌مان برسیم.
> 
> حداقل من در حوزه سلاح و تجهیزات پدافند عرض می‌کنم که ما امروز زیرساخت‌های لازم و کافی را به کمک همین جوانان توانستیم تولید کنیم و لازمه‌اش این است که به این جوانان مومن و انقلابی باور و اعتماد داشته باشیم چراکه اینها می توانند هر کاری را در هر سطحی انجام دهند مشروط بر اینکه نگاهمان به آنها باشد و نگاهمان را از خارج قطع کنیم . رمز پیروزی ما همین است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> حضرت آقا در فرامین‌شان مکررا به این موضوع اشاره کردند و مادامیکه ما به آن عمل کردیم، موفق بودیم و به نتیجه رسیدیم. حتی در فناوری های بسیار پیچیده ای که در اختیار معدود کشورهای دنیا قرار دارد هم پیشرفت کردیم، در حوزه هسته‌ای، نانوفناوری و تولید سلاح‌های پیچیده و پیشرفته پدافندی، ما فقط با این نگاه در این موقعیت قرار گرفتیم.
> 
> ** دشمنان باید نگاهشان به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد
> 
> این مسیر باز است و در آینده نزدیک شاهد پیشرفت‌های بسیار زیادی خواهیم بود که لازمه‌اش فقط نگاه به داخل، نگاه به توانمندی ها و دانش فنی خودمان و بهره گیری از جوانان انقلابی، مومن و بانگیزه است که اینها اداره کننده کشورمان خواهند بود. اگر کار را به جوانان بسپاریم مطمئن باشید که به خوبی و حتی بهتر از چیزی که مد نظر هست کشور اداره می شود.
> 
> تحریم ها و تهدیدها هم مادامی‌که نگاهمان به داخل باشد هیچ تأثیری نخواهد داشت؛ آمریکایی‌ها هم در موضوع ۳۰ خرداد و سرنگونی پهپاد فوق پیشرفته شان به این نتیجه رسیده اند که جمهوری اسلامی ایران به توان بسیار بالایی دست یافته است.
> 
> به دشمنان هم می‌گوییم که باید نگاهشان نسبت به جمهوری اسلامی ایران متفاوت باشد. ایران کشوری مقتدر در منطقه و فرامنطقه است و بدانند که اگر فکر خطایی در تجاوز و تهدید به کشورمان داشته باشند، ما قطعا ایستاده‌ایم و محکم پاسخ‌شان را خواهیم داد و بدانید که امنیت ملی برای ما خط قرمز است.
> 
> گزارش تصویری این گفتگو را در اینجا مشاهده کنید.
> 
> انتهای پیام/
> 
> https://www.farsnews.ir/news/13990331000122/سردار-شبان-سپاه-وارد-عرصه-پدافند-هوایی-برد-بلند-می‌شود-تست-موفق



Could someone provide a summary in english please? Seems like a lot of nice info in that article


----------



## sahureka2

Khordad System has been tested on a supply vessel,





today I was thinking about how it could look embarked and tested on a much more* performing military ship*.
So out of curiosity I made this simple photoshop and as a model I chose an* Alvand class frigate*, certainly with Khordad System without the vehicle and in its place create a dedicated superstructure, making the necessary changes to free up the space needed aft even for sealed containers for reserve missiles and a hydraulic crane for their movement.
As you can see, I wanted to keep the anti-ship missiles by replacing them in the bow.




As I wrote above, it is only out of pure curiosity and does not want to hypothesize anything, but it certainly would offer an exponential increase in air defense capabilities with a system already in production and operational today.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## triangle

Some time nice fotoshop, and altough I like the idea, I think the IRIN will go for VLS. I think there could be a chance that the Sina-class sized FAC could be fielded with 3rd khordad system with reloads.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

triangle said:


> Some time nice fotoshop, and altough I like the idea, I think the IRIN will go for VLS. I think there could be a chance that the Sina-class sized FAC could be fielded with 3rd khordad system with reloads.





sahureka2 said:


> Khordad System has been tested on a supply vessel,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> today I was thinking about how it could look embarked and tested on a much more* performing military ship*.
> So out of curiosity I made this simple photoshop and as a model I chose an* Alvand class frigate*, certainly with Khordad System without the vehicle and in its place create a dedicated superstructure, making the necessary changes to free up the space needed aft even for sealed containers for reserve missiles and a hydraulic crane for their movement.
> As you can see, I wanted to keep the anti-ship missiles by replacing them in the bow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I wrote above, it is only out of pure curiosity and does not want to hypothesize anything, but it certainly would offer an exponential increase in air defense capabilities with a system already in production and operational today.


you see the missiles at least Sayyad-2 is used in 15th of khordad and Bavae so they are VLS ready because of that it won't make any sense at all to use such design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sahureka2

Hack-Hook said:


> you see the missiles at least Sayyad-2 is used in 15th of khordad and Bavae so they are VLS ready because of that it won't make any sense at all to use such design



Sorry but I thought I was clear in presenting my photoshop:
"As I wrote above, *it is only out of pure curiosity and does not want to hypothesize anything*, but it certainly would *offer an exponential increase in air defense capabilities with a system already in production and operational today*."

I add that it is a system that is almost all in one, radar and launcher, perfect to be installed on various naval platforms in use today without extending the modification and adaptation work to the ship.
But let's try to hypothesize if it is installed on a specific version of standard size containers of those for maritime use, completely autonomous for electricity and operator command post, and, moreover, embarkable when needed on different types of military or commercial ships.
But I repeat my photoshop was just a curiosity.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

I think it is possible to set up the rotating luncher turret of 3rd khordad air defence system with three missile in iranian big size Zulfiqar or siraj class speed boat

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

In this video they seem to be highly professional in their actions, however I still can't understand why they didn't close Iran's airspace to passenger planes during the missile strike on Al Asad base. Even after other countries took the precautions, still they didn't. Maybe overconfidence ? Considering everything, I'm pretty sure it was the fault of one or two air defense operators who panicked.

I doubt that a command and control center like the one seen the in video could have given the order since they would have seen the plane on their radar. I'm also doubting if the operator(s) who launched those deadly missiles got approval from above before taking action. At that point, Iran's air defense units were probably on high alert ? Perhaps they were told to fire at will at any threatening object ?

Another thing I can't understand to this day is how the operators could not tell the difference between an incoming missile / fighter jet and an outbound passenger plane. The speeds at which they travel, the altitudes are significantly different. The plane must have also been following a route as well so its just baffling. Didn't they see it taking off from the airport on their radar ? More than likely someone did not follow their protocol and/or panicked badly.



Messerschmitt said:


>


----------



## Raghfarm007

sha ah said:


> In this video they seem to be highly professional in their actions, however I still can't understand why they didn't close Iran's airspace to passenger planes during the missile strike on Al Asad base. Even after other countries took the precautions, still they didn't. Maybe overconfidence ? Considering everything, I'm pretty sure it was the fault of one or two air defense operators who panicked.
> 
> I doubt that a command and control center like the one seen the in video could have given the order since they would have seen the plane on their radar. I'm also doubting if the operator(s) who launched those deadly missiles got approval from above before taking action. At that point, Iran's air defense units were probably on high alert ? Perhaps they were told to fire at will at any threatening object ?
> 
> Another thing I can't understand to this day is how the operators could not tell the difference between an incoming missile / fighter jet and an outbound passenger plane. The speeds at which they travel, the altitudes are significantly different. The plane must have also been following a route as well so its just baffling. Didn't they see it taking off from the airport on their radar ? More than likely someone did not follow their protocol and/or panicked badly.



Do you undrestand how 6 am on an icey morning, someone was filming the exect spot where the missile hit the plane???

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Raghfarm007 said:


> Do you undrestand how 6 am on an icey morning, someone was filming the exect spot where the missile hit the plane???


He filmed the second missile not the first one . he saw the first one and then get out his phone and start taking video.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Really???
And he just sent it to American anti Iran groups straightaway?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sahureka2

triangle said:


> Some time nice fotoshop, and altough I like the idea, I think the IRIN will go for VLS. I think there could be a chance that the Sina-class sized FAC could be fielded with 3rd khordad system with reloads.



I don't know if there is enough space on the Sina class FACs, but I think it is perhaps more appropriate on some large supply ships, for example the Bandar Abbas class.
Here I have fantasized by installing the system on a standard container, so that I can quickly put it in case of need indifferently on one or another ship, for example, when a ship is in port after a long mission so as to be subjected to the necessary restoration works , the system can be moved to another ship that has to leave on a mission.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

This is most certainly due to the installation/activation of an Iranian radar to that area.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1275739986541805579

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Raghfarm007 said:


> Really???
> And he just sent it to American anti Iran groups straightaway?



Yes, Tehran province has over 20 million people. So yes one person will be awake and walking at 6 am. It’s like saying is it weird that there was someone walking at 5 am in NYC? Of course not.

Also the person didn’t send it to anti iran groups they posted on social media. So yes in this day and age when people see something surprising they will post on social media. I’m not sure the person knew what he was exactly filming during chaos of war. I doubt he had intelligence to think An AD system shot down a plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Raghfarm007 said:


> Do you undrestand how 6 am on an icey morning, someone was filming the exect spot where the missile hit the plane???


Yeah its very unusual. And the Iranian government claiming they they shot down the plane? I don't believe it. I think it was some anti-Iranian government that claimed it. And not the official one.


----------



## PeeD

sahureka2 said:


> I don't know if there is enough space on the Sina class FACs, but I think it is perhaps more appropriate on some large supply ships, for example the Bandar Abbas class.
> Here I have fantasized by installing the system on a standard container, so that I can quickly put it in case of need indifferently on one or another ship, for example, when a ship is in port after a long mission so as to be subjected to the necessary restoration works , the system can be moved to another ship that has to leave on a mission.



Expect the 3rd Khordad radar to be used if they think an "air defense FAC" concept is a good idea.

But I then expect Sayyad-2's as missile, with their airtight containers, that solves the saltwater environment issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Raghfarm007 said:


> Really???
> And he just sent it to American anti Iran groups straightaway?


The incident is clear and irgc accepted the responsibility . let not bechildish about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Lets also not be retarded also ...... it was certainly IRGC Missiles that hit... but there is a lot that dont make sense.... 
When you look at the Nofozi government of Rohani, and the signals he was giving to the US, you have to be suspicioues.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arminkh

Now it makes sense to me:

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1089313/جزئیات-حادثه-هواپیمای-اوکراینی-از-زبان-دادستان-نظامی-تهران

The night Ukrainian passenger airplane was hit with friendly fire, the state of Iran AD was not "fire at will". It was a lower stage at which the units had to get confirmation from the command center before shooting. The Ukrainian aircraft had received clearance from Iran's AD command center. 

The unit that fired, due to human negligence, had not setup its North direction properly. So they had a 105 degree error on all detections meaning they thought the airplane is approaching them from North West not from the airport direction. The operator contacts the center but since it can't get through, he determines with high certainty that the object approaching from NW is an unknown object not cleared by central AD and decides to fire the missile. A correct decision in normal situation that would probably get him a medal however, unfortunately they had not setup system's North correctly. 

Iran's AD protocols were reasonable and correct. It all broke down due to one person's mistake. Very unfortunate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

Arminkh said:


> Now it makes sense to me:
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1089313/جزئیات-حادثه-هواپیمای-اوکراینی-از-زبان-دادستان-نظامی-تهران
> 
> The night Ukrainian passenger airplane was hit with friendly fire, the state of Iran AD was not "fire at will". It was a lower stage at which the units had to get confirmation from the command center before shooting. The Ukrainian aircraft had received clearance from Iran's AD command center.
> 
> The unit that fired, due to human negligence, had not setup its North direction properly. So they had a 105 degree error on all detections meaning they thought the airplane is approaching them from North West not from the airport direction. The operator contacts the center but since it can't get through, he determines with high certainty that the object approaching from NW is an unknown object not cleared by central AD and decides to fire the missile. A correct decision in normal situation that would probably get him a medal however, unfortunately they had not setup system's North correctly.
> 
> Iran's AD protocols were reasonable and correct. It all broke down due to one person's mistake. Very unfortunate.


tehran was probably the safest city that night... no way the US would have balls to strike inside iran. very poor judging and intelligence by everyone on the ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arminkh

Dariush the Great said:


> tehran was probably the safest city that night... no way the US would have balls to strike inside iran. very poor judging and intelligence by everyone on the ground.


It's like our football team going against Argentina for the very first time. There is reality of what your opponent could do and what each single player thinks they could do. No matter what the coach tells them, they look at Argentina players like super humans.

Same is true about our soldiers. The mistake is unthinkable but you should not ignore the psychological effect of going against the strongest military on earth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

They should have closed off Iran's entire airspace to civilian flights. Even after several other nations closed off their airspace, still Iran didn't. That was a terrible mistake. 



Arminkh said:


> It's like our football team going against Argentina for the very first time. There is reality of what your opponent could do and what each single player thinks they could do. No matter what the coach tells them, they look at Argentina players like super humans.
> 
> Same is true about our soldiers. The mistake is unthinkable but you should not ignore the psychological effect of going against the strongest military on earth.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## triangle

Another gem in the form of a blogpost from Pataramesh

https://patarames.blogspot.com/2020/07/3rd-khordad-mythical-missile.html

*3rd Khordad: The mythical missile*





*Understanding what was achieved*
This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first operational kill of a RQ-4 in summer 2019.






A RQ-4 Global Hawk is an expensive and vital asset in U.S airpower structure, that does the battlefield management of a whole front section.
It remains far behind the lines, employing its stand-off SAR/GMTI sensors and has no crew that is put to risk.

The first iteration of such a capability was to be protected by employing a survivable air platform, which resulted in the low-observable/stealth (LO) Tacit Blue design.
Technical hurdles forced the U.S to abandon this plan and the solution was the E-8 Joint STARS.
A large E-3 AWACS-like concept, where larger sensor size allowed for increased distance to the dangerous battlefield periphery.

It added up to the portfolio of U.S airpower _force-multiplier _support assets; systems that greatly enhance the U.S airpower concept, but are vulnerable.
Too vulnerable in confrontations with peer-level adversaries, yet still sufficient against opponents lacking "strategic assets".






The RQ-4 hence became what the Tacit Blue should have been; JSTARS capability within a survivable platform. 
The aerodynamic penalty the Tacit Blue had to pay, due to its LO geometry with its heavy emphasis of deflecting radar waves could be reduced.
Instead the requirement for LO/stealth aspect of the design was achieved by _material stealth_.

Aerodynamic LO penalties were reduced so much that the RQ-4 became a kinematically high performance platform with vast endurance and high altitude performance.




_Credits to members of military.ir_

Its radar absorbing materials and structures (RAM/RAS) are very expensive to manufacture and designed to disrupt a key element of the kill chain, of a system trying to kill it: The engagement phase, where normally X-band and higher radar wavelength are employed.
The X-band allows a small aperture seeker in the SAM and/or a sufficiently high precision ground/air tracking by the radar system.

The RAS of the RQ-4 BAMS-D that was shot down, is a complex double layer honeycomb design in critical areas. Its size suggest that its design perform best in the critical 8 Ghz X-band at which almost all SAM systems operate, including the *3rd Khordad*.

*Quantifying the LO performance of the RQ-4*
The performance depends on the radar cross section of the geometry, overall size, to which an average RAS/RAM performance is added. It is best measured in dB.




_Credits to members of military.ir_

This is a crude simulation but gives a general idea what the RCS of a blank RQ-4 at 8-10 Ghz looks like.
It averages 0-5 dB at relevant aspects and would be higher if the emitter/radar is ground based, like in this case.

Another more professional analysis is available for the RAS, the key LO performance element of the RQ-4 design.




_Credits to members of military.ir_

The highest reduction in X-band is between -25 to -20 dB. 
That's if a RQ-4 that applies similar double layer RAS all around the air frame. In practice this is not the case and here we must average the variations of geometric RCS and its RAS/RAM coverage.

Ideal results are between -25 dB and -15 dB overall RCS of relevant aspects.
A stable RCS for tracking is therefore estimated to be -10 dB to -20 dB, which gives an idea of the grade of low observability of the RQ-4.
To be on the conservative side, a RCS of -20 dB or 0,01m² is selected for all frontal threat aspects and against a ground based X-band emitter.

As the performance parameters of the 3rd Khordad have not been published, we can calculate the performance of other better known systems against a -20 dB class target.
The highest performance system, of which the necessary data for the radar equation is known, is the export variant of the Russian S-400:

Tracking of a -20 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 56km.

Tracking of a -10 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 100km.
Iran claims that target was tracked or locked at 120km, missile was launched at 90km distance and hit the approaching RQ-4 at 75km distance.

The 3rd Khordad however is not comparable to the S-400. In terms of aperture size, its about 7 times smaller and doesn't achieve as high power levels.


*How was it done?*
The inadequacy of the 3rd Khordad engagement radar and the comparatively high LO performance of the large conventional layout RQ-4 rise questions.
The AESA technology which the 3rd Khordad employs, compared to the PESA S-400, is no explanation either, as it could never make up for the performance level necessary.

Beyond the world of conventional techniques, and modes described in export rated system manuals, there are some interesting points.

A SARH seeker based SAM system with an IMU can fly an energy optimized pattern, where it climbs above the target and dives into it.




3rd Khordad Taer-2 missile diving into target

This offers improved kinematic performance than a SAM doing just proportional navigation.
It also allows lock-on after launch in order to control emissions and remain passive.

Additional to all of that, it puts the ground based emitter and the approaching SAM's seeker into bi-static positions relative to each other.
This can offer improvements against systems that employ techniques of shape/geometry LO/stealth, which deflect radar waves away from the emitter line of sight.

The RQ-4 is not a sophisticated representative of shape LO and concentrates on high performance radar absorption as a subsonic design.




Simplistic graphic on bi-static effect of SARH SAM

Another reality of such next generation systems are their inherent data fusion and multi-band architecture.
Here the 3rd Khordad's own AESA radar would do textbook tracking engagements against non-LO/stealth conventional targets. 
Against LO/VLO targets, its main task would become that of high-power missile up-link, missile tracker and terminal illuminator.

The long range tracking in such cases could be done by other radar systems that perform better against X-band optimized LO assets.
Lower band radars in VHF-band nearly completely neutralize the benefits of RAM and RAS and to a lesser extend also help against LO shaping techniques.
However they often fail to provide accurate coordinates for the SAM to get sufficiently close to the target to kill it.

At some point sooner or later, a portion of the illuminated engagement radar frequency energy would get picked up by the SAM's SARH seeker, even if a large portion is absorbed or deflected by the LO target.

In this case the 3rd Khordad would do a _blind illumination _based on the coordinate data of the lower band radar that tracks the LO target. A key requirement for such a operation mode, would be knowledge on the accurate positions of both radars relative to each other.




Najm-802B S-band AESA radar

Illuminating a spot in airspace, blindly requires a sufficiently high accuracy. Irans family of S-band AESA's offer such accuracy levels at relative long ranges.
This could be sufficient to allow the 3rd Khordad's X-band radar, to illuminate the LO target without own tracking.

The 3-3,5 Ghz operating frequency of these radars reduces the -20-25 dB performance of the double layer honeycomb RAS, effectively down to around -7 dB. 
The result is that the lower-band of this S-band AESA, allows it to confront the RQ-4 as a -7 dB (0,2m²) class LO asset, not -20 dB as in X-band.

Simulated models of the Najm-802B with conservative, very low power TRMs show that it would offer sufficient capability to do a 80-100km tracking of a -5-7 dB class LO target.




Thermal imaging camera of the 3rd Khordad
Thermal imaging systems able to detect air targets at extended ranges are a quite recent development. The performance class needed to detect a air targets at 70-100km distance was only in the hands of few advanced nations in the 2000's. 
Today Iran employs such high performance TI optics on its tactical 3rd Khordad SAM system.
They allow angle tracking of targets that either can't be radar tracked due to electronic warfare, or by employing LO/stealth techniques like in the case of the RQ-4.
The TI system could either help to compensate radar positional errors of the multi-band engagement solution as mentioned above, or assist in autonomous engagements.

In the latter scenario, a low-band radar would do the coarse tracking, such as the widespread Matla-ol-Fajr-2.




Matla-ol-Fajr-2 VHF-band array

The low coordinate accuracy would then be compensated by angular tracking via the TI camera system.
This combined employment of multi-band radar data and corrections from the TI sensor, could then be sufficient for the _blind illumination _concept via the 3rd Khordad own X-band radar.

Active radar homing SAM could be another explanation. 
Cost and robustness are main reasons why Iran stays with the SARH principle, just like Russia.
Russia's newest SAM system, the S-350 employs ARH SAM to counter terrain masking cruise missile, that are not protected by electronic warfare.
In such scenarios, loss of LOS illumination is no issue anymore because the SAM is illuminating its own target from above. 
Ambush scenarios are other cases where ARH may be employed, such as long-range shots by the S-400 40N6 missile against physically large U.S airpower support assets.

However the reason even the newest S-350 retains the expensive X-band PESA engagement radar, is that under severe electronic warfare conditions, the dual-mode SAM seeker can switch to SARH/SAGG mode, which is the most robust mode.

Iran claims that there is a 105km range variant of the Taer SAM for the 3rd Khordad. This maybe a special variant, that uses ARH seeker at ranges where the 3rd Khordad's own engagement radar can't effectively illuminate. However, this could also be the maximum range of the newest Taer-2 variant against kinematically low performance targets. 
Irans view on ARH tactical SAM seems to be that they are too fragile on one side and too expensive, if to be made robust, on the other.
After the shot down of an Ukrainian airliner by an Iranian Tor-M1, Iran acknowledged that U.S electronic warfare assets are taken very seriously.

The concept of an imaging infrared seeker SAM variant sounds attractive, just like the ARH concept initially. However here its not the cost for the seeker but the robustness and redundancy factors. Beside an aerodynamic penalty for a IIR seeker on SAM kinematics, SARH or even SAGG is simply regarded as very mature and robust. An IIR seeker SAM could probably simply not come out as the winner in a competition with a SARH counterpart on the key parameters.




3rd Khordad TELAR transiting

There are more techniques that could be applied to allow for an extended-range engagement of LO targets in the class of the RQ-4, but it would be too theoretical at this point.


*What happend most likely on that night*

The RQ-4 BAMS-D started from an airbase the UAE and climbed to altitude. During that climb it should have appeared at some point on the screens of the Iranian Ghadir/Rezonans long range early warning radar. With its strict emission control, no active IFF, and flight pattern Iranians would realize at some point that it is a Global Hawk leaving UAE airspace towards Iran.

Later a manned P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft added up and they formed a group, typical for a long range reconnaissance mission along Iranian borders. A slower MQ-9 drone added to the group on their way back towards the straight of Hormuz.
Once near Iranian borders, the old, static early warning radar network and mobile VHF Matla-ol-Fajr-2 early warning radars would have detected and tracked the LO/stealth RQ-4.

When warnings were ignored and Irans airspace violated, the decision was made to engage the RQ-4.

At the remote missile site where the 3rd Khordad system was, likely also a widespreadly used Matla-ol-Fajr-2 was present, directly linked to the 3rd Khordad.
The 3rd Khordad remained passive, as illumination of the RQ-4 could trigger its powerful towed electronic warfare system.
Coarse coordinated were continuously provided to the 3rd Khordad which allowed angle tracking by its TI camera. Coarse range data came via the Matla-ol-Fajr-2 and this was sufficient to launch a Taer-2 towards the estimated interception point.
The Taer-2 would then have received mid-course updates via the short range data-link of the 3rd Khordad. 




3rd Khordad operators

Approaching the target the 3rd Khordad would have started emissions of its LPI AESA radar to track the SAM and do the later stage, long range, course updates. 
This was not perceived as a threat by the ESM suite of the RQ-4. 
Continuous command guidance would not be necessary as the IMU of the Taer-2 can work with one update every several seconds without wasting too much kinetic energy.

It appears that, if at all, only the missile approach warning system detected the inbound Taer-2 and this was to late to deploy the towed jammer, since the Iranian operators claim that there was no ECM as they had expected.
Seconds away from impact the 3rd Khordad radar would have started _blind illumination_ of the target based on the external VHF-radar data, corrected by the angular data from its own TI camera. This would then have been precise enough to concentrate the electronically steered, illumination pencil beam on the RQ-4.
The now very close distance Taer-2 SARH seeker would then have picked up the portion of RF energy that had not been absorbed by RAS or deflected by shape.

Once locked it would have corrected the trajectory uncertainties caused by the VHF and TI sensors, got the exact range to the target and brought itself into a parallel position for the highest directed fragmentation effect of its warhead.
In the last phase redundant seeker and proximity fuses would determine the right timing and direction for the detonation of the warhead.




Taer-2 approaching a low RCS target drone
*Conclusion*
Iranians claim that Russians called the 3rd Khordad's missile "mythical" after information was exchanged. 
The reason should be the fact, that as per conventional engagement techniques, even large brute-force SAM systems such as the S-400 can't track the RQ-4 at extended ranges with their engagement radar alone. Certainly Russians apply similar unconventional techniques for engagement of LO assets, at least in their domestic _federation standard_ systems.

3rd Khordad would not have been able to track a RQ-4 class LO target at beyond 25-30km, but was able to engage at 90km and kill at 75km.
Its a display of what is possible if you are the owner and creator of the system design, it can be continuously updated and integrated with other systems.
It must also be understood that the RQ-4 is a genuine LO/stealth asset which capabilities in this field should not be downplayed after the shot down. Its AESA radar is said to have high LPI capabilities and its emissions very difficult for ESM systems to pick-up and finding the source of it.

The same defeat tactics could be employed against more capable LO/stealth assets such as F-22 and F-35, even if their LO performance is higher than that of Global Hawk.

The 3rd Khordad is the final result of IRGC-ASF's quest for a:

cost-efficient (low cost SAM, low cost TEL, low cost radar, COTS components)
highly mobile and off-road capable
highly autonomous (target search/acquisition and engagement done by single radar on TEL) 
low footprint (small size and easily disguised)
shoot and scoot (fast change of position)
multi-target engagement capable
low maintenance and support footprint
SAM system which roots go back to the SA-6, which was highly regarded by the IRGC.
It creates a sphere of 150km diameter under protection against tactical fighters and 210km against kinematically low performance assets such as U.S air power support platforms.
It can suddenly appear near a contested front sector or areas where the SEAD/DEAD mission is seen as accomplished.
It can also operate within a battery of other 3rd Khordad TELAR and TELs if such structures are intact.
Its high performance TI camera allows to avoid decoys and only engage targets that are worth it.
The load of just 3 Taer-2 may appear low but the missile is regarded as highly sophisticated, indicated by the single shot against the RQ-4.

Overall it's asymmetric approaches which the 3rd Khordad employs to be successful against an air power machinery, as that of the U.S.
It's the flexible backbone of IRGC-ASF's air defense, designed to remain a threat down to the last phase of any potential conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Mithridates

triangle said:


> Another gem in the form of a blogpost from Pataramesh
> 
> https://patarames.blogspot.com/2020/07/3rd-khordad-mythical-missile.html
> 
> *3rd Khordad: The mythical missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Understanding what was achieved*
> This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first operational kill of a RQ-4 in summer 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A RQ-4 Global Hawk is an expensive and vital asset in U.S airpower structure, that does the battlefield management of a whole front section.
> It remains far behind the lines, employing its stand-off SAR/GMTI sensors and has no crew that is put to risk.
> 
> The first iteration of such a capability was to be protected by employing a survivable air platform, which resulted in the low-observable/stealth (LO) Tacit Blue design.
> Technical hurdles forced the U.S to abandon this plan and the solution was the E-8 Joint STARS.
> A large E-3 AWACS-like concept, where larger sensor size allowed for increased distance to the dangerous battlefield periphery.
> 
> It added up to the portfolio of U.S airpower _force-multiplier _support assets; systems that greatly enhance the U.S airpower concept, but are vulnerable.
> Too vulnerable in confrontations with peer-level adversaries, yet still sufficient against opponents lacking "strategic assets".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The RQ-4 hence became what the Tacit Blue should have been; JSTARS capability within a survivable platform.
> The aerodynamic penalty the Tacit Blue had to pay, due to its LO geometry with its heavy emphasis of deflecting radar waves could be reduced.
> Instead the requirement for LO/stealth aspect of the design was achieved by _material stealth_.
> 
> Aerodynamic LO penalties were reduced so much that the RQ-4 became a kinematically high performance platform with vast endurance and high altitude performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> Its radar absorbing materials and structures (RAM/RAS) are very expensive to manufacture and designed to disrupt a key element of the kill chain, of a system trying to kill it: The engagement phase, where normally X-band and higher radar wavelength are employed.
> The X-band allows a small aperture seeker in the SAM and/or a sufficiently high precision ground/air tracking by the radar system.
> 
> The RAS of the RQ-4 BAMS-D that was shot down, is a complex double layer honeycomb design in critical areas. Its size suggest that its design perform best in the critical 8 Ghz X-band at which almost all SAM systems operate, including the *3rd Khordad*.
> 
> *Quantifying the LO performance of the RQ-4*
> The performance depends on the radar cross section of the geometry, overall size, to which an average RAS/RAM performance is added. It is best measured in dB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> This is a crude simulation but gives a general idea what the RCS of a blank RQ-4 at 8-10 Ghz looks like.
> It averages 0-5 dB at relevant aspects and would be higher if the emitter/radar is ground based, like in this case.
> 
> Another more professional analysis is available for the RAS, the key LO performance element of the RQ-4 design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> The highest reduction in X-band is between -25 to -20 dB.
> That's if a RQ-4 that applies similar double layer RAS all around the air frame. In practice this is not the case and here we must average the variations of geometric RCS and its RAS/RAM coverage.
> 
> Ideal results are between -25 dB and -15 dB overall RCS of relevant aspects.
> A stable RCS for tracking is therefore estimated to be -10 dB to -20 dB, which gives an idea of the grade of low observability of the RQ-4.
> To be on the conservative side, a RCS of -20 dB or 0,01m² is selected for all frontal threat aspects and against a ground based X-band emitter.
> 
> As the performance parameters of the 3rd Khordad have not been published, we can calculate the performance of other better known systems against a -20 dB class target.
> The highest performance system, of which the necessary data for the radar equation is known, is the export variant of the Russian S-400:
> 
> Tracking of a -20 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 56km.
> 
> Tracking of a -10 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 100km.
> Iran claims that target was tracked or locked at 120km, missile was launched at 90km distance and hit the approaching RQ-4 at 75km distance.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad however is not comparable to the S-400. In terms of aperture size, its about 7 times smaller and doesn't achieve as high power levels.
> 
> 
> *How was it done?*
> The inadequacy of the 3rd Khordad engagement radar and the comparatively high LO performance of the large conventional layout RQ-4 rise questions.
> The AESA technology which the 3rd Khordad employs, compared to the PESA S-400, is no explanation either, as it could never make up for the performance level necessary.
> 
> Beyond the world of conventional techniques, and modes described in export rated system manuals, there are some interesting points.
> 
> A SARH seeker based SAM system with an IMU can fly an energy optimized pattern, where it climbs above the target and dives into it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad Taer-2 missile diving into target
> 
> This offers improved kinematic performance than a SAM doing just proportional navigation.
> It also allows lock-on after launch in order to control emissions and remain passive.
> 
> Additional to all of that, it puts the ground based emitter and the approaching SAM's seeker into bi-static positions relative to each other.
> This can offer improvements against systems that employ techniques of shape/geometry LO/stealth, which deflect radar waves away from the emitter line of sight.
> 
> The RQ-4 is not a sophisticated representative of shape LO and concentrates on high performance radar absorption as a subsonic design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simplistic graphic on bi-static effect of SARH SAM
> 
> Another reality of such next generation systems are their inherent data fusion and multi-band architecture.
> Here the 3rd Khordad's own AESA radar would do textbook tracking engagements against non-LO/stealth conventional targets.
> Against LO/VLO targets, its main task would become that of high-power missile up-link, missile tracker and terminal illuminator.
> 
> The long range tracking in such cases could be done by other radar systems that perform better against X-band optimized LO assets.
> Lower band radars in VHF-band nearly completely neutralize the benefits of RAM and RAS and to a lesser extend also help against LO shaping techniques.
> However they often fail to provide accurate coordinates for the SAM to get sufficiently close to the target to kill it.
> 
> At some point sooner or later, a portion of the illuminated engagement radar frequency energy would get picked up by the SAM's SARH seeker, even if a large portion is absorbed or deflected by the LO target.
> 
> In this case the 3rd Khordad would do a _blind illumination _based on the coordinate data of the lower band radar that tracks the LO target. A key requirement for such a operation mode, would be knowledge on the accurate positions of both radars relative to each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Najm-802B S-band AESA radar
> 
> Illuminating a spot in airspace, blindly requires a sufficiently high accuracy. Irans family of S-band AESA's offer such accuracy levels at relative long ranges.
> This could be sufficient to allow the 3rd Khordad's X-band radar, to illuminate the LO target without own tracking.
> 
> The 3-3,5 Ghz operating frequency of these radars reduces the -20-25 dB performance of the double layer honeycomb RAS, effectively down to around -7 dB.
> The result is that the lower-band of this S-band AESA, allows it to confront the RQ-4 as a -7 dB (0,2m²) class LO asset, not -20 dB as in X-band.
> 
> Simulated models of the Najm-802B with conservative, very low power TRMs show that it would offer sufficient capability to do a 80-100km tracking of a -5-7 dB class LO target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermal imaging camera of the 3rd Khordad
> Thermal imaging systems able to detect air targets at extended ranges are a quite recent development. The performance class needed to detect a air targets at 70-100km distance was only in the hands of few advanced nations in the 2000's.
> Today Iran employs such high performance TI optics on its tactical 3rd Khordad SAM system.
> They allow angle tracking of targets that either can't be radar tracked due to electronic warfare, or by employing LO/stealth techniques like in the case of the RQ-4.
> The TI system could either help to compensate radar positional errors of the multi-band engagement solution as mentioned above, or assist in autonomous engagements.
> 
> In the latter scenario, a low-band radar would do the coarse tracking, such as the widespread Matla-ol-Fajr-2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matla-ol-Fajr-2 VHF-band array
> 
> The low coordinate accuracy would then be compensated by angular tracking via the TI camera system.
> This combined employment of multi-band radar data and corrections from the TI sensor, could then be sufficient for the _blind illumination _concept via the 3rd Khordad own X-band radar.
> 
> Active radar homing SAM could be another explanation.
> Cost and robustness are main reasons why Iran stays with the SARH principle, just like Russia.
> Russia's newest SAM system, the S-350 employs ARH SAM to counter terrain masking cruise missile, that are not protected by electronic warfare.
> In such scenarios, loss of LOS illumination is no issue anymore because the SAM is illuminating its own target from above.
> Ambush scenarios are other cases where ARH may be employed, such as long-range shots by the S-400 40N6 missile against physically large U.S airpower support assets.
> 
> However the reason even the newest S-350 retains the expensive X-band PESA engagement radar, is that under severe electronic warfare conditions, the dual-mode SAM seeker can switch to SARH/SAGG mode, which is the most robust mode.
> 
> Iran claims that there is a 105km range variant of the Taer SAM for the 3rd Khordad. This maybe a special variant, that uses ARH seeker at ranges where the 3rd Khordad's own engagement radar can't effectively illuminate. However, this could also be the maximum range of the newest Taer-2 variant against kinematically low performance targets.
> Irans view on ARH tactical SAM seems to be that they are too fragile on one side and too expensive, if to be made robust, on the other.
> After the shot down of an Ukrainian airliner by an Iranian Tor-M1, Iran acknowledged that U.S electronic warfare assets are taken very seriously.
> 
> The concept of an imaging infrared seeker SAM variant sounds attractive, just like the ARH concept initially. However here its not the cost for the seeker but the robustness and redundancy factors. Beside an aerodynamic penalty for a IIR seeker on SAM kinematics, SARH or even SAGG is simply regarded as very mature and robust. An IIR seeker SAM could probably simply not come out as the winner in a competition with a SARH counterpart on the key parameters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad TELAR transiting
> 
> There are more techniques that could be applied to allow for an extended-range engagement of LO targets in the class of the RQ-4, but it would be too theoretical at this point.
> 
> 
> *What happend most likely on that night*
> 
> The RQ-4 BAMS-D started from an airbase the UAE and climbed to altitude. During that climb it should have appeared at some point on the screens of the Iranian Ghadir/Rezonans long range early warning radar. With its strict emission control, no active IFF, and flight pattern Iranians would realize at some point that it is a Global Hawk leaving UAE airspace towards Iran.
> 
> Later a manned P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft added up and they formed a group, typical for a long range reconnaissance mission along Iranian borders. A slower MQ-9 drone added to the group on their way back towards the straight of Hormuz.
> Once near Iranian borders, the old, static early warning radar network and mobile VHF Matla-ol-Fajr-2 early warning radars would have detected and tracked the LO/stealth RQ-4.
> 
> When warnings were ignored and Irans airspace violated, the decision was made to engage the RQ-4.
> 
> At the remote missile site where the 3rd Khordad system was, likely also a widespreadly used Matla-ol-Fajr-2 was present, directly linked to the 3rd Khordad.
> The 3rd Khordad remained passive, as illumination of the RQ-4 could trigger its powerful towed electronic warfare system.
> Coarse coordinated were continuously provided to the 3rd Khordad which allowed angle tracking by its TI camera. Coarse range data came via the Matla-ol-Fajr-2 and this was sufficient to launch a Taer-2 towards the estimated interception point.
> The Taer-2 would then have received mid-course updates via the short range data-link of the 3rd Khordad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad operators
> 
> Approaching the target the 3rd Khordad would have started emissions of its LPI AESA radar to track the SAM and do the later stage, long range, course updates.
> This was not perceived as a threat by the ESM suite of the RQ-4.
> Continuous command guidance would not be necessary as the IMU of the Taer-2 can work with one update every several seconds without wasting too much kinetic energy.
> 
> It appears that, if at all, only the missile approach warning system detected the inbound Taer-2 and this was to late to deploy the towed jammer, since the Iranian operators claim that there was no ECM as they had expected.
> Seconds away from impact the 3rd Khordad radar would have started _blind illumination_ of the target based on the external VHF-radar data, corrected by the angular data from its own TI camera. This would then have been precise enough to concentrate the electronically steered, illumination pencil beam on the RQ-4.
> The now very close distance Taer-2 SARH seeker would then have picked up the portion of RF energy that had not been absorbed by RAS or deflected by shape.
> 
> Once locked it would have corrected the trajectory uncertainties caused by the VHF and TI sensors, got the exact range to the target and brought itself into a parallel position for the highest directed fragmentation effect of its warhead.
> In the last phase redundant seeker and proximity fuses would determine the right timing and direction for the detonation of the warhead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taer-2 approaching a low RCS target drone
> *Conclusion*
> Iranians claim that Russians called the 3rd Khordad's missile "mythical" after information was exchanged.
> The reason should be the fact, that as per conventional engagement techniques, even large brute-force SAM systems such as the S-400 can't track the RQ-4 at extended ranges with their engagement radar alone. Certainly Russians apply similar unconventional techniques for engagement of LO assets, at least in their domestic _federation standard_ systems.
> 
> 3rd Khordad would not have been able to track a RQ-4 class LO target at beyond 25-30km, but was able to engage at 90km and kill at 75km.
> Its a display of what is possible if you are the owner and creator of the system design, it can be continuously updated and integrated with other systems.
> It must also be understood that the RQ-4 is a genuine LO/stealth asset which capabilities in this field should not be downplayed after the shot down. Its AESA radar is said to have high LPI capabilities and its emissions very difficult for ESM systems to pick-up and finding the source of it.
> 
> The same defeat tactics could be employed against more capable LO/stealth assets such as F-22 and F-35, even if their LO performance is higher than that of Global Hawk.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad is the final result of IRGC-ASF's quest for a:
> 
> cost-efficient (low cost SAM, low cost TEL, low cost radar, COTS components)
> highly mobile and off-road capable
> highly autonomous (target search/acquisition and engagement done by single radar on TEL)
> low footprint (small size and easily disguised)
> shoot and scoot (fast change of position)
> multi-target engagement capable
> low maintenance and support footprint
> SAM system which roots go back to the SA-6, which was highly regarded by the IRGC.
> It creates a sphere of 150km diameter under protection against tactical fighters and 210km against kinematically low performance assets such as U.S air power support platforms.
> It can suddenly appear near a contested front sector or areas where the SEAD/DEAD mission is seen as accomplished.
> It can also operate within a battery of other 3rd Khordad TELAR and TELs if such structures are intact.
> Its high performance TI camera allows to avoid decoys and only engage targets that are worth it.
> The load of just 3 Taer-2 may appear low but the missile is regarded as highly sophisticated, indicated by the single shot against the RQ-4.
> 
> Overall it's asymmetric approaches which the 3rd Khordad employs to be successful against an air power machinery, as that of the U.S.
> It's the flexible backbone of IRGC-ASF's air defense, designed to remain a threat down to the last phase of any potential conflict.


thank you bro, very informative.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

triangle said:


> Another gem in the form of a blogpost from Pataramesh
> 
> https://patarames.blogspot.com/2020/07/3rd-khordad-mythical-missile.html
> 
> *3rd Khordad: The mythical missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Understanding what was achieved*
> This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first operational kill of a RQ-4 in summer 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A RQ-4 Global Hawk is an expensive and vital asset in U.S airpower structure, that does the battlefield management of a whole front section.
> It remains far behind the lines, employing its stand-off SAR/GMTI sensors and has no crew that is put to risk.
> 
> The first iteration of such a capability was to be protected by employing a survivable air platform, which resulted in the low-observable/stealth (LO) Tacit Blue design.
> Technical hurdles forced the U.S to abandon this plan and the solution was the E-8 Joint STARS.
> A large E-3 AWACS-like concept, where larger sensor size allowed for increased distance to the dangerous battlefield periphery.
> 
> It added up to the portfolio of U.S airpower _force-multiplier _support assets; systems that greatly enhance the U.S airpower concept, but are vulnerable.
> Too vulnerable in confrontations with peer-level adversaries, yet still sufficient against opponents lacking "strategic assets".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The RQ-4 hence became what the Tacit Blue should have been; JSTARS capability within a survivable platform.
> The aerodynamic penalty the Tacit Blue had to pay, due to its LO geometry with its heavy emphasis of deflecting radar waves could be reduced.
> Instead the requirement for LO/stealth aspect of the design was achieved by _material stealth_.
> 
> Aerodynamic LO penalties were reduced so much that the RQ-4 became a kinematically high performance platform with vast endurance and high altitude performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> Its radar absorbing materials and structures (RAM/RAS) are very expensive to manufacture and designed to disrupt a key element of the kill chain, of a system trying to kill it: The engagement phase, where normally X-band and higher radar wavelength are employed.
> The X-band allows a small aperture seeker in the SAM and/or a sufficiently high precision ground/air tracking by the radar system.
> 
> The RAS of the RQ-4 BAMS-D that was shot down, is a complex double layer honeycomb design in critical areas. Its size suggest that its design perform best in the critical 8 Ghz X-band at which almost all SAM systems operate, including the *3rd Khordad*.
> 
> *Quantifying the LO performance of the RQ-4*
> The performance depends on the radar cross section of the geometry, overall size, to which an average RAS/RAM performance is added. It is best measured in dB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> This is a crude simulation but gives a general idea what the RCS of a blank RQ-4 at 8-10 Ghz looks like.
> It averages 0-5 dB at relevant aspects and would be higher if the emitter/radar is ground based, like in this case.
> 
> Another more professional analysis is available for the RAS, the key LO performance element of the RQ-4 design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> The highest reduction in X-band is between -25 to -20 dB.
> That's if a RQ-4 that applies similar double layer RAS all around the air frame. In practice this is not the case and here we must average the variations of geometric RCS and its RAS/RAM coverage.
> 
> Ideal results are between -25 dB and -15 dB overall RCS of relevant aspects.
> A stable RCS for tracking is therefore estimated to be -10 dB to -20 dB, which gives an idea of the grade of low observability of the RQ-4.
> To be on the conservative side, a RCS of -20 dB or 0,01m² is selected for all frontal threat aspects and against a ground based X-band emitter.
> 
> As the performance parameters of the 3rd Khordad have not been published, we can calculate the performance of other better known systems against a -20 dB class target.
> The highest performance system, of which the necessary data for the radar equation is known, is the export variant of the Russian S-400:
> 
> Tracking of a -20 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 56km.
> 
> Tracking of a -10 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 100km.
> Iran claims that target was tracked or locked at 120km, missile was launched at 90km distance and hit the approaching RQ-4 at 75km distance.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad however is not comparable to the S-400. In terms of aperture size, its about 7 times smaller and doesn't achieve as high power levels.
> 
> 
> *How was it done?*
> The inadequacy of the 3rd Khordad engagement radar and the comparatively high LO performance of the large conventional layout RQ-4 rise questions.
> The AESA technology which the 3rd Khordad employs, compared to the PESA S-400, is no explanation either, as it could never make up for the performance level necessary.
> 
> Beyond the world of conventional techniques, and modes described in export rated system manuals, there are some interesting points.
> 
> A SARH seeker based SAM system with an IMU can fly an energy optimized pattern, where it climbs above the target and dives into it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad Taer-2 missile diving into target
> 
> This offers improved kinematic performance than a SAM doing just proportional navigation.
> It also allows lock-on after launch in order to control emissions and remain passive.
> 
> Additional to all of that, it puts the ground based emitter and the approaching SAM's seeker into bi-static positions relative to each other.
> This can offer improvements against systems that employ techniques of shape/geometry LO/stealth, which deflect radar waves away from the emitter line of sight.
> 
> The RQ-4 is not a sophisticated representative of shape LO and concentrates on high performance radar absorption as a subsonic design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simplistic graphic on bi-static effect of SARH SAM
> 
> Another reality of such next generation systems are their inherent data fusion and multi-band architecture.
> Here the 3rd Khordad's own AESA radar would do textbook tracking engagements against non-LO/stealth conventional targets.
> Against LO/VLO targets, its main task would become that of high-power missile up-link, missile tracker and terminal illuminator.
> 
> The long range tracking in such cases could be done by other radar systems that perform better against X-band optimized LO assets.
> Lower band radars in VHF-band nearly completely neutralize the benefits of RAM and RAS and to a lesser extend also help against LO shaping techniques.
> However they often fail to provide accurate coordinates for the SAM to get sufficiently close to the target to kill it.
> 
> At some point sooner or later, a portion of the illuminated engagement radar frequency energy would get picked up by the SAM's SARH seeker, even if a large portion is absorbed or deflected by the LO target.
> 
> In this case the 3rd Khordad would do a _blind illumination _based on the coordinate data of the lower band radar that tracks the LO target. A key requirement for such a operation mode, would be knowledge on the accurate positions of both radars relative to each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Najm-802B S-band AESA radar
> 
> Illuminating a spot in airspace, blindly requires a sufficiently high accuracy. Irans family of S-band AESA's offer such accuracy levels at relative long ranges.
> This could be sufficient to allow the 3rd Khordad's X-band radar, to illuminate the LO target without own tracking.
> 
> The 3-3,5 Ghz operating frequency of these radars reduces the -20-25 dB performance of the double layer honeycomb RAS, effectively down to around -7 dB.
> The result is that the lower-band of this S-band AESA, allows it to confront the RQ-4 as a -7 dB (0,2m²) class LO asset, not -20 dB as in X-band.
> 
> Simulated models of the Najm-802B with conservative, very low power TRMs show that it would offer sufficient capability to do a 80-100km tracking of a -5-7 dB class LO target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermal imaging camera of the 3rd Khordad
> Thermal imaging systems able to detect air targets at extended ranges are a quite recent development. The performance class needed to detect a air targets at 70-100km distance was only in the hands of few advanced nations in the 2000's.
> Today Iran employs such high performance TI optics on its tactical 3rd Khordad SAM system.
> They allow angle tracking of targets that either can't be radar tracked due to electronic warfare, or by employing LO/stealth techniques like in the case of the RQ-4.
> The TI system could either help to compensate radar positional errors of the multi-band engagement solution as mentioned above, or assist in autonomous engagements.
> 
> In the latter scenario, a low-band radar would do the coarse tracking, such as the widespread Matla-ol-Fajr-2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matla-ol-Fajr-2 VHF-band array
> 
> The low coordinate accuracy would then be compensated by angular tracking via the TI camera system.
> This combined employment of multi-band radar data and corrections from the TI sensor, could then be sufficient for the _blind illumination _concept via the 3rd Khordad own X-band radar.
> 
> Active radar homing SAM could be another explanation.
> Cost and robustness are main reasons why Iran stays with the SARH principle, just like Russia.
> Russia's newest SAM system, the S-350 employs ARH SAM to counter terrain masking cruise missile, that are not protected by electronic warfare.
> In such scenarios, loss of LOS illumination is no issue anymore because the SAM is illuminating its own target from above.
> Ambush scenarios are other cases where ARH may be employed, such as long-range shots by the S-400 40N6 missile against physically large U.S airpower support assets.
> 
> However the reason even the newest S-350 retains the expensive X-band PESA engagement radar, is that under severe electronic warfare conditions, the dual-mode SAM seeker can switch to SARH/SAGG mode, which is the most robust mode.
> 
> Iran claims that there is a 105km range variant of the Taer SAM for the 3rd Khordad. This maybe a special variant, that uses ARH seeker at ranges where the 3rd Khordad's own engagement radar can't effectively illuminate. However, this could also be the maximum range of the newest Taer-2 variant against kinematically low performance targets.
> Irans view on ARH tactical SAM seems to be that they are too fragile on one side and too expensive, if to be made robust, on the other.
> After the shot down of an Ukrainian airliner by an Iranian Tor-M1, Iran acknowledged that U.S electronic warfare assets are taken very seriously.
> 
> The concept of an imaging infrared seeker SAM variant sounds attractive, just like the ARH concept initially. However here its not the cost for the seeker but the robustness and redundancy factors. Beside an aerodynamic penalty for a IIR seeker on SAM kinematics, SARH or even SAGG is simply regarded as very mature and robust. An IIR seeker SAM could probably simply not come out as the winner in a competition with a SARH counterpart on the key parameters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad TELAR transiting
> 
> There are more techniques that could be applied to allow for an extended-range engagement of LO targets in the class of the RQ-4, but it would be too theoretical at this point.
> 
> 
> *What happend most likely on that night*
> 
> The RQ-4 BAMS-D started from an airbase the UAE and climbed to altitude. During that climb it should have appeared at some point on the screens of the Iranian Ghadir/Rezonans long range early warning radar. With its strict emission control, no active IFF, and flight pattern Iranians would realize at some point that it is a Global Hawk leaving UAE airspace towards Iran.
> 
> Later a manned P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft added up and they formed a group, typical for a long range reconnaissance mission along Iranian borders. A slower MQ-9 drone added to the group on their way back towards the straight of Hormuz.
> Once near Iranian borders, the old, static early warning radar network and mobile VHF Matla-ol-Fajr-2 early warning radars would have detected and tracked the LO/stealth RQ-4.
> 
> When warnings were ignored and Irans airspace violated, the decision was made to engage the RQ-4.
> 
> At the remote missile site where the 3rd Khordad system was, likely also a widespreadly used Matla-ol-Fajr-2 was present, directly linked to the 3rd Khordad.
> The 3rd Khordad remained passive, as illumination of the RQ-4 could trigger its powerful towed electronic warfare system.
> Coarse coordinated were continuously provided to the 3rd Khordad which allowed angle tracking by its TI camera. Coarse range data came via the Matla-ol-Fajr-2 and this was sufficient to launch a Taer-2 towards the estimated interception point.
> The Taer-2 would then have received mid-course updates via the short range data-link of the 3rd Khordad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad operators
> 
> Approaching the target the 3rd Khordad would have started emissions of its LPI AESA radar to track the SAM and do the later stage, long range, course updates.
> This was not perceived as a threat by the ESM suite of the RQ-4.
> Continuous command guidance would not be necessary as the IMU of the Taer-2 can work with one update every several seconds without wasting too much kinetic energy.
> 
> It appears that, if at all, only the missile approach warning system detected the inbound Taer-2 and this was to late to deploy the towed jammer, since the Iranian operators claim that there was no ECM as they had expected.
> Seconds away from impact the 3rd Khordad radar would have started _blind illumination_ of the target based on the external VHF-radar data, corrected by the angular data from its own TI camera. This would then have been precise enough to concentrate the electronically steered, illumination pencil beam on the RQ-4.
> The now very close distance Taer-2 SARH seeker would then have picked up the portion of RF energy that had not been absorbed by RAS or deflected by shape.
> 
> Once locked it would have corrected the trajectory uncertainties caused by the VHF and TI sensors, got the exact range to the target and brought itself into a parallel position for the highest directed fragmentation effect of its warhead.
> In the last phase redundant seeker and proximity fuses would determine the right timing and direction for the detonation of the warhead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taer-2 approaching a low RCS target drone
> *Conclusion*
> Iranians claim that Russians called the 3rd Khordad's missile "mythical" after information was exchanged.
> The reason should be the fact, that as per conventional engagement techniques, even large brute-force SAM systems such as the S-400 can't track the RQ-4 at extended ranges with their engagement radar alone. Certainly Russians apply similar unconventional techniques for engagement of LO assets, at least in their domestic _federation standard_ systems.
> 
> 3rd Khordad would not have been able to track a RQ-4 class LO target at beyond 25-30km, but was able to engage at 90km and kill at 75km.
> Its a display of what is possible if you are the owner and creator of the system design, it can be continuously updated and integrated with other systems.
> It must also be understood that the RQ-4 is a genuine LO/stealth asset which capabilities in this field should not be downplayed after the shot down. Its AESA radar is said to have high LPI capabilities and its emissions very difficult for ESM systems to pick-up and finding the source of it.
> 
> The same defeat tactics could be employed against more capable LO/stealth assets such as F-22 and F-35, even if their LO performance is higher than that of Global Hawk.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad is the final result of IRGC-ASF's quest for a:
> 
> cost-efficient (low cost SAM, low cost TEL, low cost radar, COTS components)
> highly mobile and off-road capable
> highly autonomous (target search/acquisition and engagement done by single radar on TEL)
> low footprint (small size and easily disguised)
> shoot and scoot (fast change of position)
> multi-target engagement capable
> low maintenance and support footprint
> SAM system which roots go back to the SA-6, which was highly regarded by the IRGC.
> It creates a sphere of 150km diameter under protection against tactical fighters and 210km against kinematically low performance assets such as U.S air power support platforms.
> It can suddenly appear near a contested front sector or areas where the SEAD/DEAD mission is seen as accomplished.
> It can also operate within a battery of other 3rd Khordad TELAR and TELs if such structures are intact.
> Its high performance TI camera allows to avoid decoys and only engage targets that are worth it.
> The load of just 3 Taer-2 may appear low but the missile is regarded as highly sophisticated, indicated by the single shot against the RQ-4.
> 
> Overall it's asymmetric approaches which the 3rd Khordad employs to be successful against an air power machinery, as that of the U.S.
> It's the flexible backbone of IRGC-ASF's air defense, designed to remain a threat down to the last phase of any potential conflict.


Thank you. What an incredible engineering marvel! How did they come up with such a complex process and executed it so brilliantly?


----------



## Sina-1

triangle said:


> Its a display of what is possible if you are the owner and creator of the system design, it can be continuously updated and integrated with other systems.


Great analysis as always. Most important aspect IMO. You cannot rely on “bought” systems when it comes to defense. That’s the hard learned lesson from the sacred defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IAm

triangle said:


> Another gem in the form of a blogpost from Pataramesh
> 
> https://patarames.blogspot.com/2020/07/3rd-khordad-mythical-missile.html
> 
> *3rd Khordad: The mythical missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Understanding what was achieved*
> This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first operational kill of a RQ-4 in summer 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A RQ-4 Global Hawk is an expensive and vital asset in U.S airpower structure, that does the battlefield management of a whole front section.
> It remains far behind the lines, employing its stand-off SAR/GMTI sensors and has no crew that is put to risk.
> 
> The first iteration of such a capability was to be protected by employing a survivable air platform, which resulted in the low-observable/stealth (LO) Tacit Blue design.
> Technical hurdles forced the U.S to abandon this plan and the solution was the E-8 Joint STARS.
> A large E-3 AWACS-like concept, where larger sensor size allowed for increased distance to the dangerous battlefield periphery.
> 
> It added up to the portfolio of U.S airpower _force-multiplier _support assets; systems that greatly enhance the U.S airpower concept, but are vulnerable.
> Too vulnerable in confrontations with peer-level adversaries, yet still sufficient against opponents lacking "strategic assets".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The RQ-4 hence became what the Tacit Blue should have been; JSTARS capability within a survivable platform.
> The aerodynamic penalty the Tacit Blue had to pay, due to its LO geometry with its heavy emphasis of deflecting radar waves could be reduced.
> Instead the requirement for LO/stealth aspect of the design was achieved by _material stealth_.
> 
> Aerodynamic LO penalties were reduced so much that the RQ-4 became a kinematically high performance platform with vast endurance and high altitude performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> Its radar absorbing materials and structures (RAM/RAS) are very expensive to manufacture and designed to disrupt a key element of the kill chain, of a system trying to kill it: The engagement phase, where normally X-band and higher radar wavelength are employed.
> The X-band allows a small aperture seeker in the SAM and/or a sufficiently high precision ground/air tracking by the radar system.
> 
> The RAS of the RQ-4 BAMS-D that was shot down, is a complex double layer honeycomb design in critical areas. Its size suggest that its design perform best in the critical 8 Ghz X-band at which almost all SAM systems operate, including the *3rd Khordad*.
> 
> *Quantifying the LO performance of the RQ-4*
> The performance depends on the radar cross section of the geometry, overall size, to which an average RAS/RAM performance is added. It is best measured in dB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> This is a crude simulation but gives a general idea what the RCS of a blank RQ-4 at 8-10 Ghz looks like.
> It averages 0-5 dB at relevant aspects and would be higher if the emitter/radar is ground based, like in this case.
> 
> Another more professional analysis is available for the RAS, the key LO performance element of the RQ-4 design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Credits to members of military.ir_
> 
> The highest reduction in X-band is between -25 to -20 dB.
> That's if a RQ-4 that applies similar double layer RAS all around the air frame. In practice this is not the case and here we must average the variations of geometric RCS and its RAS/RAM coverage.
> 
> Ideal results are between -25 dB and -15 dB overall RCS of relevant aspects.
> A stable RCS for tracking is therefore estimated to be -10 dB to -20 dB, which gives an idea of the grade of low observability of the RQ-4.
> To be on the conservative side, a RCS of -20 dB or 0,01m² is selected for all frontal threat aspects and against a ground based X-band emitter.
> 
> As the performance parameters of the 3rd Khordad have not been published, we can calculate the performance of other better known systems against a -20 dB class target.
> The highest performance system, of which the necessary data for the radar equation is known, is the export variant of the Russian S-400:
> 
> Tracking of a -20 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 56km.
> 
> Tracking of a -10 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 100km.
> Iran claims that target was tracked or locked at 120km, missile was launched at 90km distance and hit the approaching RQ-4 at 75km distance.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad however is not comparable to the S-400. In terms of aperture size, its about 7 times smaller and doesn't achieve as high power levels.
> 
> 
> *How was it done?*
> The inadequacy of the 3rd Khordad engagement radar and the comparatively high LO performance of the large conventional layout RQ-4 rise questions.
> The AESA technology which the 3rd Khordad employs, compared to the PESA S-400, is no explanation either, as it could never make up for the performance level necessary.
> 
> Beyond the world of conventional techniques, and modes described in export rated system manuals, there are some interesting points.
> 
> A SARH seeker based SAM system with an IMU can fly an energy optimized pattern, where it climbs above the target and dives into it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad Taer-2 missile diving into target
> 
> This offers improved kinematic performance than a SAM doing just proportional navigation.
> It also allows lock-on after launch in order to control emissions and remain passive.
> 
> Additional to all of that, it puts the ground based emitter and the approaching SAM's seeker into bi-static positions relative to each other.
> This can offer improvements against systems that employ techniques of shape/geometry LO/stealth, which deflect radar waves away from the emitter line of sight.
> 
> The RQ-4 is not a sophisticated representative of shape LO and concentrates on high performance radar absorption as a subsonic design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simplistic graphic on bi-static effect of SARH SAM
> 
> Another reality of such next generation systems are their inherent data fusion and multi-band architecture.
> Here the 3rd Khordad's own AESA radar would do textbook tracking engagements against non-LO/stealth conventional targets.
> Against LO/VLO targets, its main task would become that of high-power missile up-link, missile tracker and terminal illuminator.
> 
> The long range tracking in such cases could be done by other radar systems that perform better against X-band optimized LO assets.
> Lower band radars in VHF-band nearly completely neutralize the benefits of RAM and RAS and to a lesser extend also help against LO shaping techniques.
> However they often fail to provide accurate coordinates for the SAM to get sufficiently close to the target to kill it.
> 
> At some point sooner or later, a portion of the illuminated engagement radar frequency energy would get picked up by the SAM's SARH seeker, even if a large portion is absorbed or deflected by the LO target.
> 
> In this case the 3rd Khordad would do a _blind illumination _based on the coordinate data of the lower band radar that tracks the LO target. A key requirement for such a operation mode, would be knowledge on the accurate positions of both radars relative to each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Najm-802B S-band AESA radar
> 
> Illuminating a spot in airspace, blindly requires a sufficiently high accuracy. Irans family of S-band AESA's offer such accuracy levels at relative long ranges.
> This could be sufficient to allow the 3rd Khordad's X-band radar, to illuminate the LO target without own tracking.
> 
> The 3-3,5 Ghz operating frequency of these radars reduces the -20-25 dB performance of the double layer honeycomb RAS, effectively down to around -7 dB.
> The result is that the lower-band of this S-band AESA, allows it to confront the RQ-4 as a -7 dB (0,2m²) class LO asset, not -20 dB as in X-band.
> 
> Simulated models of the Najm-802B with conservative, very low power TRMs show that it would offer sufficient capability to do a 80-100km tracking of a -5-7 dB class LO target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermal imaging camera of the 3rd Khordad
> Thermal imaging systems able to detect air targets at extended ranges are a quite recent development. The performance class needed to detect a air targets at 70-100km distance was only in the hands of few advanced nations in the 2000's.
> Today Iran employs such high performance TI optics on its tactical 3rd Khordad SAM system.
> They allow angle tracking of targets that either can't be radar tracked due to electronic warfare, or by employing LO/stealth techniques like in the case of the RQ-4.
> The TI system could either help to compensate radar positional errors of the multi-band engagement solution as mentioned above, or assist in autonomous engagements.
> 
> In the latter scenario, a low-band radar would do the coarse tracking, such as the widespread Matla-ol-Fajr-2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matla-ol-Fajr-2 VHF-band array
> 
> The low coordinate accuracy would then be compensated by angular tracking via the TI camera system.
> This combined employment of multi-band radar data and corrections from the TI sensor, could then be sufficient for the _blind illumination _concept via the 3rd Khordad own X-band radar.
> 
> Active radar homing SAM could be another explanation.
> Cost and robustness are main reasons why Iran stays with the SARH principle, just like Russia.
> Russia's newest SAM system, the S-350 employs ARH SAM to counter terrain masking cruise missile, that are not protected by electronic warfare.
> In such scenarios, loss of LOS illumination is no issue anymore because the SAM is illuminating its own target from above.
> Ambush scenarios are other cases where ARH may be employed, such as long-range shots by the S-400 40N6 missile against physically large U.S airpower support assets.
> 
> However the reason even the newest S-350 retains the expensive X-band PESA engagement radar, is that under severe electronic warfare conditions, the dual-mode SAM seeker can switch to SARH/SAGG mode, which is the most robust mode.
> 
> Iran claims that there is a 105km range variant of the Taer SAM for the 3rd Khordad. This maybe a special variant, that uses ARH seeker at ranges where the 3rd Khordad's own engagement radar can't effectively illuminate. However, this could also be the maximum range of the newest Taer-2 variant against kinematically low performance targets.
> Irans view on ARH tactical SAM seems to be that they are too fragile on one side and too expensive, if to be made robust, on the other.
> After the shot down of an Ukrainian airliner by an Iranian Tor-M1, Iran acknowledged that U.S electronic warfare assets are taken very seriously.
> 
> The concept of an imaging infrared seeker SAM variant sounds attractive, just like the ARH concept initially. However here its not the cost for the seeker but the robustness and redundancy factors. Beside an aerodynamic penalty for a IIR seeker on SAM kinematics, SARH or even SAGG is simply regarded as very mature and robust. An IIR seeker SAM could probably simply not come out as the winner in a competition with a SARH counterpart on the key parameters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad TELAR transiting
> 
> There are more techniques that could be applied to allow for an extended-range engagement of LO targets in the class of the RQ-4, but it would be too theoretical at this point.
> 
> 
> *What happend most likely on that night*
> 
> The RQ-4 BAMS-D started from an airbase the UAE and climbed to altitude. During that climb it should have appeared at some point on the screens of the Iranian Ghadir/Rezonans long range early warning radar. With its strict emission control, no active IFF, and flight pattern Iranians would realize at some point that it is a Global Hawk leaving UAE airspace towards Iran.
> 
> Later a manned P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft added up and they formed a group, typical for a long range reconnaissance mission along Iranian borders. A slower MQ-9 drone added to the group on their way back towards the straight of Hormuz.
> Once near Iranian borders, the old, static early warning radar network and mobile VHF Matla-ol-Fajr-2 early warning radars would have detected and tracked the LO/stealth RQ-4.
> 
> When warnings were ignored and Irans airspace violated, the decision was made to engage the RQ-4.
> 
> At the remote missile site where the 3rd Khordad system was, likely also a widespreadly used Matla-ol-Fajr-2 was present, directly linked to the 3rd Khordad.
> The 3rd Khordad remained passive, as illumination of the RQ-4 could trigger its powerful towed electronic warfare system.
> Coarse coordinated were continuously provided to the 3rd Khordad which allowed angle tracking by its TI camera. Coarse range data came via the Matla-ol-Fajr-2 and this was sufficient to launch a Taer-2 towards the estimated interception point.
> The Taer-2 would then have received mid-course updates via the short range data-link of the 3rd Khordad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad operators
> 
> Approaching the target the 3rd Khordad would have started emissions of its LPI AESA radar to track the SAM and do the later stage, long range, course updates.
> This was not perceived as a threat by the ESM suite of the RQ-4.
> Continuous command guidance would not be necessary as the IMU of the Taer-2 can work with one update every several seconds without wasting too much kinetic energy.
> 
> It appears that, if at all, only the missile approach warning system detected the inbound Taer-2 and this was to late to deploy the towed jammer, since the Iranian operators claim that there was no ECM as they had expected.
> Seconds away from impact the 3rd Khordad radar would have started _blind illumination_ of the target based on the external VHF-radar data, corrected by the angular data from its own TI camera. This would then have been precise enough to concentrate the electronically steered, illumination pencil beam on the RQ-4.
> The now very close distance Taer-2 SARH seeker would then have picked up the portion of RF energy that had not been absorbed by RAS or deflected by shape.
> 
> Once locked it would have corrected the trajectory uncertainties caused by the VHF and TI sensors, got the exact range to the target and brought itself into a parallel position for the highest directed fragmentation effect of its warhead.
> In the last phase redundant seeker and proximity fuses would determine the right timing and direction for the detonation of the warhead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taer-2 approaching a low RCS target drone
> *Conclusion*
> Iranians claim that Russians called the 3rd Khordad's missile "mythical" after information was exchanged.
> The reason should be the fact, that as per conventional engagement techniques, even large brute-force SAM systems such as the S-400 can't track the RQ-4 at extended ranges with their engagement radar alone. Certainly Russians apply similar unconventional techniques for engagement of LO assets, at least in their domestic _federation standard_ systems.
> 
> 3rd Khordad would not have been able to track a RQ-4 class LO target at beyond 25-30km, but was able to engage at 90km and kill at 75km.
> Its a display of what is possible if you are the owner and creator of the system design, it can be continuously updated and integrated with other systems.
> It must also be understood that the RQ-4 is a genuine LO/stealth asset which capabilities in this field should not be downplayed after the shot down. Its AESA radar is said to have high LPI capabilities and its emissions very difficult for ESM systems to pick-up and finding the source of it.
> 
> The same defeat tactics could be employed against more capable LO/stealth assets such as F-22 and F-35, even if their LO performance is higher than that of Global Hawk.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad is the final result of IRGC-ASF's quest for a:
> 
> cost-efficient (low cost SAM, low cost TEL, low cost radar, COTS components)
> highly mobile and off-road capable
> highly autonomous (target search/acquisition and engagement done by single radar on TEL)
> low footprint (small size and easily disguised)
> shoot and scoot (fast change of position)
> multi-target engagement capable
> low maintenance and support footprint
> SAM system which roots go back to the SA-6, which was highly regarded by the IRGC.
> It creates a sphere of 150km diameter under protection against tactical fighters and 210km against kinematically low performance assets such as U.S air power support platforms.
> It can suddenly appear near a contested front sector or areas where the SEAD/DEAD mission is seen as accomplished.
> It can also operate within a battery of other 3rd Khordad TELAR and TELs if such structures are intact.
> Its high performance TI camera allows to avoid decoys and only engage targets that are worth it.
> The load of just 3 Taer-2 may appear low but the missile is regarded as highly sophisticated, indicated by the single shot against the RQ-4.
> 
> Overall it's asymmetric approaches which the 3rd Khordad employs to be successful against an air power machinery, as that of the U.S.
> It's the flexible backbone of IRGC-ASF's air defense, designed to remain a threat down to the last phase of any potential conflict.



No wonder the US didn't dare to retaliate. Their F-22-35 would have been disgraced. If Iran shot down their F-22 in a retaliation attempt their air superiority thing would have fizzled out creating high demand for Iranian ADs/SAMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Messerschmitt said:


>


What is that?



Philosopher said:


> Sevome Khordad on the naval vessel:
> 
> View attachment 642887
> View attachment 642888


Ingenious, it seems it could be put on many vessels. It allows theoretically even Iranian older ships to fire long range missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mithridates

Philip the Arab said:


> What is that?


it launches rockets with proximity fuses. seems like it's for anti helicopter missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> Ingenious, it seems it could be put on many vessels. It allows theoretically even Iranian older ships to fire long range missile.



Yes brother, the IRGC is always full of surprises.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Mithridates said:


> it launches rockets with proximity fuses. seems like it's for anti helicopter missions.


Rather see SALH (APKWS) type rockets with proximity fuses, those would be killer in my opinion but more expensive. All it would need would be general direction and a vehicle based laser designator with good tracking capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279764697705783297

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279764697705783297


Old radar or modernized?


----------



## Mithridates

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems-that-are-manufacturing-in-iran.217142/
damm it's good to read old threads, people posting didn't know sayyad AD is coming and were happy with hawk reverse engineered version and mobile s-200.


Philip the Arab said:


> Old radar or modernized?


they are being replaced with 15th khordad. they possibly relocate the old systems to north west and east of the country which do not face vast and immediate threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## waduhek

Mithridates said:


> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems-that-are-manufacturing-in-iran.217142/
> damm it's good to read old threads, people posting didn't know sayyad AD is coming and were happy with hawk reverse engineered version and mobile s-200.
> 
> they are being replaced with 15th khordad. they possibly relocate the old systems to north west and east of the country which do not face vast and immediate threats.



Incredible how far we came in missile technology.

Wished other products received the same love instead of cheap PR.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philip the Arab

Do you know the max range and altitude of an IR only or inertial with IR missile? I was thinking of how poor or ill equipped forces could fight stronger forces. I was thinking that it would not be manportable, but be able to be mounted on light vehicles equipped with EO systems for tracking enemy aircraft at high altitudes, and far ranges. It would have enough fuel to hit targets at 10km altitude, and the same distance.


----------



## Mithridates

Philip the Arab said:


> Do you know the max range and altitude of an IR only or inertial with IR missile? I was thinking of how poor or ill equipped forces could fight stronger forces. I was thinking that it would not be manportable, but be able to be mounted on light vehicles equipped with EO systems for tracking enemy aircraft at high altitudes, and far ranges. It would have enough fuel to hit targets at 10km altitude, and the same distance.


for a head on confrontation scenario would be around 40 km but for better results possibly you would need to know target speed and azimuth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Mithridates said:


> for a head on confrontation scenario would be around 40 km but for better results possibly you would need to know target speed and azimuth.


Ah, but for ranges like only 10km would you need precise data?


----------



## hussainb72

Philip the Arab said:


> Do you know the max range and altitude of an IR only or inertial with IR missile? I was thinking of how poor or ill equipped forces could fight stronger forces. I was thinking that it would not be manportable, but be able to be mounted on light vehicles equipped with EO systems for tracking enemy aircraft at high altitudes, and far ranges. It would have enough fuel to hit targets at 10km altitude, and the same distance.





Philip the Arab said:


> Ah, but for ranges like only 10km would you need precise data?


I am not sure if you knew about this or not, but the Houthis have actually done something like this. They have converted the R 27, R 73, and R 77 missiles to be launched from small launchers on the ground. And they use EO/IR sensors to locate the targets. So the system is pretty compact and movable. You just need to turn the missile launcher towards the direction the target is, and launch it. And the missiles either use IR sensors or their onboard radars for finding the exact location of the target. The R 73 and R 27 are used for shorter ranges as they use IR sensors, but the R 77 can be used for medium ranges as it's an ARH missile and has an onboard radar that can be used.

Basically a system like this:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...h-r-27-air-to-air-missile-modified-into-a-sam

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1280140454776967169

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dariush the Great

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1280140454776967169


what kind of system is this ?


----------



## Shams313

Dariush the Great said:


> what kind of system is this ?


s200 stuffs. most probably.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

thaose are S200 missiles , but what for , the system is old and can't be used against small drone and cruise missile . also s200 tends to be not such portable system , if they move s-200 missile there it meas they had a s-200 battallion there already

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

There one of known position S-200 deployed near Isfahan, approx. in 80 km from Natanz. Probably these missiles were transported for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussainb72

Finally this is happening. This render the Israeli airforce useless if the air defence systems are deployed properly to cover the entire areas around Israel.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1280809305776762883

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Sina-1

hussainb72 said:


> Finally this is happening. This render the Israeli airforce useless if the air defence systems are deployed properly to cover the entire areas around Israel.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1280809305776762883


10 years ago it seemed Syria had much better AD than Iran because we only saw the tip of the iceberg regarding Iranian capabilities. Guess what. We still only see the tip of the iceberg!

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## IAm

hussainb72 said:


> Finally this is happening. This render the Israeli airforce useless if the air defence systems are deployed properly to cover the entire areas around Israel.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1280809305776762883


 Great to hear. Long overdue.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Does anyone know if this is true?

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1094163/کدام-سامانه-پدافند-هوایی-ایران-در-سوریه-مستقر-می-شود

Has Iran really accepted to send Bavar 373 systems to Syria? I thought at most they will send 3rd Khordad Systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> Does anyone know if this is true?
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1094163/کدام-سامانه-پدافند-هوایی-ایران-در-سوریه-مستقر-می-شود
> 
> Has Iran really accepted to send Bavar 373 systems to Syria? I thought at most they will send 3rd Khordad Systems.



Last I checked it was some Arab online newspaper quoting “anon” sources in Iran and Syria.

So no, not true till an Iranian official goes ON RECORD saying it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## M.s

Arminkh said:


> Does anyone know if this is true?
> 
> https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1094163/کدام-سامانه-پدافند-هوایی-ایران-در-سوریه-مستقر-می-شود
> 
> Has Iran really accepted to send Bavar 373 systems to Syria? I thought at most they will send 3rd Khordad Systems.


I don't think so. at least not in short term. Bavar is undergoing several changes in battle management systems and also some changes in radars and other sub systems. Several boards and interfaces and whole software must be redesigned completely and In the best case scenario it's not going to be ready till end of the year. After that mass production is another story.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

M.s said:


> Bavar is undergoing several changes in battle management systems and also some changes in radars and other sub systems. Several boards and interfaces and whole software must be redesigned completely.



Do you have a source for this?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M.s

Philosopher said:


> Do you have a source for this?


Sorry it's not exactly public knowledge I can't say my source but I think news will eventually come out.
Let's just say bavar is going to evolve to meet new requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

M.s said:


> Sorry it's not exactly public knowledge I can't say my source but I think news will eventually come out.
> Let's just say bavar is going to evolve to meet new requirements.



Tell us more interesting things about upcoming and active defence projects.

Lol if you're an insider that's the freshest thing on this forum since I arrived.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Does Iran have anything that can reliably take out Turkish drones? That seems important for Syrian air defenses as Turkey is a threat to Syria as well.


----------



## Philosopher

M.s said:


> Sorry it's not exactly public knowledge I can't say my source but I think news will eventually come out.
> Let's just say bavar is going to evolve to meet new requirements.



Okay I understand, just be careful not to divulge information or even the existence of it that is not available via OSINT.

Regarding your claim, I am not surprised given ex air defence commander already said Bavar-373 would evolve to be even more advanced than S-400 in 2 years.



Philip the Arab said:


> Does Iran have anything that can reliably take out Turkish drones? That seems important for Syrian air defenses as Turkey is a threat to Syria as well.



Iran destroyed American drones that are decades more advanced than anything Turkey has, thus destroying their drones is easy work for Iran. Furthermore remember Iran has been in the UAV business long before the Turks so its understands the threats posed by them. The issue regarding UAVs is destroying them en mass in an economical manner. For this, the upcoming Iranian SHORAD called "Oghab" will do the job. That system will be the Iranian counterpart to the Tor series.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Philip the Arab

Philosopher said:


> Iran destroyed American drones that are decades more advanced than anything Turkey has, thus destroying their drones is easy work for Iran. Furthermore remember Iran has been in the UAV business long before the Turks so its understands the threats posed by them. The issue regarding UAVs is destroying them en mass in an economical manner. For this, the upcoming Iranian SHORAD called "Oghab" will do the job. That system will be the Iranian counterpart to the Tor series.


Is Herz-9 capable of shooting down drones?


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> Is Herz-9 capable of shooting down drones?



Yes, Herz-9 is one of the best suited systems for such a role given it functions in a entirely passive mode.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Arminkh

M.s said:


> Sorry it's not exactly public knowledge I can't say my source but I think news will eventually come out.
> Let's just say bavar is going to evolve to meet new requirements.


Thanks but then please don't talk about anything that is not public here.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

M.s said:


> I don't think so. at least not in short term. Bavar is undergoing several changes in battle management systems and also some changes in radars and other sub systems. Several boards and interfaces and whole software must be redesigned completely and In the best case scenario it's not going to be ready till end of the year. After that mass production is another story.


If you are telling the truth then what you and your “source” is doing now is called treason. I would be very careful if I was in your shoes since every country on this planet takes leaking of sensitive military information very seriously.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sina-1 said:


> If you are telling the truth then what you and your “source” is doing now is called treason. I would be very careful if I was in your shoes since every country on this planet takes leaking of sensitive military information very seriously.



Its already been disclosed that Bavar 373 is undergoing improvements for next gen when it was first completely revealed.

Also take all these “I have inside info” with a bucket of salt.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M.s

Sina-1 said:


> If you are telling the truth then what you and your “source” is doing now is called treason. I would be very careful if I was in your shoes since every country on this planet takes leaking of sensitive military information very seriously.


Don't worry. there's no sensitive or classified information in my post. Just not announced yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

M.s said:


> Sorry it's not exactly public knowledge I can't say my source but I think news will eventually come out.
> Let's just say bavar is going to evolve to meet new requirements.


Thank you, and this makes sense. Lets be honest, the moment Bavar rolled out, half of people on this thread wanted it deployed across the whole middle east...but thats not how reality works. lol



TheImmortal said:


> Also take all these “I have inside info” with a bucket of salt.


this is the hating they were talking about that you sometimes do. Why you mad bra? just cuz they know something you dont? chill bro...enjoy the information..if its false it wont line up logically in the future..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NaCon

Sina-1 said:


> If you are telling the truth then what you and your “source” is doing now is called treason. I would be very careful if I was in your shoes since every country on this planet takes leaking of sensitive military information very seriously.


Firstly he didn’t leak anything secondly he hasn’t stated anything new. Everybody knows that they are working on improving their systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander

*Israel Will Never Let Iran Improve Syria’s Decrepit Air Defenses*
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulid...de-syrias-decrepit-air-defenses/#5af32f36357d

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Iskander said:


> *Israel Will Never Let Iran Improve Syria’s Decrepit Air Defenses*
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulid...de-syrias-decrepit-air-defenses/#5af32f36357d



“The Syrian S-300s, by far the most advanced missiles in Syria’s air defense arsenal, haven’t been fired at Israeli warplanes to date. This is likely because Russian military operators are reportedly still in charge of how those systems are used and don’t want to violate Russia’s deconfliction arrangement with Israel.”


This is why Russia has no allies will one day be picked off by the West. It screws over everyone until there is no one left to screw over.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zectech

Iskander said:


> Israel Will Never Let Iran Improve Syria’s Decrepit Air Defenses
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulid...de-syrias-decrepit-air-defenses/#5af32f36357d



lol.

I knew this years ago. Any common sense would tell you this. When you know the technology the US and Isreal have are much greater than export F-35s, I knew Isreali F-35s are much different than Italian F-35s.

The Israeli Air Force has also modified its U.S.-built fifth-generation stealthy F-35 Lightning II jets with domestically-built systems that are purportedly better than those in other F-35s. These hi-tech jets are likely capable of swiftly destroying any air defense missiles Iran manages to deploy in Syria or supply to Damascus.

I am sure much of it is EW and ECM. Which is more important than stealth. Remember Khordad 15s can destroy stealth targets. I am not certain they are capable of destroying a target when under heavy EW. That is something I want to see.

The downing of a spydrone by Iran could have been planned by the US to test Iranian air defenses. The fact that the 3rd Khordad destroyed the intended target shocked everybody, except the Iranians.

What I don't get is why not set up ADS in Syria up on the road to Baghdad, out of range, train the Syrians in Iran, have mobile systems active when deployed while you set up the main systems. Then set up a new ADS 50km away toward Damascus. Then another. Slowly moving toward the south. Then move the furthest one north to the south and reposition the ADS, slowly and steadily.

Whatever they are doing currently is a failed strategy.

And don't let a destroyed ADS go to waste, have it transmit what type of electronic warfare is being used back to Iran through sat communication before the ADS is destroyed.

If Iran can develop an ADS that beats the EW of the West, then Washington is gonna arrive in Tehran, crying and screaming they always wanted peace with Iran, and don't share such technology with China. That Washington does not want war with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

zectech said:


> lol.
> 
> I knew this years ago. Any common sense would tell you this. When you know the technology the US and Isreal have are much greater than export F-35s, I knew Isreali F-35s are much different than Italian F-35s.
> 
> The Israeli Air Force has also modified its U.S.-built fifth-generation stealthy F-35 Lightning II jets with domestically-built systems that are purportedly better than those in other F-35s. These hi-tech jets are likely capable of swiftly destroying any air defense missiles Iran manages to deploy in Syria or supply to Damascus.
> 
> I am sure much of it is EW and ECM. Which is more important than stealth. Remember Khordad 15s can destroy stealth targets. I am not certain they are capable of destroying a target when under heavy EW. That is something I want to see.
> 
> The downing of a spydrone by Iran could have been planned by the US to test Iranian air defenses. The fact that the 3rd Khordad destroyed the intended target shocked everybody, except the Iranians.
> 
> What I don't get is why not set up ADS in Syria up on the road to Baghdad, out of range, train the Syrians in Iran, have mobile systems active when deployed while you set up the main systems. Then set up a new ADS 50km away toward Damascus. Then another. Slowly moving toward the south. Then move the furthest one north to the south and reposition the ADS, slowly and steadily.
> 
> Whatever they are doing currently is a failed strategy.
> 
> And don't let a destroyed ADS go to waste, have it transmit what type of electronic warfare is being used back to Iran through sat communication before the ADS is destroyed.
> 
> If Iran can develop an ADS that beats the EW of the West, then Washington is gonna arrive in Tehran, crying and screaming they always wanted peace with Iran, and don't share such technology with China. That Washington does not want war with Iran.



If Israel will strike the border region then they will strike inside Iraq. They do not care about violating laws since the USA will cover for them.

Not sure how Iran plans to deliver these big systems to Syria then protect them.

Even civilians can see which flights enter Syria from where. So almost every flight into Syria by Iran is likely tracked by Mossad and Spy satellite.

Will be interesting to see how Iran goes about this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## QWECXZ

TheImmortal said:


> If Israel will strike the border region then they will strike inside Iraq. They do not care about violating laws since the USA will cover for them.
> 
> Not sure how Iran plans to deliver these big systems to Syria then protect them.
> 
> Even civilians can see which flights enter Syria from where. So almost every flight into Syria by Iran is likely tracked by Mossad and Spy satellite.
> 
> Will be interesting to see how Iran goes about this.



They can transfer the important parts and then assemble them in Syria as one potential solution.

If Iran does send Bavar-373 to Syria, it means two things: 1- It is confident that Bavar-373 is a capable system that can improve Syria's air defense and 2- It has already developed a better system that will be unveiled in near future.

However, I doubt that Iran would send Bavar-373 to Syria anytime soon. But I can be wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## flameboard

M.s said:


> Don't worry. there's no sensitive or classified information in my post. Just not announced yet.


Just not announced sounds like a grey area LOL


----------



## Iskander

TheImmortal said:


> “The Syrian S-300s, by far the most advanced missiles in Syria’s air defense arsenal, haven’t been fired at Israeli warplanes to date. This is likely because Russian military operators are reportedly still in charge of how those systems are used and don’t want to violate Russia’s deconfliction arrangement with Israel.”
> 
> 
> This is why Russia has no allies will one day be picked off by the West. It screws over everyone until there is no one left to screw over.


Yes, Russians are unreliable

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

925boy said:


> this is the hating they were talking about that you sometimes do. Why you mad bra? just cuz they know something you dont? chill bro...enjoy the information..if its false it wont line up logically in the future..



While probably positing to be the exception to the rule, i. e. take all these "I have inside info" with a bucket of salt, except...


----------



## Messerschmitt

*If* Iran actually plans to provide the Syrians with air-defense systems, then, in my opinion, a system like the IRGC's Raad-2 or the IRIADF's Mersad(-16) would be a more probable choice than the Bavar-373, which is not even deployed in sufficient numbers in Iran yet due to its low production rate.

Another option would be an upgrade program to Syrian S-200 sites similar to Iran's Talash project using modern radar systems and Sayyad-2 surface-to-air missiles to allow for mid range engagements. The Iranians could also improve Syrian 2K12 Kub systems and turn them into passive SAM systems like Iran's Raad or into something more capable and akin to a 3rd Khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

raad already dropped from production, the only one survived is Tabas and 3rd Khordad, yet tabas didn't being deployed many numbers bcz superiority of 3rd Khordad.
khordad 15, new mershad or erd khordad only option.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

https://southfront.org/iran-put-it-...r-series-of-mysterious-explosions-cnn-report/

*Iran Put It Air Defense Force On High Alert After Series Of Mysterious Explosions: CNN Report*

Iran had put portions of its air defense system on “high alert” in the last few days, the CNN reported on July 16, citing a U.S. official with knowledge on the matter.

According to the official, the U.S. believes that the Iranian alert is not part of a training exercise but rather a response to an unknown threat. The official declined to explain how the U.S. was able to obtain this information.

The Iranian step came after a series of mysterious explosions that rocked military and industrial facilities in different parts of the country.






The most critical incident took place in the Natanz nuclear facility on July 2. An advanced centrifuge assembly center was destroyed as a result of a fairly large explosion. Iranian authorities are currently investigating the incident.

Some recent reports suggested that Israel may be behind some of the recent explosions in Iran, especially Natanz explosion. Nevertheless, there is no evidence to support these accusations.

The possibility of foreign involvement in these incidents is taken seriously by Iran. Tehran is apparently taking defensive measures to address any possible threat, including aerial attacks.


----------



## QWECXZ

sha ah said:


> https://southfront.org/iran-put-it-...r-series-of-mysterious-explosions-cnn-report/
> 
> *Iran Put It Air Defense Force On High Alert After Series Of Mysterious Explosions: CNN Report*
> 
> Iran had put portions of its air defense system on “high alert” in the last few days, the CNN reported on July 16, citing a U.S. official with knowledge on the matter.
> 
> According to the official, the U.S. believes that the Iranian alert is not part of a training exercise but rather a response to an unknown threat. The official declined to explain how the U.S. was able to obtain this information.
> 
> The Iranian step came after a series of mysterious explosions that rocked military and industrial facilities in different parts of the country.
> 
> View attachment 651846
> 
> 
> The most critical incident took place in the Natanz nuclear facility on July 2. An advanced centrifuge assembly center was destroyed as a result of a fairly large explosion. Iranian authorities are currently investigating the incident.
> 
> Some recent reports suggested that Israel may be behind some of the recent explosions in Iran, especially Natanz explosion. Nevertheless, there is no evidence to support these accusations.
> 
> The possibility of foreign involvement in these incidents is taken seriously by Iran. Tehran is apparently taking defensive measures to address any possible threat, including aerial attacks.


Some of the incidents that have been mentioned in that photo never occurred (like Baghershahr incident) and the others are quite irrelevant. Only Natanz and Parchin incidents could be relevant.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*it seems Iranian air defense system was active tonight in Syria *

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Muhammed45

skyshadow said:


> *it seems Iranian air defense system was active tonight in Syria *


The image is from Iran not Syria, are you sure about it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

mohammad45 said:


> The image is from Iran not Syria, are you sure about it?


i know the video is from Syria not the pics well the only air defense system that hunt couple cruise missiles perfectly without sound of a missile that Syria has is saeer.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285291425802981377

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Ich

As you all know: I like Saeer. Saeer with for example KETF ammunition is great versus all subsonic CMs or sliding bombs - if it is integrated into a greater radar network.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## husseinibnali

skyshadow said:


> i know the video is from Syria not the pics well the only air defense system that hunt couple cruise missiles perfectly without sound of a missile that Syria has is saeer.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285291425802981377


It missed some missiles.

I thought Saer is dedicated to confront saturation attacks.

If faced by US military saturation attacks it will be less effective.

But I’m pretty sure that resistance forces learn new lessons in nearly every strike.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

husseinibnali said:


> It missed some missiles.
> 
> I thought Saer is dedicated to confront saturation attacks.
> 
> If faced by US military saturation attacks it will be less effective.
> 
> But I’m pretty sure that resistance forces learn new lessons in nearly every strike.



System is only as good as its radar network. If radar systems are jammed or facing heavy EW then the system is gonna suffer.

Not sure what radars Syria has active and still working at this point after all the air raids.

Id like to see more Skyguard and Automatic AA rings around key installations tied to powerful radars in Syria. I think it’s more feasible than bringing in expensive high end systems like 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad to defend areas against saturation attacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IAm

husseinibnali said:


> If faced by US military saturation attacks it will be less effective.


Yeah every air defense can be destroyed under saturation attacks but that doesn't mean it is not effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

husseinibnali said:


> It missed some missiles.
> 
> I thought Saer is dedicated to confront saturation attacks.
> 
> If faced by US military saturation attacks it will be less effective.
> 
> But I’m pretty sure that resistance forces learn new lessons in nearly every strike.


i saw couple of videos of saree and in all it hit its target perfectly it's small but effective short range system not designed to act alone against US or Israel of course.



TheImmortal said:


> System is only as good as its radar network. If radar systems are jammed or facing heavy EW then the system is gonna suffer.
> 
> Not sure what radars Syria has active and still working at this point after all the air raids.
> 
> Id like to see more Skyguard and Automatic AA rings around key installations tied to powerful radars in Syria. I think it’s more feasible than bringing in expensive high end systems like 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad to defend areas against saturation attacks.



it dose not have any radars it can have radar but these do not have one












https://www.dalfak.com/w/jmo85/توپ-100-میلیمتری-سعیر

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285638306013818881
با وجود سرعت بالا با تغییر برنامه پردازش تصویر در سعیر برای تطابق با سرعت بالای سه بعدی با چن تا سعیر میشه زدش
....​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

New documentary from IRGC:
*آپارات - مستند چشم شیطان*








mohsen said:


> New documentary from IRGC:
> *آپارات - مستند چشم شیطان*


Two systems have received the lock order on MQ-4, khordad-3rd stationed near Sirik was about 90km away, and S-300 stationed in Larak (or Qeshm island) was about 150km away.

https://www.mapdevelopers.com/dista...3978786088084,57.33196345848576]],"#000000"]]

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

Shawnee said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285638306013818881
> با وجود سرعت بالا با تغییر برنامه پردازش تصویر در سعیر برای تطابق با سرعت بالای سه بعدی با چن تا سعیر میشه زدش
> ....​


 
And that's why offense is the best defense!


----------



## Myself

mohsen said:


> Two systems have received the lock order on MQ-4, khordad-3rd stationed near Sirik was about 90km away, and S-300 stationed in Larak (or Qeshm island) was about 150km away.


Dr. Sourena Sattari clearly mentioned S-300 could not lock on it. I know the guy very well, and I do believe he doesn’t lie.


----------



## mohsen

Myself said:


> Dr. Sourena Sattari clearly mentioned S-300 could not lock on it. I know the guy very well, and I do believe he doesn’t lie.


Well, our military said both systems had locked on the drone, and so far S-300 is the only other system which they mentioned in this incident.


----------



## Muhammed45

@Ultima Thule my friend, you can Ask your questions from @VEVAK @Philosopher @AmirPatriot @PeeD and other experts in this section.

Good Luck, my advice, try to ask @PeeD

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

mohammad45 said:


> @Ultima Thule my friend, you can Ask your questions from @VEVAK @Philosopher @AmirPatriot @PeeD and other experts in this section.
> 
> Good Luck, my advice, try to ask @PeeD


Ok thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Edit:
Its from the exercise. Also you can clearly see that once again Iranian bm have very poor accuracy.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Muhammed45

Sina-1 said:


> View attachment 656641
> 
> 
> View attachment 656642
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> Its from the exercise. Also you can clearly see that once again Iranian bm have very poor accuracy.


Fired from New launcher.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mithridates

Sina-1 said:


>



so we destroyed an AN/TPY-2 radar mock up??

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mithridates

mohammad45 said:


> Fired from New launcher.


any information on the missile type?? is it from fateh-110 family or a new one??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sobhan

mohammad45 said:


> Fired from New launcher.


Can they use these tubes to launch balistic missiles from the navy ships?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

Mithridates said:


> so we destroyed an AN/TPY-2 radar mock up??


Yes!


sobhan said:


> Can they use these tubes to launch balistic missiles from the navy ships?


Yes! It autocorrects it’s trajectory upon launch. In theory you should be able launch it vertically as well.
This one is the most interesting imo.




Finless and launched underground. Meaning TVC, trajectory correction, thus should be canister enabled and space efficient for ships! Impressive to say the least!

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Myself

mohsen said:


> Well, our military said both systems had locked on the drone, and so far S-300 is the only other system which they mentioned in this incident.


http://www.ensafnews.com/183423/سقوط-پهپاد-آمریکا-با-سامانه-اس-۳۰۰-اجر/

As I said, he is not a phony guy like most of the military folks you refer to. I know him very well and I worked with him in the past. He doesn’t lie (he does not need to).


----------



## mohsen

Myself said:


> http://www.ensafnews.com/183423/سقوط-پهپاد-آمریکا-با-سامانه-اس-۳۰۰-اجر/
> 
> As I said, he is not a phony guy like most of the military folks you refer to. I know him very well and I worked with him in the past. He doesn’t lie (he does not need to).


He is Rouhani's guy, so I doubt in every word which comes out of his mouth.

His words are also ambiguous (maybe he meant they would jam the missile), anyway I prefer to believe someone in this field who has done the job, rather than a random guy in government.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> He is Rouhani's guy, so I doubt in every word which comes out of his mouth.
> 
> His words are also ambiguous (maybe he meant they would jam the missile), anyway I prefer to believe someone in this field who has done the job, rather than a random guy in government.



Are you actually calling Shahid Sattari's son some random guy in the Government? This a guy that had security clearance before he even hit puberty... So he is most definitely not some random guy!

Till today most of our Air Forces most notable achievements are projects that started by his father.... Owj, Kowsar, Qassed, OWJ engine, Arming F-14's with HAWK missiles that lead to the Fakor.... He was basically the Tehrani Moghadam of Iran's Airforce and if hadn't been martyred in the mid 90's a lot of these projects would have gone into mass production over a decade ago!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

VEVAK said:


> Are you actually calling Shahid Sattari's son some random guy in the Government? This a guy that had security clearance before he even hit puberty... So he is most definitely not some random guy!
> 
> Till today most of our Air Forces most notable achievements are projects that started by his father.... Owj, Kowsar, Qassed, OWJ engine, Arming F-14's with HAWK missiles that lead to the Fakor.... He was basically the Tehrani Moghadam of Iran's Airforce and if hadn't been martyred in the mid 90's a lot of these projects would have gone into mass production over a decade ago!


*گیرم که پدر تو بود فاضل/از فضل پدر تو را چه حاصل؟*

Shahid Sattari was a great personality. You are right, we miss someone in that calibre. But we still miss someone like him

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

mohammad45 said:


> *گیرم که پدر تو بود فاضل/از فضل پدر تو را چه حاصل؟*
> 
> Shahid Sattari was a great personality. You are right, we miss someone in that calibre. But we still miss someone like him



Hadeh aghalesh ean e keh az pedaresh dastressi be ettelaat keh haselesh shood! 

And we are not talking about his capabilities simply access to intel!


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> Are you actually calling Shahid Sattari's son some random guy in the Government? This a guy that had security clearance before he even hit puberty... So he is most definitely not some random guy!
> 
> Till today most of our Air Forces most notable achievements are projects that started by his father.... Owj, Kowsar, Qassed, OWJ engine, Arming F-14's with HAWK missiles that lead to the Fakor.... He was basically the Tehrani Moghadam of Iran's Airforce and if hadn't been martyred in the mid 90's a lot of these projects would have gone into mass production over a decade ago!


"dear Surena, you are the son of gen Sattari, and a good supporter of Rouhani, so let us share confidential air defense information with you!"
Is that what you think of our military?!

What you said about Surena is an exact meaning of the word "آقازاده". Rouhani needed the name of Sattari, that's why he chose Surena, nothing more.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## M.s

mohsen said:


> "dear Surena, you are the son of gen Sattari, and a good supporter of Rouhani, so let us share confidential air defense information with you!"
> Is that what you think of our military?!
> 
> What you said about Surena is an exact meaning of the word "آقازاده". Rouhani needed the name of Sattari, that's why he chose Surena, nothing more.


He is a good man a true scientist really a hardworking character. He was and still is one of the key members of many Iranian defense and industrial projects. Please don't just judge people like that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> "dear Surena, you are the son of gen Sattari, and a good supporter of Rouhani, so let us share confidential air defense information with you!"
> Is that what you think of our military?!
> 
> What you said about Surena is an exact meaning of the word "آقازاده". Rouhani needed the name of Sattari, that's why he chose Surena, nothing more.



There are two types of people that are bad for the Republic.

People like Rouhani who are naive and wish Iran to be aligned with the West at all costs. They cannot see the strategic consequences of making rushed decisions (see example of Ghaddafi).

other is people like you who are so blinded by the conservative vs reformist divide that they are blinded from making accurate decisions in the best interest of the nation. (See current republican vs democrat political deadlock in US legislative branch).

Both types of people lead to ineffective governance.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> "dear Surena, you are the son of gen Sattari, and a good supporter of Rouhani, so let us share confidential air defense information with you!"
> Is that what you think of our military?!
> 
> What you said about Surena is an exact meaning of the word "آقازاده". Rouhani needed the name of Sattari, that's why he chose Surena, nothing more.



1st off as Khanevadeh shahideh na MASOUL! Have some respect! And he is most definitely not a Agha Zadeh! 
His father died in 1995! So the idea that he got to where he is due to under the table dealings of his father is beyond absurd! 
2ndly He is from a family of patriots and was brought up in a family of Patriot and because his dad was an officer in the Air Force he has been vetted by Iran's intel agencies since before he hit puberty 

Finally He is well educated and worked hard to get to where he is and if he got some help along the way that's the least the government can do for what they sacrificed for our country! 

And those are the facts and any government that doesn't take care of the family of the patriots who gave every inch of their life protecting our country isn't a government worth protecting! So utilizing such families is the least our government can do for what they gave up and contributed to our country! 

And if you think among Iran's Military simply being the Son of a Martyr doesn't hold weight then your delusional and again among Iran's Air Force his father is like the Tehrani Moghadam of Iran's Air Force Program! 

And the fact that the U.S. has access to S300 codes is nothing new and has been mention repeatedly even in Iran's own media and *your not in a position to say whether the info being put out by Iran's gov is miss information or not
but your insult of the son of Iran's most notable martyred Air Force commander simply because his political beliefs don't conform with yours speaks volumes on your character! *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

VEVAK said:


> 1st off as Khanevadeh shahideh na MASOUL! Have some respect! And he is most definitely not a Agha Zadeh!
> His father died in 1995! So the idea that he got to where he is due to under the table dealings of his father is beyond absurd!
> 2ndly He is from a family of patriots and was brought up in a family of Patriot and because his dad was an officer in the Air Force he has been vetted by Iran's intel agencies since before he hit puberty
> 
> Finally He is well educated and worked hard to get to where he is and if he got some help along the way that's the least the government can do for what they sacrificed for our country!
> 
> And those are the facts and any government that doesn't take care of the family of the patriots who gave every inch of their life protecting our country isn't a government worth protecting! So utilizing such families is the least our government can do for what they gave up and contributed to our country!
> 
> And if you think among Iran's Military simply being the Son of a Martyr doesn't hold weight then your delusional and again among Iran's Air Force his father is like the Tehrani Moghadam of Iran's Air Force Program!
> 
> And the fact that the U.S. has access to S300 codes is nothing new and has been mention repeatedly even in Iran's own media and *your not in a position to say whether the info being put out by Iran's gov is miss information or not
> but your insult of the son of Iran's most notable martyred Air Force commander simply because his political beliefs don't conform with yours speaks volumes on your character! *


No background deal is needed, everything is one the scene, getting any privilege because of your family is the meaning of Aghazadeh.

Just like you who thinks X and Y deserve to be promoted because of good/great/whatever work of their family, others think the same way, and the result is a system full of family relationships, full of corruption. Yet, it's always despicable, there is no exception, that's why even Imam Khomeini prohibited his entire family of getting any position in the government; that's why Khamanei has warned his sons they have to change their family name first before even getting into economic activities.

Our Politics is our religion, our religion is our politics, remember this?!
So yes, I spare no one when it's due, for example, the children of Great martyr Hemmat are now nothing less than Zionists! the son of Ayatollah Ban-Sadr sold his country during war, etc.

But regardless of the religion, martyrdom and similar concepts, my problem with arse-holes like Surena Sattari is that they sold the future of this country (that much that they could), slowed our scientific advancement (as much as they could), I don't blame a Laboo-Foroosh who voted to a traitor who promised a good life by slowing our scientific advancement, but certainly I wont forget traitors like Surena who encouraged that Laboo-foroosh with this lie, a so called science deputy of president who proudly inaugurates the assembly line of Pegeot301, jut to be shut down few months later when his masters didn't provide the parts.

*He should sell the Laboo beside the streets, that much he deserves.*


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> No background deal is needed, everything is one the scene, getting any privilege because of your family is the meaning of Aghazadeh.
> 
> Just like you who thinks X and Y deserve to be promoted because of good/great/whatever work of their family, others think the same way, and the result is a system full of family relationships, full of corruption. Yet, it's always despicable, there is no exception, that's why even Imam Khomeini prohibited his entire family of getting any position in the government; that's why Khamanei has warned his sons they have to change their family name first before even getting into economic activities.
> 
> Our Politics is our religion, our religion is our politics, remember this?!
> So yes, I spare no one when it's due, for example, the children of Great martyr Hemmat are now nothing less than Zionists! the son of Ayatollah Ban-Sadr sold his country during war, etc.
> 
> But regardless of the religion, martyrdom and similar concepts, my problem with arse-holes like Surena Sattari is that they sold the future of this country (that much that they could), slowed our scientific advancement (as much as they could), I don't blame a Laboo-Foroosh who voted to a traitor who promised a good life by slowing our scientific advancement, but certainly I wont forget traitors like Surena who encouraged that Laboo-foroosh with this lie, a so called science deputy of president who proudly inaugurates the assembly line of Pegeot301, jut to be shut down few months later when his masters didn't provide the parts.
> 
> *He should sell the Laboo beside the streets, that much he deserves.*



If I recall correctly, wasn’t your idol Ahmadinejad? The man whose period of reign is synonymous with the greatest Corruption period in the history of the Republic? The man who is right now writing love letters to MBS?

Very ironic who you like and dislike.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myself

mohsen said:


> No background deal is needed, everything is one the scene, getting any privilege because of your family is the meaning of Aghazadeh.
> 
> Just like you who thinks X and Y deserve to be promoted because of good/great/whatever work of their family, others think the same way, and the result is a system full of family relationships, full of corruption. Yet, it's always despicable, there is no exception, that's why even Imam Khomeini prohibited his entire family of getting any position in the government; that's why Khamanei has warned his sons they have to change their family name first before even getting into economic activities.
> 
> Our Politics is our religion, our religion is our politics, remember this?!
> So yes, I spare no one when it's due, for example, the children of Great martyr Hemmat are now nothing less than Zionists! the son of Ayatollah Ban-Sadr sold his country during war, etc.
> 
> But regardless of the religion, martyrdom and similar concepts, my problem with arse-holes like Surena Sattari is that they sold the future of this country (that much that they could), slowed our scientific advancement (as much as they could), I don't blame a Laboo-Foroosh who voted to a traitor who promised a good life by slowing our scientific advancement, but certainly I wont forget traitors like Surena who encouraged that Laboo-foroosh with this lie, a so called science deputy of president who proudly inaugurates the assembly line of Pegeot301, jut to be shut down few months later when his masters didn't provide the parts.
> 
> *He should sell the Laboo beside the streets, that much he deserves.*


Apparently changing your mind is a mission-impossible for you. I don’t know how to explain to you! I know the guy very well. More than you can imagine. He doesn’t believe in most of the things you think he does, because he knows how his father lost his life. He is a real patriot like his father.


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> If I recall correctly, wasn’t your idol Ahmadinejad? The man whose period of reign is synonymous with the greatest Corruption period in the history of the Republic? The man who is right now writing love letters to MBS?
> 
> Very ironic who you like and dislike.


Greatest corruption period?!
Based on which criteria? Among of Reports in Anti-Iran reports? Good to know

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Myself said:


> Apparently changing your mind is a mission-impossible for you. I don’t know how to explain to you! I know the guy very well. More than you can imagine. He doesn’t believe in most of the things you think he does, because he knows how his father lost his life. He is a real patriot like his father.


I judge people based on what they have done, this personal knowing is like a poison in judging the government guys.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> No background deal is needed, everything is one the scene, getting any privilege because of your family is the meaning of Aghazadeh.
> 
> Just like you who thinks X and Y deserve to be promoted because of good/great/whatever work of their family, others think the same way, and the result is a system full of family relationships, full of corruption. Yet, it's always despicable, there is no exception, that's why even Imam Khomeini prohibited his entire family of getting any position in the government; that's why Khamanei has warned his sons they have to change their family name first before even getting into economic activities.
> 
> Our Politics is our religion, our religion is our politics, remember this?!
> So yes, I spare no one when it's due, for example, the children of Great martyr Hemmat are now nothing less than Zionists! the son of Ayatollah Ban-Sadr sold his country during war, etc.
> 
> But regardless of the religion, martyrdom and similar concepts, my problem with arse-holes like Surena Sattari is that they sold the future of this country (that much that they could), slowed our scientific advancement (as much as they could), I don't blame a Laboo-Foroosh who voted to a traitor who promised a good life by slowing our scientific advancement, but certainly I wont forget traitors like Surena who encouraged that Laboo-foroosh with this lie, a so called science deputy of president who proudly inaugurates the assembly line of Pegeot301, jut to be shut down few months later when his masters didn't provide the parts.
> 
> *He should sell the Laboo beside the streets, that much he deserves.*


فکر نمیکنی با این تعریف شما تمام خانواده شهدا میشن آقازاده


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> فکر نمیکنی با این تعریف شما تمام خانواده شهدا میشن آقازاده


Law is the difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Greatest corruption period?!
> Based on which criteria? Among of Reports in Anti-Iran reports? Good to know









Period of Ahmadinejad’s rule. Yet much of the revenue gone to corruption, Middle men, and theft. Simple google search that even someone like you should be able to pull off.

Now your idol is courting MBS as if his defiance of the SL was not enough during his time. The man wanted to be the Erdogan of Iran.

Even the establishment does not like him anymore and cut his wings shortly after he left office.

But I won’t waste my time arguing with a man who reveres a person who spoke in a prominent US University and embarrassed Iran as a nation by proclaiming “there are no gays in Iran”. Such an individual like yourself cannot see reason and live in a world tinted by the color you wish to see.

Enjoy that bubble Mohsen.


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> Period of Ahmadinejad’s rule. Yet much of the revenue gone to corruption, Middle men, and theft. Simple google search that even someone like you should be able to pull off.
> 
> Now your idol is courting MBS as if his defiance of the SL was not enough during his time. The man wanted to be the Erdogan of Iran.
> 
> Even the establishment does not like him anymore and cut his wings shortly after he left office.
> 
> But I won’t waste my time arguing with a man who reveres a person who spoke in a prominent US University and embarrassed Iran as a nation by proclaiming “there are no gays in Iran”. Such an individual like yourself cannot see reason and live in a world tinted by the color you wish to see.
> 
> Enjoy that bubble Mohsen.



What does this graph show? How many oil was sold?


----------



## Draco.IMF

*Topic of this thread is*

*"Iranian Air Defense Systems"*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Ich said:


> What does this graph show? How many oil was sold?



oil revenue in dollars adjusted for inflation/cost. So Iran sold more oil towards the end of shah when taking costs/inflation into account, but as you can see the Ahmadinejad years were some of the best in the history of the Republic due to high oil prices (at the time).


----------



## mohsen

Draco.IMF said:


> *Topic of this thread is*
> 
> *"Iranian Air Defense Systems"*


Well, since random civilians with a degree in mechanic and expertise of opening car assembly lines are more credible than our air defenses (specially those who have done their job very well), then maybe we should change the title to Random Reformist's claims!



TheImmortal said:


> Period of Ahmadinejad’s rule. Yet much of the revenue gone to corruption, Middle men, and theft. Simple google search that even someone like you should be able to pull off.
> 
> Now your idol is courting MBS as if his defiance of the SL was not enough during his time. The man wanted to be the Erdogan of Iran.
> 
> Even the establishment does not like him anymore and cut his wings shortly after he left office.
> 
> But I won’t waste my time arguing with a man who reveres a person who spoke in a prominent US University and embarrassed Iran as a nation by proclaiming “there are no gays in Iran”. Such an individual like yourself cannot see reason and live in a world tinted by the color you wish to see.
> 
> Enjoy that bubble Mohsen.


lol, Even yourself don't know what you have posted.
Rouhani and Ahmadinejad both had the same oil revenue, Ahmadinejad sold with higher price, Rouhani sold more barrel. yet Rouhani's Rial revenue (which is what our government pays for projects) is more than the sum of all previous governments.










I only care about what Ahmadinejad did for Iran, highest science growth rate, unprecedented advancement in major science sectors, paying attention to deserted cities and it's people, lots of infrastructure projects, etc.

But of course Zionists like you who can't argue on these issues likes to talk about their beloved gays. good for you, that's your level of argument. Ahmadinejad's speech in NY was a complete success, just watch the speech to see how many times people clap for him, lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Rouhani and Ahmadinejad both had the same oil revenue, Ahmadinejad sold with higher price, Rouhani sold more barrel.



What a load of propaganda. 

Iran was selling oil above $100 a barrel millions barrels per day under your idol with Rial at 1,200-2,000 to the dollar. Rouhani has been selling oil at sub below 1M (maybe even sub 500,000) barrels per day with rial at anywhere from 10,000 to 26,000 depending on what timeframe you are looking at! 

Even the government has admitted that the oil situation is worse than during the imposed war and yet you sit here positing propaganda claiming Ahmadinejad and Rouhani had same oil revenue. Absurd.

Ahmadinjad had no claim to the success he INHERITED from the hardworking Iranian institutions that had been set into motion years before he came into power. 

The man inherited a strong Iranian economy, strong currency, and high oil prices. What did he do with it all? Maybe paid you to shill for him who knows.


----------



## Sineva

mohsen said:


> maybe we should change the title to Random Reformist's claims!



Its probably better to start a brand new thread with that actual title rather than hijack and clutter up the existing air defences thread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> Law is the difference.


oh so law can say so , wonder how much the rest of Aghazadeh-ha used law to advance their agenda and how much they used means out of law.

you don't get it for a normal people when he see how much they differently treat him at work, University , ..... with one less qualified but have the support of that law this can be frusterating , how much resentment that can bring.


----------



## triangle

Sineva said:


> Its probably better to start a brand new thread with that actual title rather than hijack and clutter up the existing air defences thread



I have reported a whole bunch of offtopic posts but the mods still have not done anything to address it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mamajama

Does Iranian air defense have SHORAD missile like tor from the Russians?


----------



## TruthHurtz

Mamajama said:


> Does Iranian air defense have SHORAD missile like tor from the Russians?



In development, it will be designated Oghab. There will be two versions, one based on the Tor, which Iran has in its inventory and the other on Pantsir, which Iran has access to through Iraq and Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

TruthHurtz said:


> In development, it will be designated Oghab. There will be two versions, one based on the Tor, which Iran has in its inventory and the other on Pantsir, which Iran has access to through Iraq and Syria.


both of them will be based on Tor system , the pantsir part come from the fact that early version won't have cannon but later model come with a cannon so they compared it to pantsir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mamajama

Hack-Hook said:


> both of them will be based on Tor system , the pantsir part come from the fact that early version won't have cannon but later model come with a cannon so they compared it to pantsir.


What cannon? 35mm copy of GDF?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mamajama said:


> What cannon? 35mm copy of GDF?


my guess , its more like a pair of 3 barrelled Gatling gun but you can't be sure until it come out something based on Akhgar or Asefeh maybe till then ,they'll refine it a little more

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

TruthHurtz said:


> In development, it will be designated Oghab. There will be two versions, one based on the Tor, which Iran has in its inventory and the other on Pantsir, which Iran has access to through Iraq and Syria.


There was this 100mm cannon. I think it was called sair(سعیر or صعیر؟). does it count as shorad?


----------



## VEVAK

mohsen said:


> No background deal is needed, everything is one the scene, getting any privilege because of your family is the meaning of Aghazadeh.
> 
> Just like you who thinks X and Y deserve to be promoted because of good/great/whatever work of their family, others think the same way, and the result is a system full of family relationships, full of corruption. Yet, it's always despicable, there is no exception, that's why even Imam Khomeini prohibited his entire family of getting any position in the government; that's why Khamanei has warned his sons they have to change their family name first before even getting into economic activities.
> 
> Our Politics is our religion, our religion is our politics, remember this?!
> So yes, I spare no one when it's due, for example, the children of Great martyr Hemmat are now nothing less than Zionists! the son of Ayatollah Ban-Sadr sold his country during war, etc.
> 
> But regardless of the religion, martyrdom and similar concepts, my problem with arse-holes like Surena Sattari is that they sold the future of this country (that much that they could), slowed our scientific advancement (as much as they could), I don't blame a Laboo-Foroosh who voted to a traitor who promised a good life by slowing our scientific advancement, but certainly I wont forget traitors like Surena who encouraged that Laboo-foroosh with this lie, a so called science deputy of president who proudly inaugurates the assembly line of Pegeot301, jut to be shut down few months later when his masters didn't provide the parts.
> 
> *He should sell the Laboo beside the streets, that much he deserves.*



So according to your definition all the children of all the martyrs in Iran who have every received any kind of benefit are automatically aghazadeh! What a retarded way of looking at things!
Fact is if anyone in Iran deserves to get benefits, it should be the families of people who gave their lives for our country! 

People like you are a disease! I've seen people like you even throw Shahid Solaimani under the bus because he didn't fully conform to their deluded views on Hejab! 

Whether knowingly or unknowingly you are the "Matarsak" of the Zionists both in Iran and outside! And that's why the most craziest and most notable of you Hejab By Force supporters have always ended up being actual Israeli Spy's who before getting caught went around pressing coins & pens on the forehead of so called bad Hejab women! 

Fact is supporters of Hejab by force truly have no business commenting on any part of Iran's economy! You have destroyed entire industries in Iran and you wanna talk about a Peugeot factory! 

Get this through that little brain of yours unless we literally use Gold as currency in an interconnected and competing global economy you can not cut your self off from multi billion dollar industries especially one as vital as tourism and somehow magically expect your currency to be able to compete and not conform to the standard supply and demand laws. And going to a gold standard is far more restrictive than you may think.... 
And filling bus loads of people from Iraq and Afghanistan to take to Mashhad isn't going to fix that because it's not about the number of ppl that come but rather the cash and foreign currency they bring! 
So if anyone is to blame for Iran's economy it's people like YOU and your deluded views of both the world and Islam! And ppl like have no business commenting on any part of Iran's economy for you are the MAIN DISEASE afflicting it!

And where is your beloved Ahmadi today? Same Ahmadi that called Sardar Solaimani's of Iran baradaraon e gachagchee is now writing love letters to Al Saud! LOL! I've been telling you for years he was a Traitor! Look at him now! He's finally starting to show his true colors!


----------



## VEVAK

Hack-Hook said:


> فکر نمیکنی با این تعریف شما تمام خانواده شهدا میشن آقازاده



Exactly!


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> both of them will be based on Tor system , the pantsir part come from the fact that early version won't have cannon but later model come with a cannon so they compared it to pantsir.



I was under impression one is hot launched (traditional Iranian architecture) and other is cold launched (Russian architecture).


----------



## Messerschmitt

TheImmortal said:


> I was under impression one is hot launched (traditional Iranian architecture) and other is cold launched (Russian architecture).


Oghab will be based on the Tor-M1 while Separ will be based on the Pantsir-S1. The second iteration of the Oghab will also be equipped with two autocannon guns.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> Oghab will be based on the Tor-M1 while Separ will be based on the Pantsir-S1. The second iteration of the Oghab will also be equipped with two autocannon guns.


Isn't Sipar a future turkish airdefense system ?


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> Isn't Sipar a future turkish airdefense system ?


we had a separ missile project too if i'm not wrong.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mithridates said:


> we had a separ missile project too if i'm not wrong.


well I'm not aware of that


----------



## Mithridates

Hack-Hook said:


> well I'm not aware of that


i have a faint memory about it, if i'm not wrong people here were speculating that it's based on rapier AD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> Isn't Sipar a future turkish airdefense system ?




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229686401526116353

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

Taken from the official website of Iran's air defence forces, where the picture along with a few others serves as a banner:
http://padafand.aja.ir/

Interesting website by the way, specializing exclusively on AD-related news reports.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## makranman

SalarHaqq said:


> View attachment 659273


that picture...  wallpaper material.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229686401526116353


again they compared second generation of Oghab with Pantsir because its equipped with cannon.
in fact the missile part and radars are Oghab , but with an additional cannon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hack-Hook said:


> again they compared second generation of Oghab with Pantsir because its equipped with cannon.
> in fact the missile part and radars are Oghab , but with an additional cannon.


do you exactly belive that oghab is a copy of tor or pantsir.....as i heard some years ago sepah has copied tor missile and they named it as oghab


----------



## Ich

We will know soon. At the moment we only know

"Oghab is a short-range, mobile defensive system, capable of targeting different flying objects and cruise missiles, he added.

The top commander [Brigadier General Alireza Elhami] said the new system will confuse the enemies because it has been fully designed and developed by the Iranian experts and the enemies are not aware of what they will face."

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zartosht

Messerschmitt said:


>




at 16:50, anybody know his story? i dont recall any Iranian air defense personnel getting martyred recently

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

zartosht said:


> at 16:50, anybody know his story? i dont recall any Iranian air defense personnel getting martyred recently



Probably in Syria...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

zartosht said:


> at 16:50, anybody know his story? i dont recall any Iranian air defense personnel getting martyred recently


S-200, Syria,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Russel

If your Can shoot down a F-35!


----------



## Shawnee

Russel said:


> If your Can shoot down a F-35!



The article says Iran claimed the hunt was done using Buk. It was Iranian 3rd Kohrdad. It is also difficult to reach and track a HALE drone. That is how reliable it is.
Use better sources for reading.
...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

Russel said:


> If your Can shoot down a F-35!


when I saw it says, shoot down was in international waters, I thought i should stop reading further.

its says,
1: international water.
2: lacks a stealthy feature
3: easily detectable
4: buk m1 version

they wanted to say, that 200m drone was a backdated trash drone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> when I saw it says, shoot down was in international waters, I thought i should stop reading further.
> 
> its says,
> 1: international water.
> 2: lacks a stealthy feature
> 3: easily detectable
> 4: buk m1 version
> 
> they wanted to say, that 200m drone was a backdated trash drone.


After rq-170 they said it was outdated out the shelf drone. If you can hit global hawk. When we did that they said it's outdated and not stealthy . they just need something to say to fool average Joe .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

They even can't admit iran air defence systems are totally different beast from the foreign one that looks like them . I bet that BUK-m1 can't engage the drone from 30km away.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

funny part about the so called outdated drone (RQ-170) is that you can not find more that 2-3 images of it online from US sources. all the images are from Iranian part...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raghfarm007

LOL.... if it was outdated US technology, why did their president ask Iran to give it back?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> funny part about the so called outdated drone (RQ-170) is that you can not find more that 2-3 images of it online from US sources. all the images are from Iranian part...



I don’t recall anyone saying it was outdated. Instead the term they used was it was built with a loss contingency in mind. Meaning that because the drone operated in contested airspace highly classified state secrets were not in the drone in case it were to fall into enemy hands.

For example F-22 is considered state secret technology (an a tad bit outdated since the concept behind it was built in 90’s). F-35 is not hence why it’s available for export.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

Russel said:


> If your Can shoot down a F-35!



The Rq-4 may not officially be stealth but it is LOW RCS. It uses RAM that covers over all the vertical surfaces on the side of the fuselage, front of the engine is well hidden, It uses V shaped stabilizers... the Aircraft even uses composites that reduce heat signature and noise signature of the engine. Plus the Aircraft was in silent mode when fired upon. And at the end of the day it's a $200 Million USD UAV and it didn't just get that price tag out of nowhere! 

If anything what made it easer to shoot down compared to an F-35 is mainly the Aircrafts lack of maneuverability which allowed Iran to shoot it down with a single shot. 

Also the author of the Forbs article claims that Iran is claiming to have used a Bulk M1 to shoot down the RQ-4 which is absolutely nonsense. Basically trying to fit in his own narrative by claiming that it's actually Iran who is "claiming" it. Which is all the prof one would need to see that this is NOT a fact based article that was written by some impartial expert solely based on FACTS!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Mersad air defense system ( almost all of the Iranian systems now have at least 1 optical system on board for passive mode )*

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## mohsen

New AD system?


----------



## triangle

mohsen said:


> New AD system?


Where ever you got this pic from, please post more.

AD-73, could be an export version of an existing system.

Edit: nvm, I already found it

https://www.irna.ir/photo/83912310/بازدید-اعضای-کمیسیون-امنیت-ملی-و-سیاست-خارجی-مجلس-از-نمایشگاه

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Thats a Fakkur-90 AAM.

AD-73 is export grade Sayyad-2/Talash

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Thats a Fakkur-90 AAM.
> 
> AD-73 is export grade Sayyad-2/Talash


but if you look at the model you see 15th of Khordad radar so could it be 15th of Khordad?


----------



## Mithridates

skyshadow said:


> *guys is that new short range air defense system? it has radar on top of it and the hatch is open too*


looks like skyguard.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Mithridates said:


> looks like skyguard.


Yep,shes a skyguard alright.




Supposedly iran used these paired with the chinese crotale knock off,the HQ-7 sam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> but if you look at the model you see 15th of Khordad radar so could it be 15th of Khordad?



Yes it can be called 15th Khordad too and that's indeed a more accurate description.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*
new radar *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *new radar *


Khordad 15 radar...modified..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> Khordad 15 radar...modified..


maybe its a expert version

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

there was a scaled down version of najm radars intended for hawk/mersad air defense systems with 90 km range. it looks like that to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Mithridates said:


> there was a scaled down version of najm radars intended for hawk/mersad air defense systems with 90 km range. it looks like that to me.


well tomorrow there will unveil 3 new air defense systems

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## triangle

skyshadow said:


> well tomorrow there will unveil 3 new air defense systems



Do you have source?


----------



## skyshadow

triangle said:


> Do you have source?



*it has been said one of them is ABM ( anti ballistic missile ) system *

*In addition to the new military systems that were unveiled today, the Ministry of Defense has specifically built three other defense systems called "Dezful", "Nawab" and "Shahid Majid", which have not been unveiled yet.*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296435877351247872

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## triangle

skyshadow said:


> *it has been said one of them is ABM ( anti ballistic missile ) system *
> 
> *In addition to the new military systems that were unveiled today, the Ministry of Defense has specifically built three other defense systems called "Dezful", "Nawab" and "Shahid Majid", which have not been unveiled yet.*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1296435877351247872



But where is the word 'tomorrow'?


----------



## skyshadow

triangle said:


> But where is the word 'tomorrow'?



yes actually he did not say tomorrow i said that because Iran national defense day is tomorrow not today

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hashirama

When will we see Bavar 373 in action at last?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Hashirama said:


> When will we see Bavar 373 in action at last?


nobody knows

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 663364
> 
> 
> View attachment 663365
> 
> 
> View attachment 663366



Iran should buy S-500. Anything else is a wasteThe amount of S-300 was too low for a country size of Iran.

S-500 with Bavar-373 and Bavar-2 and Bavar ABM version (S-300V) will be a formidable LR shield.

Iran should skip S-400 as the S-300 it bought is roughly on the same level as the S-400. But S-500 would give Iran access to latest in Russian air defense technology which Iran can incorporate into future Bavar generations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

well agreed but S-500 is mostly ABM two different class of AD


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> well agreed but S-500 is mostly ABM two different class of AD



The range of s-400 40N6 missile is 250 miles. The S-500 has been able to hit target at 300 miles. On top of being able to intercept fast moving aircraft, HGV, and BMs.

It has a lot of technology that Iran can learn from for its own systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran confirms purchase of Russian S-400 and Pantsir-S air defense missile systems*












*Подробнее на: https://avia-pro.net/news/iran-podtverdil-pokupku-rossiyskih-s-400-i-zrpk-pancir-s



 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297665518225297408*


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *Iran confirms purchase of Russian S-400 and Pantsir-S air defense missile system*



Is there any independent confirmation by any iranian sources,or better yet the iranian government,as to the validity of these claims?
Frankly I`m extremely dubious about these claims for rather obvious reasons.


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Iran confirms purchase of Russian S-400 and Pantsir-S air defense missile systems*
> 
> View attachment 663421
> 
> 
> View attachment 663422
> 
> 
> 
> *Подробнее на: https://avia-pro.net/news/iran-podtverdil-pokupku-rossiyskih-s-400-i-zrpk-pancir-s
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297665518225297408*



I do not see a single source (credible Russian or western or Iranian)!confirming that Iran has said it is purchasing the missile systems in question.

I will wait for Iran side to confirm it via media channels.

It seems from video Iran was more interested in the helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

TheImmortal said:


> I do not see a single source (credible Russian or western or Iranian)!confirming that Iran has said it is purchasing the missile systems in question.
> 
> I will wait for Iran side to confirm it via media channels.
> 
> It seems from video Iran was more interested in the helicopters.


Most likely fake news ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> *Iran confirms purchase of Russian S-400 and Pantsir-S air defense missile systems*
> 
> View attachment 663421
> 
> 
> View attachment 663422
> 
> 
> 
> *Подробнее на: https://avia-pro.net/news/iran-podtverdil-pokupku-rossiyskih-s-400-i-zrpk-pancir-s
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297665518225297408*


Fake news

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Is there any independent confirmation by any iranian sources,or better yet the iranian government,as to the validity of these claims?
> Frankly I`m extremely dubious about these claims for rather obvious reasons.





TheImmortal said:


> I do not see a single source (credible Russian or western or Iranian)!confirming that Iran has said it is purchasing the missile systems in question.
> 
> I will wait for Iran side to confirm it via media channels.
> 
> It seems from video Iran was more interested in the helicopters.



i'm constantly looking but that site is a well respected Russian outlet with ties to government, that's why i posted it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Video of Iranian Defense Minister Amir Khatami inspecting the Pantsir-S1 air defense system and Ka-226T helicopter. The Iranian delegation was reportedly most interested in the Pantsir-S1 and S-400 air defense systems. 

Shoigu: At the forum's expositions, the Iranian delegation will be able to get acquainted with the latest examples of Russian weapons and military equipment. 


 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297694991855362048*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> *Iran confirms purchase of Russian S-400 and Pantsir-S air defense missile systems*
> 
> View attachment 663421
> 
> 
> View attachment 663422
> 
> 
> 
> *Подробнее на: https://avia-pro.net/news/iran-podtverdil-pokupku-rossiyskih-s-400-i-zrpk-pancir-s
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1297665518225297408*




ran Bavar_373 long range air defense system, Sayyad-6 Anti-Ballistic Missile System = S500

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

yavar said:


> ran Bavar_373 long range air defense system, Sayyad-6 Anti-Ballistic Missile System = S500


*excellent but where does it say Sayyad-6 missile ? i only heard a more powerful Bavar-373 which is more powerful then S-500 will be produce in 2 years*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

Iran Army Air defense Gen. Esmaeily: Sayyad-6 project in next two years = S400+S500, Bavar-373 system,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> ran Bavar_373 long range air defense system, Sayyad-6 Anti-Ballistic Missile System = S500



you said Iran lacks space observation, so currently Iran will not be able to make something similar to S-500
maybe an S-500 "light" version..without space observation features...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> *excellent but where does it say Sayyad-6 missile ? i only heard a more powerful Bavar-373 which is more powerful then S-500 will be produce in 2 years*



no, he talked about the S-400, Iran has something similar to the S-400 (not the downgraded export version, the more powerful version which is in use by russian forces)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

This documentary has been around for about a year and posted here already. There was no mention directly to a "Sayyad'-6" missile. What he said is (paraphrasing) " I am confident in the next 2 years, Bavar system will not be comparable to the current version and much more advanced, and not even comparable to the S-400 and even S-500".

He obviously has direct information to next projects and feels confident it will be very advanced.


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> no, he talked about the S-400, Iran has something similar to the S-400 (not the downgraded export version, the more powerful version which is in use by russian forces)


he said a version which is more powerful then *S-400 and S-500*


----------



## Ich

Maybe Sayyad-6 is anew missile for the Bavar system and able against ballistic missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

To be more powerful than S-500, Iran would need a missile that can intercept HGV targets not just SCUD and fixed trajectory BMs. Also a system that is extremely resilient to EW/ECW.

Somehow I doubt Iran will be able to overtake the leader in air defense technology (Russians) in a less than 2 decades (Bavar was started in circa 2009). Russians have been making air defense systems since before Iran was able to manufacture a gun on its own. So I take these claims of “better than S-500” with a grain of salt.

Nonetheless, Iran’s advancements in field of air defense in such a short time is nothing but remarkable in my opinion.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> To be more powerful than S-500, Iran would need a missile that can intercept HGV targets not just SCUD and fixed trajectory BMs. Also a system that is extremely resilient to EW/ECW.
> 
> Somehow I doubt Iran will be able to overtake the leader in air defense technology (Russians) in a less than 2 decades (Bavar was started in circa 2009). Russians have been making air defense systems since before Iran was able to manufacture a gun on its own. So I take these claims of “better than S-500” with a grain of salt.
> 
> Nonetheless, Iran’s advancements in field of air defense in such a short time is nothing but remarkable in my opinion.



*how dose Iran overcome EW/ECW ?* read the article below.









3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing


Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...




patarames.blogspot.com






*HGV targets:* well Iran already has Haj Qasem missile fastest tactical ballistic missile with HGV trajectory that can test its S-500 (Bavar-474) on it.


----------



## Philosopher

Bavar can surpass the capabilities of S-400 _relatively_ easily. The main area in which S-400 is currently superior to our Bavar is in the range of missile, this can be dealt with by Iran with no major problem. Also, do not forget our Bavar uses AESA radars whereas the S-400 uses non-AESA systems. Thus Bavar surpassing S-400 in next few years will not only not surprise me, but I am expecting it to happen.

Regarding the S-500, we (in the public) need to wait and see its specifications before we can comment on it. It would not be a shock to know the Iranian officials may have more information regarding its capabilities than us relying on OSINT data. From what I can see, the S-500 is more of a dedicated missile defence system. How capable it will be on paper against HGV remains to be seem. It is thus more difficult to do hypothetical comparison regarding future Bavar and S-500. However, there is no question that defence against hypersonic and space based systems will become a major threat in the future and Iran must prepare accordingly.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *how dose Iran overcome EW/ECW ?* read the article below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing
> 
> 
> Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patarames.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *HGV targets:* well Iran already has Haj Qasem missile fastest tactical ballistic missile with HGV trajectory that can test its S-500 (Bavar-474) on it.



You should probably read the article you referenced as even Iran admits the drone never turned on its jammer.

Also the ECW/EW I refer to is not just from aircraft, but cyber warfare and dedicated ECW/EW that the US has up its sleeves for wartime.

I refer to ECW/EW against the system and not just the missile.

Also Haj Qasem missile is a missile not an ABM. For Iran to intercept a Haj Qasem missile it needs to build an ABM that can move very fast and agile enough to counter the movement Qasem missile makes. It needs to have enough penalty energy to be able to make deviations without running out of energy. Also it needs to be able to intercept a quasi BM missile meaning within the atmosphere envelope instead of traditional BMs that seek to intercept outside that envelope or just don’t have penalty energy to account for the adjustments Qasem missile can make.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*it seems Iran will soon unveil a anti cruise missile system 


پیشرفتهای خوبی در سامانه های پدافندی ضد کروز و سامانه های چابک پدافند هوایی دست یافته ایم و محصولات جدیدی در زمینه پدافند هوایی شناورها معرفی خواهیم کرد. 




https://ir.sputniknews.com/opinion/202008246836595-%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A8%D9%87-%D8%A8%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%BE%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C%DA%A9-%D9%87%D9%85%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9%DB%8C-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%88-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%87-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA/


*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GWXP

skyshadow said:


> *it seems Iran will soon unveil a anti cruise missile system
> 
> 
> پیشرفتهای خوبی در سامانه های پدافندی ضد کروز و سامانه های چابک پدافند هوایی دست یافته ایم و محصولات جدیدی در زمینه پدافند هوایی شناورها معرفی خواهیم کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://ir.sputniknews.com/opinion/202008246836595-%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A8%D9%87-%D8%A8%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%BE%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C%DA%A9-%D9%87%D9%85%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9%DB%8C-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%88-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%87-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA/
> 
> 
> *


Probably on 22 September---40th anniversary of Iran-Iraq war---Sacred Defence Week

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mamajama

skyshadow said:


> *it seems Iran will soon unveil a anti cruise missile system
> 
> 
> پیشرفتهای خوبی در سامانه های پدافندی ضد کروز و سامانه های چابک پدافند هوایی دست یافته ایم و محصولات جدیدی در زمینه پدافند هوایی شناورها معرفی خواهیم کرد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://ir.sputniknews.com/opinion/202008246836595-%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A8%D9%87-%D8%A8%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%BE%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C%DA%A9-%D9%87%D9%85%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9%DB%8C-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%88-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%87-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%AA%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA/
> 
> 
> *


Very hard to counter cruise missile in the modern world, best bet are probably aerostat with radars or AWACS. Even than, targeting them is harder given Iran's mountainous terrain and NOE flight many cruise missiles fly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mamajama said:


> Very hard to counter cruise missile in the modern world, best bet are probably aerostat with radars or AWACS. Even than, targeting them is harder given Iran's mountainous terrain and NOE flight many cruise missiles fly.



It’s a short range system using dual IF/optical imaging alongside its own radar as well as data link to National Iranian air defense network. This is how it will locate the CM.

It’s goal is to protect its kill sphere. It’s goal isn’t to protect all of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mamajama

TheImmortal said:


> It’s a short range system using dual IF/optical imaging alongside its own radar as well as data link to National Iranian air defense network. This is how it will locate the CM.
> 
> It’s goal is to protect its kill sphere. It’s goal isn’t to protect all of Iran.


Of course it is a point defense system, but the problem i see with intercepting cruise missiles in general is they are usually launched in swarms depending on the importance of the target which makes interception of every single missile almost impossible. That is a major threat even big powers cannot combat.


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> It’s a short range system using dual IF/optical imaging alongside its own radar as well as data link to National Iranian air defense network. This is how it will locate the CM.
> 
> It’s goal is to protect its kill sphere. It’s goal isn’t to protect all of Iran.


They said they will unveil oghab(iranian tor) and separ(iranian pantsir). This one is different?


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> you said Iran lacks space observation, so currently Iran will not


After October I RGC will launch satellite into space it is so decided so in the next two years we are hoping we can do it
the actual missile is ready and the seeker and .............. Are ready so it’s just a matter of getting it to work

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Mamajama said:


> Very hard to counter cruise missile in the modern world, best bet are probably aerostat with radars or AWACS. Even than, targeting them is harder given Iran's mountainous terrain and NOE flight many cruise missiles fly.


agreed it will probably be a short range Tor like system well Iran's high terrain will give it an advantage too if Iran add long range radar on its mountainous terrain then it can see much larger in range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> They said they will unveil oghab(iranian tor) and separ(iranian pantsir). This one is different?


i don't think so its probably the Ogab system


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

yavar said:


> After October *I RGC will launch satellite into space it is so decided so in the next two years we are hoping we can do it*
> the actual missile is ready and the seeker and .............. Are ready so it’s just a matter of getting it to work



Meaning: IRGC has already launched several observational satellites during these years, but not publicly...

For sure Iran has "some" observational satellites orbiting Earth since some years...

Iran is the master of deception!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Meaning: IRGC has already launched several observational satellites during these years, but not publicly...
> 
> For sure Iran has "some" observational satellites orbiting Earth since some years...
> 
> Iran is the master of deception!



Space doesn’t work like that. There are laws to space and Iran has to declare its orbital space it intends to put objects into at time of launch as well as the time so other satellites can maintain a safe distance during insertion.

Space isn’t a no mans land where anyone can just shoot something up at anytime without giving advance notice. There are thousands of satellites and tens of thousands of objects floating around the earth at any given point.


----------



## yavar

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Meaning: IRGC has already launched several observational satellites during these years, but not publicly...
> 
> For sure Iran has "some" observational satellites orbiting Earth since some years...
> 
> Iran is the master of deception!



we have had experiment but only Noor-1 satellite is first operational satellite so, so far only one satellite

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

BEIRUT,LEBANON (1:00 P.M.) – The Russian publication Avia.Pro posted a
satellite image on Sunday of what they claim to be an Iranian air
defense system near the Syrian-Lebanese border.

Citing an unnamed source, the publication posted a satellite image
that allegedly shows the deployment of the Iranian-made Khordad-3 air
defense system near the Syrian-Lebanese border.

“The source of the Avia.pro news agency has provided satellite images
showing at least three Iranian-made Khordad-3 anti-aircraft missile
systems on the Syrian-Lebanese border, from where most of the Israeli
F-16 attacks are made. The effective range of destruction of targets of
the latter is from 75 to 105 kilometers, which is enough to defeat
Israeli fighters in the event of new attacks on Syria,” the publication
said.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Artillery systems like the Mesbah would be very useful. It would not be surprising if this system is in place not too far from the Khordad-3

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> BEIRUT,LEBANON (1:00 P.M.) – The Russian publication Avia.Pro posted a
> satellite image on Sunday of what they claim to be an Iranian air
> defense system near the Syrian-Lebanese border.
> 
> Citing an unnamed source, the publication posted a satellite image
> that allegedly shows the deployment of the Iranian-made Khordad-3 air
> defense system near the Syrian-Lebanese border.
> 
> “The source of the Avia.pro news agency has provided satellite images
> showing at least three Iranian-made Khordad-3 anti-aircraft missile
> systems on the Syrian-Lebanese border, from where most of the Israeli
> F-16 attacks are made. The effective range of destruction of targets of
> the latter is from 75 to 105 kilometers, which is enough to defeat
> Israeli fighters in the event of new attacks on Syria,” the publication
> said.



I would wait for more reputable confirmation. Hard to tell that is 3rd of Khordad from the sat image. 

Syria has BUK systems and from the air they would look similar.

If it was deployed it is thanks to Hezbollah and the Hezbollah operative that was killed in recent air strikes. Since that time Israel has reduced the amount of sorties on Syrian territory in fears of sparking another war with HZ in case an operative were to get killed again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Honestly one issue with the "resistance front" is that they do not function as one holistic entity. Israel attacks Syrian assets or Hezbollah / Iranian backed assets in Syria and because Syria is so depleted and war torn they don't usually respond. 

Israeli jets fly low over Lebanese airspace and strike Syria but there are neither spotters or MANPAD crews there to atleast deter them. Syria is depleted but Hezbollah has 100,000 missiles/rockets. Whenever Israel strikes any target in Syria, if you think about it rationally, Hezbollah should retaliate in kind with the same number of missiles to deter further Israel attacks, but no, because of Lebanese politics, Hezbollah sits idle. 

It doesn't really make sense if you think about it. If the resistance front is fighting in unison for one cause, one end goal then they should work together and function as one.




TheImmortal said:


> I would wait for more reputable confirmation. Hard to tell that is 3rd of Khordad from the sat image.
> 
> Syria has BUK systems and from the air they would look similar.
> 
> If it was deployed it is thanks to Hezbollah and the Hezbollah operative that was killed in recent air strikes. Since that time Israel has reduced the amount of sorties on Syrian territory in fears of sparking another war with HZ in case an operative were to get killed again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

sha ah said:


> It doesn't really make sense if you think about it. If the resistance front is fighting in unison for one cause, one end goal then they should work together and function as one.



They do fight in one unison, but the strategy is depicted by Tehran. And Tehran has chosen strategic patience. Such patience, that it's willing to support a tyrant killing his own Muslim population in the short term. Because while that is not morally the right thing to do for an Islamic-republic under the guardianship of the Islamic jurists, it is the right this to do so strategically. In order to, in the long term, get to their number 1 geopolitical regional rival, Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> Honestly one issue with the "resistance front" is that they do not function as one holistic entity. Israel attacks Syrian assets or Hezbollah / Iranian backed assets in Syria and because Syria is so depleted and war torn they don't usually respond.
> 
> Israeli jets fly low over Lebanese airspace and strike Syria but there are neither spotters or MANPAD crews there to atleast deter them. Syria is depleted but Hezbollah has 100,000 missiles/rockets. Whenever Israel strikes any target in Syria, if you think about it rationally, Hezbollah should retaliate in kind with the same number of missiles to deter further Israel attacks, but no, because of Lebanese politics, Hezbollah sits idle.
> 
> It doesn't really make sense if you think about it. If the resistance front is fighting in unison for one cause, one end goal then they should work together and function as one.



That is the latest i read about Hezbollah









Sayyed Nasrallah to Zionists: ‘One Israeli Soldier for Every Hezbollah Fighter’


Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on the 10th of Muh...




english.almanar.com.lb


----------



## sha ah

Yeah but see that's what I'm talking about. It's not enough. 

First of all Hezbollah should be using preventative measures to deter any and all Israeli strikes on Syria. That includes Israeil strikes on SAA positions or Israeli strikes Iranian backed forces in Deir Ezzor for example, not just on Hezbollah targets. 

Hezbollah should also be actively trying to deter Israel from flying over Lebanese airspace. Israeli jets flying low are vulnerable to MANPADS. At the least there should be early warning systems or spotters on the ground in Lebanon. How hard would that be ? 

Also anytime Israel does successfully strike any target in Syria, Hezbollah should respond reciprocally with just as many missiles. 

A policy such as that could actually deter Israel from targeting any part of the resistance axis. 

Look at how the Americans are withdrawing 1/3rd of their forces from Iraq now. There have been countless rocket strikes on American targets as well as guerilla forces consistently targeting US convoys. 

However the US constantly denies sustaining any damage or casualties, however that's very unlikely. I'm guessing that Trump doesn't want any major escalation during the election process ? 

Also the Zionist official policy is to actively deny any casualties that occur as a result of enemy strikes and now it seems as if the Americans under Trump are following suite.

It's the same thing with the Iranian missile strikes on Al Asad base. First they said no casualties, all is well. Then 12, then 30, then 60, then finally 100+ American soldiers with traumatic brain injuries. According to Trump it's headaches that can easily be cured by Tylenol however many US soldiers have not returned to active duty since. Conspiracy theory or is there something to it ?



Ich said:


> That is the latest i read about Hezbollah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sayyed Nasrallah to Zionists: ‘One Israeli Soldier for Every Hezbollah Fighter’
> 
> 
> Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on the 10th of Muh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> english.almanar.com.lb


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> I would wait for more reputable confirmation. Hard to tell that is 3rd of Khordad from the sat image.
> 
> Syria has BUK systems and from the air they would look similar.
> 
> If it was deployed it is thanks to Hezbollah and the Hezbollah operative that was killed in recent air strikes. Since that time Israel has reduced the amount of sorties on Syrian territory in fears of sparking another war with HZ in case an operative were to get killed again.






This is not 3rd khordad.Iran or hezbollah would never place it in such a way😂

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

sha ah said:


> Yeah but see that's what I'm talking about. It's not enough.
> 
> First of all Hezbollah should be using preventative measures to deter any and all Israeli strikes on Syria. That includes Israeil strikes on SAA positions or Israeli strikes Iranian backed forces in Deir Ezzor for example, not just on Hezbollah targets.
> 
> Hezbollah should also be actively trying to deter Israel from flying over Lebanese airspace. Israeli jets flying low are vulnerable to MANPADS. At the least there should be early warning systems or spotters on the ground in Lebanon. How hard would that be ?
> 
> Also anytime Israel does successfully strike any target in Syria, Hezbollah should respond reciprocally with just as many missiles.
> 
> A policy such as that could actually deter Israel from targeting any part of the resistance axis.
> 
> Look at how the Americans are withdrawing 1/3rd of their forces from Iraq now. There have been countless rocket strikes on American targets as well as guerilla forces consistently targeting US convoys.
> 
> However the US constantly denies sustaining any damage or casualties, however that's very unlikely. I'm guessing that Trump doesn't want any major escalation during the election process ?
> 
> Also the Zionist official policy is to actively deny any casualties that occur as a result of enemy strikes and now it seems as if the Americans under Trump are following suite.
> 
> It's the same thing with the Iranian missile strikes on Al Asad base. First they said no casualties, all is well. Then 12, then 30, then 60, then finally 100+ American soldiers with traumatic brain injuries. According to Trump it's headaches that can easily be cured by Tylenol however many US soldiers have not returned to active duty since. Conspiracy theory or is there something to it ?



Me think that there is already AD in Lebanon. Also Lebanon is not only Hezbollah. There must be consense between all political fraction to openly and activ deploy AD against Israel. The disaster what happened with the explosion in Beirut habor could lead to a new political will in Lebanon and solve the illegal Israely overflys. At the moment me think Hezbollah has to wait in what direction the people in Lebanon want to go, cant decide in Lebanon internal alone. But can do small skirmish at border with and in Israel. And me think that is what Nasrallah said in his speech.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

Ich said:


> Me think that there is already AD in Lebanon. Also Lebanon is not only Hezbollah. There must be consense between all political fraction to openly and activ deploy AD against Israel. The disaster what happened with the explosion in Beirut habor could lead to a new political will in Lebanon and solve the illegal Israely overflys. At the moment me think Hezbollah has to wait in what direction the people in Lebanon want to go, cant decide in Lebanon internal alone. But can do small skirmish at border with and in Israel. And me think that is what Nasrallah said in his speech.


good comments, but regarding "small skirmish with Israel"....HMMMM...issue with that is that Israel can escalate that, cuz its fond of violating(another) international law that bans collective punishment...its possible the clash might stay small and local ,but im just saying that the risk is considerablly higher now imo that it wont stay so small.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

According to this tweet new air defence achievements will be revealed tomorrow. I assume they will probably be new SHORADS.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1300774088294772736

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Shams313

VLS type as they mentioned earlier...


Philosopher said:


> According to this tweet new air defence achievements will be revealed tomorrow. I assume they will probably be new SHORADS.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1300774088294772736

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Brigadier General Amir Sabahifard announced the unveiling of 27 achievements of the Air Defense Forces on Wednesday, September second .





*

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *Brigadier General Amir Sabahifard announced the unveiling of 27 achievements of the Air Defense Forces on Wednesday, September second .
> 
> 
> View attachment 665873
> *



Currently it’s 5:30 AM in Tehran Wednesday September 2nd

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

The first picture is in






A bird detecting radar with a range of 12 km and able to detect more than 300 targets. Not a bad thing to put into service with the ever growing spread of small (suicide) drones that are capable of attacking targets.





رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شد- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


صبح امروز از رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران رونمایی شد.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## IranDefence

triangle said:


> The first picture is in
> 
> View attachment 665932
> 
> 
> A bird detecting radar with a range of 12 km and able to detect more than 300 targets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شد- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> صبح امروز از رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران رونمایی شد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com



Great for south of Lebanon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Nothing yet


----------



## PeeD

Can't expect too much from an IRIADF internal SSJ project but Kashef-99 could be quite useful as valley gap-filler.
Critical, up to 24km wide ingress valleys, foremost threatened by CMs can be covered.

It depends on the MTBF of the system and power consumption. If that is ok, it can align AAA and MANPAD teams and provide early warning.
It would take the role for which Iranian Kasta-2 gap filler would be a overkill, secure the blindspots.

Lets see if IRIADF is serious about this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## triangle

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301080363649970177
The S-200 got an upgrade to its controlstations. Seems like the old screens and buttons have been replaced by modern digital screens and keyboards. Most probably saves a lot of weight and room to make smaller and lighter control posts.

Edit: We have moving images


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301088574125867008
Looks like 30 rpm. High refresh rate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

PeeD said:


> It depends on the MTBF of the system



According to twitter, it can operate 24h continuously. And it has 3D capability


----------



## Shams313

triangle said:


> According to twitter, it can operate 24h continuously. And it has 3D capability


The mechanical designer could have come with a better concept.typical box modeling.

and they certainly lack a powder coating line for a better painting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Its a promising development, because its just a SSJ project. This could be the minimum technology used for Oghab and Separ SHORAD systems.

Compared to Tor-M1 and -M2 it has true and precise 3D capability but as for now shorter ranged.

Its on pair to Pantsir-S1, which is again longer ranged and outperformed by Pantsir-S2, which as AESA has better MTBF and much longer range.

Its all about MTBF and cost on such systems.

Its phased array 3D TWS capability and high update rate could even perform the task of the Skyguard radar but much more simple and lower cost for AAA.

More important is the full upgrade of the Square pair S-200 engagement radars. This was the last major S-200 subsystem that was not yet fully upgraded.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## triangle

PeeD said:


> Its a promising development, because its just a SSJ project. This could be the minimum technology used for Oghab and Separ SHORAD systems.
> 
> Compared to Tor-M1 and -M2 it has true and precise 3D capability but as for now shorter ranged.
> 
> Its on pair to Pantsir-S1, which is again longer ranged and outperformed by Pantsir-S2, which as AESA has better MTBF and much longer range.
> 
> Its all about MTBF and cost on such systems.
> 
> Its phased array 3D TWS capability and high update rate could even perform the task of the Skyguard radar but much more simple and lower cost for AAA.
> 
> More important is the full upgrade of the Square pair S-200 engagement radars. This was the last major S-200 subsystem that was not yet fully upgraded.



Thanks, will use this information in my presentation to my superiors which is scheduled for next week 😉

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301102783358267392
Here we can see some CMANO like software in use by IRIADF to command AD units. Also an older and short clip of one of the Bavar-373 controlstations, this time unscensored which IMO shows a test/prototype user interface on its screen

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Great for the export market and surely PMU, Hezbollah, Syria and countless other groups/nations will be interested. It's small size makes it ideal for transfer to Houthi's as well. 

Haftar and his forces would love a few dozen of these. It can add a decent boost to smaller air defense systems that can be the difference between life and death.



triangle said:


> The first picture is in
> 
> View attachment 665932
> 
> 
> A bird detecting radar with a range of 12 km and able to detect more than 300 targets. Not a bad thing to put into service with the ever growing spread of small (suicide) drones that are capable of attacking targets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شد- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> صبح امروز از رادار کاشف‌ــ‌99 پدافند هوایی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران رونمایی شد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com


----------



## Saleh99

They said they will unveil 27 new products. We only saw the radar... any information?


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran Not to Unveil All Air Defense Achievements *

TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Army's Khatam ol-Anbiya Air Defense Base Brigadier General Alireza Sabahi Fard underlined Iran’s astonishing progress in developing modern weapons and military equipment, and said the country keeps part of these systems hidden in a bid to surprise to enemies.

“Many of the Air Defense’s equipment cannot be unveiled to the media and we will use them in secret layers of the Air Defense when needed in a bid to disappoint enemies at their moves,” General Sabahi Fard said after unveiling a new 3D and phased-array radar named Kashef-99 on Wednesday.

He also referred to the unveiling of a “smart, advanced and unique” system named Emad which can model different war scenarios in exercises and wargames, and said it can be used to increase the operational power of specialists in all defensive fields.

General Sabahi Fard said Emad has been developed based on a highly advanced software and hardware and designed based on new threats, and added that the Iranian Air Defense experts ended the monopoly of the advanced countries by making the system.

Iran on Wednesday unveiled a new 3D and phased-array radar system capable of detecting hundreds of small flying objects simultaneously.
The new radar named Kashef-99 (Discoverer) was unveiled in a ceremony participated by General Sabahi Fard.
Kashef-99 is a 3D, phased-array and mobile radar which has been designed and manufactured at the Army Air Defense’s Center for Research on New Technologies and is capable of detecting up to 300 small-size flying objects from a distance of 12km simultaneously.



FarsNews Agency - Commander: Iran Not to Unveil All Air Defense Achievements to Surprise Enemies

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Why is it in the back of a Toyota pick up truck?


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Why is it in the back of a Toyota pick up truck?


to better hide it, like in cities


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> to better hide it, like in cities



I doubt you would use it in cities. Way too much background noise and the range is too small. Cities already fall under the defense envelope of Bavar-373 and S-300 along with medium and short range defense systems.

This seems to be to protect smaller kill zones in rural areas or around special points where a medium range and short range defense systems are either overkill or too expensive a solution.

They should try to double the range in future generations and At least use an Iranian military Humvee truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

@PeeD if the IRIADF managed to upgrade he kashef-99 to increase the range, can it be used on the oghab or separ SHOARADS or at least manufacture their radar based on kashef-99?


----------



## Mithridates

TheImmortal said:


> Why is it in the back of a Toyota pick up truck?


because it's army.


----------



## PeeD

Saleh99 said:


> @PeeD if the IRIADF managed to upgrade he kashef-99 to increase the range, can it be used on the oghab or separ SHOARADS or at least manufacture their radar based on kashef-99?



Sure but at least the Separ will likely go for a more advanced solution. Iran has already shown more advanced technology suitable.

Its about costs and reliability. In that field this Kashef might be quite good.

Btw. instead of being happy that it fits on a low-profile vehicle like a Toyota, some people have problems with that

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

Upgraded S-200 C&C system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

PeeD said:


> Btw. instead of being happy that it fits on a low-profile vehicle like a Toyota, some people have problems with that



Sadly many people can't see the big picture and instead moan about details such as the make of the pick-up truck.

This new radar has rather limited range, however when range will be increased, it could potentially be a game changer in the hand of Hezbollah and our Syrians allies. Even in Iran itself, many dozens of these systems scattered throughout Iran can greatly increase our vision (especially in the relatively more blind spots) and be a very significant boost.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Sure but at least the Separ will likely go for a more advanced solution. Iran has already shown more advanced technology suitable.
> 
> Its about costs and reliability. In that field this Kashef might be quite good.
> 
> Btw. instead of being happy that it fits on a low-profile vehicle like a Toyota, some people have problems with that


Did iran show anything that might be fitted on separ? Because you said iran showed more advanced technology suitable.


----------



## PeeD

Saleh99 said:


> Did iran show anything that might be fitted on separ? Because you said iran showed more advanced technology suitable.



Last year Iran showed a full blown X-band AESA, it should have been mentioned somewhere in this thread.


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Last year Iran showed a full blown X-band AESA, it should have been mentioned somewhere in this thread.


You mean the Bavar-373 engagement radar maybe


----------



## Philosopher

An interesting poster from the current exhbition showing an Arrow-2 lookalike system, could it hint at an Iranian AB defence ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## triangle

PeeD said:


> Haha perfect timing:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1302575252925566977



One year after the unveiling. My estimation is that they have 2 complete batteries by now. Production rate could rise to 4 batteries per year with 20 batteries in 5-6 years.


----------



## Saleh99

@PeeD bavar uses SARH guidance, is it better than ARH that all modern ADs use or what?


----------



## makranman

triangle said:


> One year after the unveiling. My estimation is that they have 2 complete batteries by now. Production rate could rise to 4 batteries per year with 20 batteries in 5-6 years.


i remember someone in twitter mentioning a couple month ago that there where only 2 batteries produced, one for semnan test range and one for the ministry to test things. though i can not remember the source now.


----------



## Blue In Green

makranman said:


> i remember someone in twitter mentioning a couple month ago that there where only 2 batteries produced, one for semnan test range and one for the ministry to test things. though i can not remember the source now.



With the news that one system is operational (idk if its a full battery or not) we can only hope Iran is full on producing the BAVAR-373 as this system is sorely needed in plugging up the holes over Iranian air-space.

My guess is that the system that just went operational is protecting some critical nuclear site.


----------



## TruthHurtz

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 667086



This doesn't mean that Iran is making an Arrow like ABM system, it's more than likely a visualisation of how Iranian missiles would defeat such a system.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1302623321947885574

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

آپارات - سرویس اشتراک ویدیو







www.aparat.com












*S-200 upgrade *







*Arash antenna (radar) *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

*Emad AD wargame system*









رونمایی از رادار سه بعدی «کاشف ۹۹» و سامانه بازی جنگ «عماد» + عکس


رادار سه‌بعدی «کاشف ۹۹» و سامانه «عماد» صبح امروز با حضور فرمانده نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شد.




www.mizanonline.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

The defence official stated the Kashef-99 radar can detect targets with RCS of 0.01m2.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

triangle said:


> One year after the unveiling. My estimation is that they have 2 complete batteries by now. Production rate could rise to 4 batteries per year with 20 batteries in 5-6 years.



More than 2 batteries are in service


----------



## skyshadow

*Breaking news : Iran will soon unveil a new air defense system more advance then Bavar - 373*







*فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور۳۷۳ ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌*






فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌- اخبار کرمانشاه - اخبار استانها تسنیم | Tasnim


گروه استان‌ها ــ فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب گفت: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *Breaking news : Iran will soon unveil a new air defense system more advance then Bavar - 373*
> 
> 
> View attachment 667562
> 
> 
> *فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور۳۷۳ ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌- اخبار کرمانشاه - اخبار استانها تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> گروه استان‌ها ــ فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب گفت: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com


@yavar @SOHEIL

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Interesting development, the Americans used a Howitzer hypersonic shell to shoot down a cruise missile.

*‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile









‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile


A U. S. Army self-propelled howitzer firing a Mach-five shell just shot down a cruise missile.




www.forbes.com




*
I think such technologies can play an important role in dealing with "swarm" attacks. It's certainly an area I hope Iran will pursue as well, especially given the dual use nature of Howitzers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> Interesting development, the Americans used a Howitzer hypersonic shell to shoot down a cruise missile.
> 
> *‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile
> 
> 
> A U. S. Army self-propelled howitzer firing a Mach-five shell just shot down a cruise missile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I think such technologies can play an important role in dealing with "swarm" attacks. It's certainly an area I hope Iran will pursue as well, especially given the dual use nature of Howitzers.


i was saying this here for a while, hyper sonic projectiles fired from ground vehicles can turn the equations for us both in region and against US. a projectile traveling in ~8 mach can penetrate any tank armor and can be used as air defense and even ABM system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> Interesting development, the Americans used a Howitzer hypersonic shell to shoot down a cruise missile.
> 
> *‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Sci-Fi Awesome’—A U.S. Army Howitzer Just Shot Down A Cruise Missile
> 
> 
> A U. S. Army self-propelled howitzer firing a Mach-five shell just shot down a cruise missile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I think such technologies can play an important role in dealing with "swarm" attacks. It's certainly an area I hope Iran will pursue as well, especially given the dual use nature of Howitzers.



Leave it to the Americans to find an even more expensive way to destroy a subsonic slow moving target.

Stupid for Iran to adopt.


----------



## TheImmortal

Mithridates said:


> i was saying this here for a while, hyper sonic projectiles fired from ground vehicles can turn the equations for us both in region and against US. a projectile traveling in ~8 mach can penetrate any tank armor and can be used as air defense and even ABM system.



It cant be used as an ABM or against manuervable target because it lacks ability to pull Gs and re adjust to counter measures.

Hypersonic projectiles are good against static targets or slow moving targets. It would make a good addition as a naval weapon to replace those aging cannons Iran uses on It’s ships.


----------



## Raghfarm007

The yank have also been pretening that their Patriot missiles really work..... unless its used against a real war, as seen in Saudi oil fields.

Anything the yanks say should be doubted, unless proven otherwise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Leave it to the Americans to find an even more expensive way to destroy a subsonic slow moving target.
> 
> Stupid for Iran to adopt.


well Iran already has a less expensive supersonics version that travels at mach 3-4 that worked very well in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> *Breaking news : Iran will soon unveil a new air defense system more advance then Bavar - 373*
> 
> 
> View attachment 667562
> 
> 
> *فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور۳۷۳ ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت / سامانه‌های انهد‌امی پیشرفته‌تر ‌رونمایی خواهد شد‌- اخبار کرمانشاه - اخبار استانها تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> گروه استان‌ها ــ فرمانده منطقه پدافند هوایی شمال‌غرب گفت: سامانه موشکی برد بلند باور373 ‌در مدار عملیاتی قرار گرفت.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com




It may be very interesting !!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*high-altitude hostile drone was destroyed with an optimized Shalamcheh missile.


In this part of the exercise, the hostile bird, which was flying at a high speed and high altitude and intended to enter the general area of the exercise while having a very small radar cross section, was discovered by Khatam al-Anbiya (PBUH) and handed over to the indigenous defense system of the army's air defense force in order to intercept and destroy it, which was shot down by the successful firing of an optimized Shalamche surface-to-air missile.
















انهدام پهپاد متخاصم در ارتفاع بالا توسط موشک بهینه‌شده شلمچه


در رزمایش مشترک ذوالفقار۹۹ ارتش، موشک بهینه شده شلمچه نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش موفق به انهدام هدف متخاصم شد.




www.yjc.ir




*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1305152386114162688

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 669844
> 
> 
> View attachment 669850


It has a very unique design.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1302623321947885574


 Iranian airspace is getting LOCKED UP....US really has no chance anymore for a succesful attack anymore. NONE

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

Arminkh said:


> It has a very unique design.


i love the design..cant wait to see it in action. Iran just came out of nowhere with this beast and not 1 country in the region can say they're not worried about them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

925boy said:


> Iranian airspace is getting LOCKED UP....US really has no chance anymore for a succesful attack anymore. NONE


never underestimate your enemy, but we can agree, they will think twice before starting any adventure...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

Draco.IMF said:


> never underestimate your enemy, but we can agree, they will think twice before starting any adventure...


yes, i agree with not underestimating your enemy, US is a very hard adversary, period.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1306810316144226307

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1306810316144226307



And people like @AmirPatriot and @Blue In Green said it’s too difficult for Iran to build Air bases inside mountains.

Clearly with missile cities and now air defense cities, the capability is there and may already be under construction for future use.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> And people like @AmirPatriot and @Blue In Green said it’s too difficult for Iran to build Air bases inside mountains.
> 
> Clearly with missile cities and now air defense cities, the capability is there and may already be under construction for future use.



(Apologies, but you pissed me off this time)

"people like" -- idk @TheImmortal what are we 'like' exactly?

Last time I checked Amir was a well respected member of this forum whose opinions are highly cherished and his rebuttal to your original position was a sound and fair one (that stills stand FYI). I don't know about you though, you seem a little too high and mighty off of your own ego sometimes (I mean this respectively btw). But go on thinking you're always right about whatever it is you comment about, it is what you're best at after all.

Also man, we were clearly talking about AIR BASES not air "defense" bases. But go ahead and try to get a one-up on Amir and I. Your suggestion is still as egregious as it was the first time you purposed it and will still be moving on forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Blue In Green said:


> (Apologies, but you pissed me off this time)
> 
> "people like" -- idk @TheImmortal what are we 'like' exactly?
> 
> Last time I checked Amir was a well respected member of this forum whose opinions are highly cherished and his rebuttal to your original position was a sound and fair one (that stills stand FYI). I don't know about you though, you seem a little too high and mighty off of your own ego sometimes (I mean this respectively btw). But go on thinking you're always right about whatever it is you comment about, it is what you're best at after all.
> 
> Also man, we were clearly talking about AIR BASES not air "defense" bases. But go ahead and try to get a one-up on Amir and I. Your suggestion is still as egregious as it was the first time you purposed it and will still be moving on forward.



You should probably learn reading comprehension. As the term “like” in the my sentence is referencing to specific examples of the word “people” in order to illustrate the subject of my sentence which is people who don’t agree with feasibility of mountain air bases.

Here is another sentence using similar sentence structure:

“And cars LIKE Mercedes and Lexus are known for their luxury vehicles.”

In this case Mercedes and Lexus are the examples for the word car used to illustrate the subject of the sentence which is cars that are known as luxury vehicles.

Shame you jump to erroneous conclusions based on your misinterpretation.

Moving on, both you and the other user cited costs (among other things) of building a mountain base for Air Force as the basis of your counter argument. And you can now see that they have done it for air defense. So cost is clearly not the Prohibitive factor you make it out to be if Iran has moved to include another branch of the military in its mountain city protection scheme.

Lastly, your underestimation of the complexity of having a radar air defense command center underground and underneath a mountain is flawed. Simply know that establishing reliable data feed and communications Network that can work underneath THAT much earth is very impressive and no easy matter.

Much more impressive in my opinion than a bunker that can house Air Force planes that many countries have built since the 1950’s.


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> And people like @AmirPatriot and @Blue In Green said it’s too difficult for Iran to build Air bases inside mountains.
> 
> Clearly with missile cities and now air defense cities, the capability is there and may already be under construction for future use.



We saw this command centre months ago and my response to your underground airbase proposal was made with full knowledge of it. This does not change my stance. We have discussed the matter extensively and I am not going to continue it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1307036960486293505

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arminkh

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1307036960486293505


I thought it was very clear why in the report that was published. They had not set the systems North correctly so on the radar screen they saw the airplane approaching them from Northwest instead of from where the airport was.


----------



## sha ah

I thought there was an article stating that the air defense system was pointing in the wrong direction and that the operators did not follow protocol, did not acquire permission from the command center before firing ?

In any case, whomever was in charge of that operation SHOULD have made sure to close off Iran's airspace during that night. I'm not sure whether it was just carelessness or over confidence on the part of the IRGC or Iranian military, but now trying to blame it on "electronic warfare" is kind of ridiculous. 

Where's the proof ? Why all these different narratives ? Iranian people deserve a decisive answer on this incident. Why beat around the bush ? 

These kind of statements along with the dowsing rod presentation really makes me think twice about these IRGC figures.



TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1307036960486293505

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Arminkh said:


> I thought it was very clear why in the report that was published. They had not set the systems North correctly so on the radar screen they saw the airplane approaching them from Northwest instead of from where the airport was.



I have a feeling it’s some within IRGC trying to deflect blame/responsibility over the instance or add doubt to the circumstances to the incident.

With the many air defense command centers Iran has and the ones inside the mountain as well. For the US to pick one AD system outside Tehran to EW attack seems highly unlikely.

It seems that crew was not only incompetent, but trigger happy.

There were a few incidents during the Cold War where Russian or US radar and air defense teams picked up what they thought was the other’s nuclear first strike launch attack.

Yet the teams used logic and reasoning and stood down even if standing down ment total annihilation. Only afterwards in each incident was it understood that it was technical problems with the systems.

In this case, the team did not use logic and assumed somehow without any reporting from any other batteries or AD command center that a CM had made its way to Tehran to strike. Even if it is was 1 cruise missile the team should have waited for confirmation from command center even if it ment they would perish or another target would perish.

By assuming anything in the air is hostile when airspace is NOT closed Is gross incompetence. If airspace was completely closed to civilian traffic then it would be a different matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Electronic warfare is not based on magic, how would anyone be able to perform EW so deep inside a country the size of Iran without penetrating through its airspace first? More-over, even if we assume this could occur, the Tor-M1 operator *chose* to fire on a target he was seeing on his screen which they assumed to be a cruise missile. What part of this could have caused by an EW? Firstly, we already know that the Tor-M1 do not have a IFF, secondly, when you consider classic radars, all they see is a blip on the screen (many have limited RCS calculation capabilities). It is quite easy to mistake targets, this is why IFFs are used. Thus this incident clearly occurred due to 1) The decision not to ground the air-fleet 2) A difficult decision made by an operator who was certainly inexperienced. There is no evidence nor any reason to think EW such as radar spoofing had anything to do with this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mithridates

it's not new. people from the fist week were saying it's possibly the result of US EW as that night there was a heavy involvement of US assets around all sides of Iran. 
the range is not an issue, su-35 radar has 450 km range. meaning the radar wave travels 900 km and it has enough energy to detect an object. now it's radar size and instrumental limit differs from an air defense system...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

It is not just the range (at those long ranges the EM intensity will be too small to create a meaningful EW) but also the fact we're dealing with a solo Tor-m1 system in a relatively mountainous region. There are various types of E-warfare systems and not a single one could be behind this incident. "Radar spoofing" is the closet thing but that is countered by the obvious fact the Tor system detected and hit a physical object i.e the plane. The only logical explanation is the one already given by the IRGC.


----------



## Philosopher

Some interesting missile nose section were shown during the recent exhibition. The one on the far right has the steepest angle, I think it is from the Shalamche missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Philosopher said:


> Some interesting missile nose section were shown during the recent exhibition. The one on the far right has the steepest angle, I think it is from the Shalamche missile?
> 
> View attachment 671927




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301554476332060674

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1301554476332060674



To me, the 28° seems to be from the Shalamche missile. The 52° one is something I have not come across before in Iran.


----------



## skyshadow

*Army Air Defense unveils two new radar projects Misagh and Soroush*









According to Sabahifard, the Soroush project is a medium-range detection and search radar with a range of *more than 220 km, *which is able to detect low cross-sectional targets at low altitude using semiconductor technology.

“The domestic *Soroush radar* can carry out missions in all weather conditions. It is capable of withstanding electronic warfare and has high mobility,” he noted.


*“Misagh radar is able to receive, process, and integrate information with a very high data processing capacity and the system does not need any operator,” he added. *

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Philosopher

One appears to a heavily upgraded version of the AN/MPQ-50 radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> One appears to a heavily upgraded version of the AN/MPQ-50 radar.
> 
> View attachment 672891
> 
> View attachment 672892


exactly i though its AN/MPQ-50 but then i saw its name Sorosh on it


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*is this a radar ? Moragheb radar ?




*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran will unveil a new air defense system called Majid


Majid system is one of our best systems that will be unveiled by the end of this year. This system has features such as high mobility and fast reaction time and its a indigenous defense systems made in the Islamic Republic of Iran.










رونمایی از سامانه پدافندی مجید تا پایان امسال/ در ۵ سال آینده، هواپیمای مسافربری می‌سازیم


جانشین وزیر دفاع گفت: تا پایان سال از سامانه پدافندی مجید رونمایی خواهد شد.




www.yjc.ir




*

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran is in an astonishing and incredible scientific leap and will surprise us enormously. I am convinced that for fighter planes they have had an advanced plane hidden for some time 

They don't have much to buy abroad

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

These air-defense systems have yet to be unveiled:

Oghab - based on the TOR-M1
Separ - based on the Pantsir-S1
Dezful
Navvab
(Shahid) Majid

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## MTN1917

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 672927
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *is this a radar ? Moragheb radar ?
> 
> View attachment 672928
> *


Probably UAV launcher.


----------



## skyshadow

MTN1917 said:


> Probably UAV launcher.


*it can rotate 360 degrees* too and behind it its *say Moragheb Radar* the details all indicate a radar but it could be a launching platform too as you said.


----------



## skyshadow

Messerschmitt said:


> These air-defense systems have yet to be unveiled:
> 
> Oghab - based on the TOR-M1
> Separ - based on the Pantsir-S1
> Dezful
> Navvab
> (Shahid) Majid

Reactions: Haha Haha:
10


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 673134

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

sha ah said:


> These kind of statements along with the dowsing rod presentation really makes me think twice about these IRGC figures.



I had already addressed this issue before, but here's a quick reminder: in reality there's nothing outlandish about the idea of a portable COVID-19 virus sensor, and therefore the entire western media campaign ridiculing the IRGC for their presentation was baseless. Such devices can be scientifically proven ones.

Here are some articles about the US regime itself agreeing to finance a project conducted by the University of Utah under the direction of a professor with Iranian roots (ironically), aiming to develop the exact same thing i. e. a COVID-19 sensor:









COVID-19 Sensor - Electrical & Computer Engineering | University of Utah


ECE professor Massood Tabib-Azar is developing a fast, reusable test for COVID-19 that works with cellphones.



www.ece.utah.edu













The University of Utah has Possibly Developed a Simple Sensor based accessory that works with a Smartphone to Self-Test for COVID-19


A Fox 13 Salt Lake City TV report last week revealed that the University of Utah has been working on a way to detect Coronavirus with a simple sensor smartphone accessory device and app. A user would only have to cough or breathe on a sensor device to get a quick result for COVID-19. What...




www.patentlyapple.com













University of Utah engineer hopes to develop a portable sensor for COVID-19 testing


Electrical and computer engineering professor Massood Tabib-Azar is using funding from a $200,000 National Science Foundation Rapid Response Research grant in an attempt to create a portable, reusable coronavirus sensor that would work with a mobile phone and be able to detect coronavirus in one...




www.deseret.com













Utah computer engineering professor making COVID-19 smartphone sensor







www.fox13now.com





Now as concerns the casing of the device presented by the IRGC, it's just that, a casing. This can be used for many different sorts of electronic devices and the fact that it was chosen to house the IRGC-made COVID-19 scanner means nothing. Just because a scammer had once used the same casing to manufacture a dowsing rod, it doesn't imply that every device with a similar casing is a scam. In fact, the scammer in question did not design the casing by himself, he took it over from some preexisting, functional electronic device.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> I had already addressed this issue before, but here's a quick reminder: in reality there's nothing outlandish about the idea of a portable COVID-19 virus sensor, and therefore the entire western media campaign ridiculing the IRGC for their presentation was baseless. Such devices can be scientifically proven ones.
> 
> Here are some articles about the US regime itself agreeing to finance a project conducted by the University of Utah under the direction of a professor with Iranian roots (ironically), aiming to develop the exact same thing i. e. a COVID-19 sensor:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> COVID-19 Sensor - Electrical & Computer Engineering | University of Utah
> 
> 
> ECE professor Massood Tabib-Azar is developing a fast, reusable test for COVID-19 that works with cellphones.
> 
> 
> 
> www.ece.utah.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The University of Utah has Possibly Developed a Simple Sensor based accessory that works with a Smartphone to Self-Test for COVID-19
> 
> 
> A Fox 13 Salt Lake City TV report last week revealed that the University of Utah has been working on a way to detect Coronavirus with a simple sensor smartphone accessory device and app. A user would only have to cough or breathe on a sensor device to get a quick result for COVID-19. What...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.patentlyapple.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> University of Utah engineer hopes to develop a portable sensor for COVID-19 testing
> 
> 
> Electrical and computer engineering professor Massood Tabib-Azar is using funding from a $200,000 National Science Foundation Rapid Response Research grant in an attempt to create a portable, reusable coronavirus sensor that would work with a mobile phone and be able to detect coronavirus in one...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.deseret.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Utah computer engineering professor making COVID-19 smartphone sensor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fox13now.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now as concerns the casing of the device presented by the IRGC, it's just that, a casing. This can be used for many different sorts of electronic devices and the fact that it was chosen to house the IRGC-made COVID-19 scanner means nothing. Just because a scammer had once used the same casing to manufacture a dowsing rod, it doesn't imply that every device with a similar casing is a scam. In fact, the scammer in question did not design the casing by himself, he took it over from some preexisting, functional electronic device.


Don't try to justify it . the problem is not irgc or the casing . the problem was the guy who invented it . he represented the same device several time before for several different use and every time it was a fake.


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

Philosopher said:


> View attachment 673886



New Radar?


----------



## Philosopher

Blue In Green said:


> New Radar?



No, these have been talked about before. But they are both important radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## makranman

what is a "سوم خرداد فرمانی"? 


Messerschmitt said:


>


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310244357388357633^ Shalamche-2

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 672927
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *is this a radar ? Moragheb radar ?
> 
> View attachment 672928
> *


Rather bizarrely it actually seems to be a rocket launcher....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Check this episode..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Rather bizarrely it actually seems to be a rocket launcher....


well i will be damned

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

makranman said:


> what is a "سوم خرداد فرمانی"?



That is the version that was tested from the ship:

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> That is the version that was tested from the ship:
> 
> View attachment 674093
> 
> View attachment 674094


it looks too small


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> it looks too small



It's just the angle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

@skyshadow any news when will army or irgc unveil new ADs? Separ, oghab,dezful, navvab ....


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow any news when will army or irgc unveil new ADs? Separ, oghab,dezful, navvab ....


no but thing are chancing with Covid-19 pushing back some unveiling ceremonies and political orbit around Iran so i will say wait couple of months

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*Ghadir OTH radar *

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310873696236695553

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310880969025560576

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310897365256155136

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310915175730548738^ a second drone has allegedly been shot down by Iranian forces

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*2 UAVs in one day entered our sky, thing are heating up now IRGC is asking Army why did it let UAVs inter 188 km inside Iran airspace and that it was going to Iran nuclear facility in north.


IRGC is very worried &angry about Iranian late reaction to Azeri drone: "the drone came very close to nuclear facilitties in Bonab city. Maybe it wasn't related to Karabakh clashes but to Iranian nuclear issue". 


@Mithridates i told you last night this going to cost us alot its not just those ISIS fighters that me and @TheImmortal are worried about Azerbaijan let's Israel/Turkey do this to us from its airspace its extremely dangerous for us to let Azerbaijan go like that.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> *2 UAVs in one day entered our sky, thing are heating up now IRGC is asking Army why did it let UAVs inter 188 km inside Iran airspace and that it was going to Iran nuclear facility in north.
> 
> 
> IRGC is very worried &angry about Iranian late reaction to Azeri drone: "the drone came very close to nuclear facilitties in Bonab city. Maybe it wasn't related to Karabakh clashes but to Iranian nuclear issue".
> 
> 
> @Mithridates i told you last night this going to cost us alot its not just those ISIS fighters that me and @TheImmortal are worried about Azerbaijan let's Israel/Turkey do this to us from its airspace its extremely dangerous for us to let Azerbaijan go like that.*



may be bcz of last passenger aircraft incident...

And israelis are pretty sure behind of this. they made recent classes as a cover to spy on iran.

its no normal coincident to enter that much inside any border.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *2 UAVs in one day entered our sky, thing are heating up now IRGC is asking Army why did it let UAVs inter 188 km inside Iran airspace and that it was going to Iran nuclear facility in north.
> 
> IRGC is very worried &angry about Iranian late reaction to Azeri drone: "the drone came very close to nuclear facilitties in Bonab city. Maybe it wasn't related to Karabakh clashes but to Iranian nuclear issue".
> 
> 
> @Mithridates i told you last night this going to cost us alot its not just those ISIS fighters that me and @TheImmortal are worried about Azerbaijan let's Israel/Turkey do this to us from its airspace its extremely dangerous for us to let Azerbaijan go like that.*


If you look at this map, you can see that there are no ADs next to the turkish azeri armenian borders except for a hawk battery... maybe because it of that the drone was able to penetrate deep

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> may be bcz of last passenger aircraft incident...
> 
> And israelis are pretty sure behind of this. they made recent classes as a cover to spy on iran.
> 
> its no normal coincident to enter that much inside any border.




maybe, but we generally don't have medium to long range systems there , its not an small drone either as in came ~200 km in and say wanted to go ~300 km back to land it must have had at least 500- 600 km range


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> If you look at this map, you can see that there are no ADs next to the turkish azeri armenian borders except for a hawk battery... maybe because it of that the drone was able to penetrate deep


well there is some unknown short range AD systems there manly because its not an hot zone for Iran and we never expect an attack from there but im sure Iran will place some there now.


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> well there is some unknown short range AD systems there manly because its not an hot zone for Iran and we never expect an attack from there but im sure Iran will place some there now.


I think irgc tabas and 3rd khordad are placed around the whole country secretly. That’s one good thing about those systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> well there is some unknown short range AD systems there manly because its not an hot zone for Iran and we never expect an attack from there but im sure Iran will place some there now.


two 3rd khordad and several SHORAD can do the job.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*dose anyone know what is this system ?





*


----------



## Philosopher

The Zionists are using these Azeris as a launching ground for their spy UAVs. These Azeris better be extremely careful, Iran has only a limited amount of patience with them. If they're not careful they will end up becoming a testing grounding for Iranian military hardware and ultimately rejoin Iranian motherland.

Make no mistake, all it takes is for IRGC to get involved with the Armenians and take a few dozen accurate ballistic missiles and this combined with Armenia's current Iskander missiles means the Azeris will be finished. I am positive behind the scene the Azeris have been warned to tread very carefully. These artificial states have a short expiry date, if they continue to allow themselves to be used as pawns, this date becomes even shorter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Could it be a Bayraktar TB2 drone or are you sure it is an Israeli system?


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310943097426186254
Don’t be surprised if Azerbaijan and Turkey makes claim on Iranian Azerbaijan in the coming months if their campaign against Armenia is successful.


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> The Zionists are using these Azeris as a launching ground for their spy UAVs. These Azeris better be extremely careful, Iran has only a limited amount of patience with them. If they're not careful they will end up becoming a testing grounding for Iranian military hardware and ultimately rejoin Iranian motherland.
> 
> Make no mistake, all it takes is for IRGC to get involved with the Armenians and take a few dozen accurate ballistic missiles and this combined with Armenia's current Iskander missiles means the Azeris will be finished. I am positive behind the scene the Azeris have been warned to tread very carefully. These artificial states have a short expiry date, if they continue to allow themselves to be used as pawns, this date becomes even shorter.



The plan has become a lot more clear.

Turkey connects to North Syria to Northern Turkmen Iraq connect to Armenia connect Iranian Azerbaijan connect to Facist Azerbaijan connect to Turkmenistan

The “Turkmen” Crescent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

skyshadow said:


> *dose anyone know what is this system ?
> 
> 
> View attachment 674634
> *


It looks like SA-2 radar maybe modernized?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310943097426186254
> Don’t be surprised if Azerbaijan and Turkey makes claim on Iranian Azerbaijan in the coming months if their campaign against Armenia is successful.


So is this drone event from Iran or Turkey in your opinion?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Philip the Arab said:


> So is this drone event from Iran or Turkey in your opinion?



It’s Turkey/Azerbaijan. They are scouting Iranian air defenses and looking at Iranian border patrol and security.

why? Good question. Maybe to find ways to send terrorist cells into Iranian Azerbaijan to stroke a separatist movement. Time will tell.

Zionist have advanced spy satellites they don’t need to send drones to do simple surveillance. There focus is Iran forces in Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Philip the Arab said:


> Could it be a Bayraktar TB2 drone or are you sure it is an Israeli system?


well they are 2 drones one is suspected to came from Turkey , plus Azerbaijan has nothing to do with Iran nuclear facilities deep inside Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

skyshadow said:


> well they are 2 drones one is suspected to came from Turkey , plus Azerbaijan has nothing to do with Iran nuclear facilities deep inside Iran


Will Iran react? It must act if this is truly the reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philip the Arab said:


> Will Iran react? It must act if this is truly the reality.


Iran is saying nothing usually when we shot down a drone we announce it all over media but for these not even a word.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> The plan has become a lot more clear.
> 
> Turkey connects to North Syria to Northern Turkmen Iraq connect to Armenia connect Iranian Azerbaijan connect to Facist Azerbaijan connect to Turkmenistan
> 
> The “Turkmen” Crescent.



These Turks should get rid of Erdogan before he pushes them past a point of no return where their country tumbles down the drain. Turkey is far too weak and vulnerable to try and create such a projects with impunity. All it will take is for arms to start pouring into Turkey and it will be on its way to a civil war and balkanisation. The Zionists (amongst others) want nothing more than to send Turkey into Chaos and it seems Erdogan is dumb enough to not realise what's right in front of him as he is walking towards his fantasy.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

"It takes a long time to design such large-scale military operations. Azerbaijan had had this plan for a long time; it was not drawn up a few days before the start of the offensive," he told the "Caucasian Knot" correspondent on September 28









Military experts assess risks for Russia in aggravation of Karabakh conflict


Azerbaijan had been preparing well in advance for an operation in the Karabakh conflict zone, the Russian military experts interviewed by the "Caucasian Knot" believe. In their opinion, it will not be possible to quickly stop the flared up confrontation, but Russia can enter the warfare only if...




www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu





This isn’t Azerbaijan plan, but US/Turkey plan. The question now is this ultimately aimed at Iran and using “Armenia” as an excuse? We saw in 2006 with HZ war, 2010 with Syrian civil war, and 2014 ISIS war, that all these wars were ultimately aimed at weakening Iran.

Iran should be cautious and vigilant.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> These Turks should get rid of Erdogan before he pushes them past a point of no return where their country tumbles down the drain. Turkey is far too weak and vulnerable to try and create such a projects with impunity. All it will take is for arms to start pouring into Turkey and it will be on its way to a civil war and balkanisation. The Zionists (amongst others) want nothing more than to send Turkey into Chaos and it seems Erdogan is dumb enough to not realise what's right in front of him as he is walking towards his fantasy.



Turkish people are ignorant and power hungry and Uber-Nationalist. Look at what is happening in Turkey, Turkish people are driving through Armenia neighborhoods in turkey waving Turkish and Azeri flags.

US is trying to goat Russia or Iran to push back against Turkey in order to activate NATO defense clause.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philip the Arab

TheImmortal said:


> Turkish people are ignorant and power hungry and Uber-Nationalist. Look at what is happening in Turkey, Turkish people are driving through Armenia neighborhoods in turkey waving Turkish and Azeri flags.
> 
> US is trying to goat Russia or Iran to push back against Turkey in order to activate NATO defense clause.


Quite an interesting turn of events, if your theory of this being a US-Turkish war is true it would mean a lot. It would mean Turkey is trying to eliminate Iran as an opponent so that it can be the regional power, and that relations are not as good as it seems compared to the Rouhani-Erdogan public relations.

We shall see how this plays out, I wonder if Iran will assist Armenia in any way. I'll say right now, the possible defeat of Armenia will not benefit Iran and may be very detrimental. We shall also see if and how the Arab states with bad relations with Turkey react towards the situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1309554207297605638
Syrian terrorist sent to fight for Azerbaijan, angry that they have to help Shias

Reactions: Like Like:
 4 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Sineva

Early days for what would become the third of khordad......

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## makranman

about the thing shot down in azerbaijan;
there is this guy who is claiming it was a tactical ballistic missile and he claims they shot it down using 3rd of khordad or 15th of khordad sams.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310972966675587080


----------



## TheImmortal

makranman said:


> about the thing shot down in azerbaijan;
> there is this guy who is claiming it was a tactical ballistic missile and he claims they shot it down using 3rd of khordad or 15th of khordad sams.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310972966675587080



Impossible

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> "It takes a long time to design such large-scale military operations. Azerbaijan had had this plan for a long time; it was not drawn up a few days before the start of the offensive," he told the "Caucasian Knot" correspondent on September 28
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Military experts assess risks for Russia in aggravation of Karabakh conflict
> 
> 
> Azerbaijan had been preparing well in advance for an operation in the Karabakh conflict zone, the Russian military experts interviewed by the "Caucasian Knot" believe. In their opinion, it will not be possible to quickly stop the flared up confrontation, but Russia can enter the warfare only if...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This isn’t Azerbaijan plan, but US/Turkey plan. The question now is this ultimately aimed at Iran and using “Armenia” as an excuse? We saw in 2006 with HZ war, 2010 with Syrian civil war, and 2014 ISIS war, that all these wars were ultimately aimed at weakening Iran.
> 
> Iran should be cautious and vigilant.



No, this is a Azerbijian/Turkey plan, they've always wanted to destroy Armenia.


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran denies allowing passage of weapons into Armenia after video emerges on social media


Iran has denied allowing the passage of weapons bound for Armenia after unverified video footage was on September 29 posted on social media showing ...




www.intellinews.com


----------



## skyshadow

*today IRGC took responsibility for downing of a unknown UAV *


*تایید اسقاط یک پهپاد متجاوز در استان آذربایجان شرقی*










تایید اسقاط یک پهپاد متجاوز در استان آذربایجان شرقی


جانشین معاون هماهنگ کننده سپاه پاسداران درباره اسقاط یک پهپاد متجاوز در استان آذربایجان شرقی گفت: امروز رزمندگان ما در حوالی ظهر توانستند یک پهپادی که حالا سرنوشتش مشخص می شود را در ملکان در استان آذربایجان شرقی ساقط کنند، لذا حواس نیروهای ما جمع است.




donya-e-eqtesad.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

They already massacred 1 million Armenians. Now they want to basically cut right through Armenian land as well.

The issue for Turkey is that they have a very tiny, narrow strip of land connecting them to the border with a western chunk of Azerbaijani territory which is also cut off from the main eastern chunk of Azerbaijan.

If the Azerbaijanis with help from Turkey, are able to take Nagorno-Karabakh, their next goal would be to connect the largest eastern chunk of Azerbaijan with the western chunk which is narrowly connected to Turkey. If that were to happen, the next natural move would be to take more Armenian territory to connect the two.

However even with the two Azerbaijani chunks of territory connected, the narrow connection to Turkey would still be a nuisance. Then the next natural progression would be either taking even more Armenian land or even eyeing Iranian territory in the south.

In my opinion, this is why Iran should be really weary of any shift in the balance of power in that region. I'm guessing that Iran is already sending vital troops and equipment to the north. The way Iran quickly shot down that drone that went into Iranian territory was a good indication.

So far the results between the two sides have been mixed. Azerbaijan has been able to use Turkish drones and has hit several Armenian columns and destroyed many air defense units, close to 10. However the Armenians have shot down more than a dozen Azeri aircraft, including helicopters, drones, planes and they have also destroyed a large quantity of Azerbaijani armor.

Remember Armenia has a population of 3 million. Azerbaijan 10 million and Turkey 80 million. I don't think the world or regional countries will accept Turkey getting deeply involved. Turkey is already sending thousands of Syrian/international mercenaries and paying them $1500 a month. However the Lira is now at an all time low and looks to be free falling. At the same time the Saudi's have banned all Turkish products and the EU is very close to imposing fresh sanctions.

I doubt if Iran will need to do anything, since Russia will not tolerate a major Turkish incursion into Armenia and worse case scenario Armenia will ask for Russian military assistance to secure their territorial integrity. I'm more than certain that Erdogan knows better than to mess with Iran. Iran could rain down hundreds of missiles on Azerbaijan and cripple their military within a day or two.

Anyways, I'm going to keep my eyes on this. Hopefully things will not get out of hand, but who knows what the future holds. Only time will tell. However in my opinion, Armenians would be smart to buy air defenses, ATGM's, loitering munitions and drones from Iran.

The Karrar drone for example would be perfect for Armenia. A cheap yet effective way of intercepting Turkish drones. The Samad or Mohajer would also be a good option for them.

The Armenians have lost close to 10x 9K33 OSA air defense systems. Something like the Sayyad or Ya Zahra would be perfect for them.

Although Iran is denying it, I'm more than certain that Iran is not going to give up the chance to sell weapons to Armenia to deter Turkish expansionism.















EU mulls new economic sanctions against Turkey


According to public statements of high-ranking representatives, the EU is considering whether to impose new economic sanctions against Turkey. On…




www.lexology.com













As Greece And EU Lags, Saudi Arabia Announces Embargo On All Turkish Products


At a time when the European Union and Greece lag and delay in announcing sanctions against Turkey, Saudi Arabia announced that they are imposing an embargo on




greekcitytimes.com






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311061647688114176

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311051418527240194

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311043248123793417

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310980552489668609





LOSTARMOUR | Военно-аналитический портал |







lostarmour.info







Stryker1982 said:


> No, this is a Azerbijian/Turkey plan, they've always wanted to destroy Armenia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311260223970082816

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311261420785479680Can somebody translate?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311260223970082816
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311261420785479680Can somebody translate?


A ground-based version of the Kamand CIWS in the anti-cruise missile role is being produced by the Iranian Ministry of Defence. It uses a phased-array radar sytem, the "Fath-630" gatling cannon and the "Azarakhsh" missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

Messerschmitt said:


> A ground-based version of the Kamand CIWS in the anti-cruise missile role is being produced by the Iranian Ministry of Defence. It uses a phased-array radar sytem, the "Fath-630" gatling cannon and the "Azarakhsh" missile.


@skyshadow sounds great... Your thoughts?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> A ground-based version of the Kamand CIWS in the anti-cruise missile role is being produced by the Iranian Ministry of Defence. It uses a phased-array radar sytem, the "Fath-630" gatling cannon and the "Azarakhsh" missile.



Is this one of the already announced Short range AD systems in development?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311260223970082816
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311261420785479680Can somebody translate?



*long story short


very good, test versions have been made but not with AESA radar that was bad idea now they add the expansive radar, so basically they going to bring this*









*and we are mounting these on it plus an small AESA radar and optics for passive mode its both for cruise missiles and drones *

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Is this one of the already announced Short range AD systems in development?


Separ ? it sure sounds like it


----------



## Messerschmitt

skyshadow said:


> Separ ? it sure sounds like it


Separ is supposed to be based on the Pantsir-S1 according to what we now. Maybe, this ground-based Kamand CIWS is one of the air-defense systems whose names (Dezful, Navvab, Shahid Majid) where mentioned on Iran's defense industry day last month or a completely different one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *long story short
> 
> 
> very good, test versions have been made but not with AESA radar that was bad idea now they add the expansive radar, so basically they going to bring this*
> 
> View attachment 674835
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *and we are mounting these on it plus an small AESA radar and optics for passive mode its both for cruise missiles and drones *
> 
> View attachment 674838
> 
> 
> View attachment 674839
> 
> 
> View attachment 674879


Bro the ASR is a naval passive radar And it is big to be put on a truck🤔Plus the azarakh missile isn’t that good compared to pantsir missiles, looks like sidewinder missile and not radar guided...


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Bro the ASR is a naval passive radar And it is big to be put on a truck🤔Plus the azarakh missile isn’t that good compared to pantsir missiles, looks like sidewinder missile and not radar guided...


pictures are archive brother just to give you en example, there are alot more to come Azarakhsh is just one of them don't be so rough on it plus IRGC has its own projects too this is defense ministry's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> pictures are archive brother just to give you en example, there are alot more to come Azarakhsh is just one of them don't be so rough on it plus IRGC has its own projects too this is defense ministry's.


Oh I understand, but when shaltouki said that kamand with azarkhsh i was surprised, because azarakhsh has a very low altitude and low range.


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Oh I understand, but when shaltouki said that kamand with azarkhsh i was surprised, because azarakhsh has a very low altitude and low range.


yes about 12 km max


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> yes about 12 km max



Similar to Pantsir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> US is trying to goat Russia or Iran to push back against Turkey in order to activate NATO defense clause.


I know what you mean, but the good news is that if they hit Turkey outside Turkey, then NATO clause cant be easily activated, because Turkey got HIT whle going o the offensive, in other non-NATO countries, on non-NATO mission...like in Syria...Iran and Russia have hit Turkish troops, even if indirectly...did NATO Come help Turkey in Libya and SYria??? NOOOOO..so there are loopholes, but they have to play careful..looks liek TUrkey is replacing US as main aggressive NATO force in ME...but Russia and Iran can cut off Turkey's "tentacles"(like Azerbaijan)though...


----------



## 925boy

Philip the Arab said:


> Quite an interesting turn of events, if your theory of this being a US-Turkish war is true it would mean a lot. It would mean Turkey is trying to eliminate Iran as an opponent so that it can be the regional power, and that relations are not as good as it seems compared to the Rouhani-Erdogan public relations.
> 
> We shall see how this plays out, I wonder if Iran will assist Armenia in any way. I'll say right now, the possible defeat of Armenia will not benefit Iran and may be very detrimental. We shall also see if and how the Arab states with bad relations with Turkey react towards the situation.


Exactly! i am feeling confident that either IRan, or Iran + Russia will soon activate a plan to limit Turkey's aggressive adventurism..Iran knows where to hit Turkey- PKK...Iran get assemble Kurds to make southern Turkey hell, Iran just didnt do it because relations were good, but now that Erdogan is showing his hand, just watch, "weird incidents" will soon start happening to Turkish forces or proxies...Turkey already sent a big ISIS guy from Syria to Azerbaijan..i hope that puts to the rest the argument that Turkey doesnt support ISIS- TUrkey manages ISIS on behalf of NATO!- there is not enough proof that shows otherwise.


----------



## skyshadow

*drones coming from Azerbaijan seem to want to go here*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> yes about 12 km max


Btw the first is for irgc, second for army. How about the other 3?


----------



## skyshadow

*it seems Azerbaijan has again hit Iran with some kind of racket today, one of these days some innocent Iranian is going to get killed.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Btw the first is for irgc, second for army. How about the other 3?


how can it be for IRGC when it's being built by Army, IRGC can buy it if the want.


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> how can it be for IRGC when it's being built by Army, IRGC can buy it if the want.


Oh an iranian friend told me it is for irgc. All built for army?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Oh an iranian friend told me it is for irgc. All built for army?


let me make it easy 



Oghab - *built by Army for Army* 
Separ - *built by Army for Army* 
Dezful *built by Defense Ministry for Army* *and IRGC*
Navvab *built by Defense Ministry for Army* *and IRGC*
(Shahid) Majid *built by Defense Ministry for Army* *and IRGC*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311260223970082816
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311261420785479680Can somebody translate?


It probably is mounted on some kind of vehicle. Is this Iranian counterpart of Pantsir? @PeeD


----------



## skyshadow

here we go where are our short range air defenses? , *Cross-border rockets damage houses, injuring a child in a village in Iran


Cross-border rockets damage houses, injuring a child in a village in Iran East Azarbaijan. Several rockets have already fallen on Iranian soil amid deadly military confrontation between Azerbaijan and Armenia in Karabağ. 



 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311620658288304128*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*3 shells landed in Parvizkhanlu, Iran. Spill over from the Armenia and Azerbaijan conflict. One child was injured, 6 houses were damaged *

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*According to this report, now Armenia and Azerbaijan have taken shots at helicopters either forcing them to land in Iran or crashed there. 



 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311615940929433600*


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> *3 shells landed in Parvizkhanlu, Iran. Spill over from the Armenia and Azerbaijan conflict. One child was injured, 6 houses were damaged *
> 
> 
> View attachment 675130
> 
> 
> View attachment 675131
> 
> 
> View attachment 675132



As much as I hate saying this, if this happened to Israel. The Zionist IDF wouldn't have waited a single-second to spring into action and take revenge for such an incident. 

I guess we will just have to wait and see what Iran will do. Such events on the border CANNOT be allowed to happen. Innocent Iranians who have zero to do with their war will end up killed very soon and Iran will be faced with the choice of doing something or nothing at all. 

Move men, artillery, missiles and defense assets in larger numbers to the North with a FIRM zero quarter warning to any side that makes "mistakes" like this one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghfarm007

Iran needs to declaire a safe zone of 40 km in te war zone, where any forces there will be destroyed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Raghfarm007 said:


> Iran needs to declaire a safe zone of 40 km in te war zone, where any forces there will be destroyed.



At the very least openly move military assets to the North and send overt signaling to either side that such incidents like this one should not be repeated and if they are, swift military responses will be enacted. 

Iran holds military supremacy over both Azerbaijan and Armenia and could easily destroy tactical assets on both sides in short order if needed. 

Azerbaijans use of foreign Jihadi mercenaries is quite concerning though... I can't imagine such a course of action would be good for the caucus region in the long-run. Iran has openly stated it won't allow terrorists to set up shop right on their border. What remains to be seen is what I.R.I is willing to do about it.


----------



## aryobarzan

Blue In Green said:


> At the very least openly move military assets to the North and send overt signaling to either side that such incidents like this one should not be repeated and if they are, swift military responses will be enacted.
> 
> Iran holds military supremacy over both Azerbaijan and Armenia and could easily destroy tactical assets on both sides in short order if needed.
> 
> Azerbaijans use of foreign Jihadi mercenaries is quite concerning though... I can't imagine such a course of action would be good for the caucus region in the long-run. Iran has openly stated it won't allow terrorists to set up shop right on their border. What remains to be seen is what I.R.I is willing to do about it.





Blue In Green said:


> At the very least openly move military assets to the North and send overt signaling to either side that such incidents like this one should not be repeated and if they are, swift military responses will be enacted.
> 
> Iran holds military supremacy over both Azerbaijan and Armenia and could easily destroy tactical assets on both sides in short order if needed.
> 
> Azerbaijans use of foreign Jihadi mercenaries is quite concerning though... I can't imagine such a course of action would be good for the caucus region in the long-run. Iran has openly stated it won't allow terrorists to set up shop right on their border. What remains to be seen is what I.R.I is willing to do about it.


quite possible that "accidental" landing of ammo or drone flights from Azarbiagan into Iranian territory is instigated by the Israeli agents openly operating in Azarbiajan to bring Iran into an open conflict with Azarbiagan. It also gives them a chance to probe Iranian Air Defence operation and readiness in that area for future Israel ops against Iran from Azarbiagan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*The source says about mortar shells, but on the photo it seems the remains of a 122mm rocket. *


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> *dose anyone know what is this system ?
> 
> 
> View attachment 674634
> *


Sayyad 1 AD missle system, Chinese Copy

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*Arash radar control room *


----------



## Arminkh

Blue In Green said:


> As much as I hate saying this, if this happened to Israel. The Zionist IDF wouldn't have waited a single-second to spring into action and take revenge for such an incident.
> 
> I guess we will just have to wait and see what Iran will do. Such events on the border CANNOT be allowed to happen. Innocent Iranians who have zero to do with their war will end up killed very soon and Iran will be faced with the choice of doing something or nothing at all.
> 
> Move men, artillery, missiles and defense assets in larger numbers to the North with a FIRM zero quarter warning to any side that makes "mistakes" like this one.


One of them was part of Iran not such a long time ago and are in fact Iranians regardless of what they call themselves and the other is a long standing ally of Iran since Sassanid era. Unlike Israel, Iran has family ties in the region that should be respected.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran should increase the use of similar items for counter surveillance warfare 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311348416161685505

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Azerbaijan is using Israeli ballistic missiles near Iran where's Bavar when you need one 

( the accuracy though )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> Azerbaijan is using Israeli ballistic missiles near Iran where's Bavar when you need one
> 
> ( the accuracy though )
> 
> View attachment 675433


so they r targeting iran?


----------



## Saleh99

Shams313 said:


> so they r targeting iran?


They targeted a bridge where armenia uses it as a supply route from its country to Nagorno-Karabakh.


----------



## skyshadow

Shams313 said:


> so they r targeting iran?


no but near Iran which make it so dangerous, if it malfunction then alot of Iranians will get killed we need Bavar-373 for safety of our ppl installed near the border


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> Azerbaijan is using Israeli ballistic missiles near Iran where's Bavar when you need one
> 
> ( the accuracy though )
> 
> View attachment 675433



Looks like LORA

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Looks like LORA


it dose


----------



## skyshadow

*20+ mortar shells from the fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia falls in #Iran.Mortars reportedly hit banks of Aras River & Aslandouz village in Ardebil province, neighboring Azerbaijan. Local villagers reportedly leaving their homes in fear of damage. 



Authorities in Iran’s Ardebil, Azerbaijan fear mortar shells would hit a dam close to Aslandouz village. The Iran-Azerbaijan Friendship Dam waters vast farmlands in NW. Iranian Foreign Ministry & Border Guards Police warned Azerbaijan & Armenia of danger of mortars. 










 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312082195096444930*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Azeri drones are absolutely demolishing Armenia infantry and vehicles.

It’s similar to how Syria got demolished by Turkish drones.

It makes you wonder why they cannot detect these drones?


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> Azeri drones are absolutely demolishing Armenia infantry and vehicles.
> 
> It’s similar to how Syria got demolished by Turkish drones.
> 
> It makes you wonder why they cannot detect these drones?



Syrian air defences were almost non existent minus some Pantsir that were clearly not up to the job (due to radar issues), but when Russians started bringing in other air defences, the Turkish UAVs started falling like flies and they ended up asking for a ceasefire. Armenians also have mostly antiquated air defences, this combined with the fact the Azaris are using their UAVs from mountainous covers, this makes it hard for the Armenians to properly respond. The truly disappointing part of all this is actually a lack of Armenia's own UAVs. The Azeris were getting quite humiliated before they started pouring in all these UAVs footages which helped their propaganda. Armenia needs to start using UAVs. This is a proof against those that claimed Iran is helping Armenia with arms. If Iran was truly helping them, the Azeri army right now would be getting decimated.

On a side note, Iranians were using UAVs right from the 80's before most these other nations even heard of them. This combined with the increasing roles of accurate ballistic missiles in the world, it just goes to show you the Iranian military planners did a great job predicting the use of these systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> Azeri drones are absolutely demolishing Armenia infantry and vehicles.
> 
> It’s similar to how Syria got demolished by Turkish drones.
> 
> It makes you wonder why they cannot detect these drones?


In syria, SYADs weren’t ready at the beginning, besides the present of some pantsir systems. Pantsir system standing alone can’t work,radar problem and can be jammed, and the syrian army lacked a proper AD network, until the last days were BUKs started working. In Nagorno-Karabakh, they only have soviet era ADs OSA and Strela systems and they are easily jammed. OSA has a bad radar and a Max range 10km, and TB2 drones can hit them easily from weak sides at an 8km distance. Don’t forget they’re old man. If I want to add and talk about libya, pantsir at first did a great job and shot down 15-20 TB2s. Most of the pantsirs got hit in libya while they were Off and getting moved on the road, or in hangars. The main problem was that the pantsirs in syria or libya sometimes weren’t getting warned by an early warning radar, max engagement is 12km, turks knew the their positions, hit them from a 7-8 km distance and the pantsir had a very short time to react. SHORADS won’t act well if they aren’t placed in an IADS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*it seems we don't have any short range air defense systems that are good for this job, do you guys feel it now ? we need Oqab and Separ asap *




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312126062583717888


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312129721119830016

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mithridates

aside from how effective shorad are against drones, it's important to note that at the end of the day drones are easily replaceable but not ADs. we should produce drones like candies.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*either a new radar which has been built for object that dive at sharp degrees like ballistic missiles or that it's a broken model of a new radar*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

skyshadow said:


> *either a new radar which has been built for object that dive at sharp degrees like ballistic missiles or that it's a broken model of a new radar*
> 
> 
> View attachment 675619


The name of this radar system is "Boshra": https://tn.ai/1730958

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> *it seems we don't have any short range air defense systems that are good for this job, do you guys feel it now ? we need Oqab and Separ asap *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312126062583717888
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312129721119830016



It would not work against high altitude. But against subsonic CMs and inflying bombs.



Mithridates said:


> aside from how effective shorad are against drones, it's important to note that at the end of the day drones are easily replaceable but not ADs. we should produce drones like candies.



Doesnt Iran has a modified version of crotale with high altitude of 12000m and range of 25km? That would be a low cost option if integrated in arial radar and air defence systems. Also option are drones with air to air missiles, what Iran also already has if i remember well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> It would not work against high altitude. But against subsonic CMs and inflying bombs.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt Iran has a modified version of crotale with high altitude of 12000m and range of 25km? That would be a low cost option if integrated in arial radar and air defence systems. Also option are drones with air to air missiles, what Iran also already has if i remember well.


mortars are not flying fast they are free falling easy to hit Israel is doing it US is doing it


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> mortars are not flying fast they are free falling easy to hit Israel is doing it US is doing it
> 
> View attachment 675754



Ah, i thought we talk about defence against drones, sorry

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> Ah, i thought we talk about defence against drones, sorry


no apologize needed brother, yes north of Iran is being hit with 122mm rackets and mortars


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> no apologize needed brother, yes north of Iran is being hit with 122mm rackets and mortars



Me think laser is best against mortars and rockets. I am sure Iran already do tests with laser cram.


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> Me think laser is best against mortars and rockets. I am sure Iran already do tests with laser cram.


Iran already said they build and use laser weapons to protect sites and shot down fighter jets i don't know if they can make them that small and mobile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> Iran already said they build and use laser weapons to protect sites and shot down fighter jets i don't know if they can make them that small and mobile



Yes, the point is not to build that, but to fit it in standardized military cases/boxes/containers including power supply so one can put it on any truck and move and position it where it is needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Did iran Acquire the russian Krasukha EW?
@skyshadow


----------



## Philosopher

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312457085787934720

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philip the Arab

Philosopher said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312457085787934720


Could DIRCM work or no?


----------



## Philosopher

Philip the Arab said:


> Could DIRCM work or no?



Certainly not. These missiles come at the target *from above*, by the time the target even knows what is happening, it will be too late for them.

Missile diving down at target:








Watch video below from 2:30

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

@PeeD

What is the advantage of the uee of Magnesium fluoride dome over the transparent dome systems? Extra thermal resistance?

Now something fantastic is proven, that Sevome Khordad can function in a purely passive mode as well as active. This system is without a doubt one of the greatest military achievement of Iran and hands down one of the best air defences globally.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

Philosopher said:


> @PeeD
> 
> What is the advantage of the uee of Magnesium fluoride dome over the transparent dome systems? Extra thermal resistance?
> 
> Now something fantastic is proven, that Sevome Khordad can function in a purely passive mode as well as active. This system is without a doubt one of the greatest military achievement of Iran and hands down one of the best air defences globally.



Well its the material of choice for medium IR band. Zolfaghar Basir uses clear "glass" for example and is exposed to highest thermal stress levels.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

PeeD said:


> Well its the material of choice for medium IR band. Zolfaghar Basir uses clear "glass" for example and is exposed to highest thermal stress levels.



Mamnoon dadash. How do you think the Sevome Khordad will evolve? Will we see a 200km range missile for it? Broadly speaking, what are your thoughts regarding the future of Iran's long range air defence programs?

Having said that, I think right now most people are more excited to see our SHORAD programs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Philosopher said:


> Mamnoon dadash. How do you think the Sevome Khordad will evolve? Will we see a 200km range missile for it? Broadly speaking, what are your thoughts regarding the future of Iran's long range air defence programs?
> 
> Having said that, I think right now most people are more excited to see our SHORAD programs.



Actually it is already a near ideal system for the IRGC doctrine, so I don't know what cost efficient upgrade would come next. Its all about cost effectiveness which results in number of systems deployed.

IRGC long range SAM programs could be unveiled pretty soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Did iran Acquire the russian Krasukha EW?
> @skyshadow


i think its been 2 years now


----------



## Draco.IMF

so there are rumours russia will be ready to delivery the S-400 AD System to Iran as soon as embargo ends
the question is why iran wants it if its allegedly capable of producing its own system with same capabilities?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IranDefence

skyshadow said:


> Azerbaijan is using Israeli ballistic missiles near Iran where's Bavar when you need one
> 
> ( the accuracy though )
> 
> View attachment 675433

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sha ah

It wouldn't be a bad addition but I believe that Iran should only purchase it if the Russians are willing to give Iran the algorithms. Unlike with Turkey, Russia really doesn't need to worry about Iran as much since Iran isn't part of NATO and isn't trying to expand its territory into the Russian sphere of influence like Turkey. In any case, Iran could just build more Bavar systems instead of the S-400 but we'll see what happens.




Draco.IMF said:


> so there are rumours russia will be ready to delivery the S-400 AD System to Iran as soon as embargo ends
> the question is why iran wants it if its allegedly capable of producing its own system with same capabilities?


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Draco.IMF said:


> so there are rumours russia will be ready to delivery the S-400 AD System to Iran as soon as embargo ends
> the question is why iran wants it if its allegedly capable of producing its own system with same capabilities?



Hi Draco,

I think Iran urgently needs modern jet fighters. If the indigenous fighter projects have great progress and advances, I think the HUGE amount of money for purchasing some tens of SU-30/SU-35 (SU-57 will be not available till several years, in an optimisticaly thinking) would be far better used in indigenous projects.

About S-400 systems, this would be a cheaper purchase. But Iran has an extremely advance AD network so I would think it's not necessary. But adding some extra elements (and "different" and advanced ones) would make this network even more solid. so it's not a silly thing.

But also I think this purchase is directly related to fighter jets purchases:
Since the iranian budget is very limited, if there is S-400 purchase, it will mean no fighter jet purchase (and it would also mean indigenous fighter projects are very advanced in development, to fill the gap-necessity).
And if there is no S-400 purchase it would mean there will be some fighter jets purchase.

Also I think Iran will learn from this russian items purchased, in terms of science and tech.
I think after october 18th (end of weapon sanctions) there will be some "movements" in term of Iran purchases. And EVEN MORE IMPORTANT: SINCE OCTOBER 18TH IRAN WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE WEAPONS TO ANY NATION IN THE WORLD (not covertly as now, but openly)


----------



## Philosopher

Iran must not waste a single penny on S-400. Iran has stated already that Bavar itself will surpass the S-400 in the next 2 years. To be frank, this should not be a problem as Bavar is already quite close to S-400. Iran's long range air defence focus should become producing systems capable of dealing with next generation threats, i.e the manoeuvring hypersonic systems. Depending on its capability, the S-500 *may* be a potential canditate for purchase.

As I have said already, Iran could make a one time large purchase of fighter jets to give its airforce a major boost but all other investments must go into its own industries. Iran has many impressive projects in field like ground forces and navy, but the rate of development/manufacture is too slow. This needs to be dealt with.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> Iran must not waste a single penny on S-400. Iran has stated already that Bavar itself will surpass the S-400 in the next 2 years. To be frank, this should not be a problem as Bavar is already quite close to S-400. Iran's long range air defence focus should become producing systems capable of dealing with next generation threats, i.e the manoeuvring hypersonic systems. Depending on its capability, the S-500 *may* be a potential canditate for purchase.
> 
> As I have said already, Iran could make a one time large purchase of fighter jets to give its airforce a major boost but all other investments must go into its own industries. Iran has many impressive projects in field like ground forces and navy, but the rate of development/manufacture is too slow. This needs to be dealt with.


I agree with you. But maybe iran at that moment needs additional Long Range Systems from russia and SHORADS, until the BAVAR is mass produced and the other Iranian SHORADS are operational and mass produced also. But for me, iran needs immediately 3-4 Squadrons of jets, or make a deal with russia or china to cooperate in this field. Navy future looks bright according to the available projects.


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> I agree with you. But maybe iran at that moment needs additional Long Range Systems from russia and SHORADS, until the BAVAR is mass produced and the other Iranian SHORADS are operational and mass produced also. But for me, iran needs immediately 3-4 Squadrons of jets, or make a deal with russia or china to cooperate in this field. Navy future looks bright according to the available projects.



Long range and SHORADS systems are already made, they just need mass production. So no need for the Russians. I would go as far as saying Iranian SHOARDS would be be much better suited to the modern conflict due to Iran's experience in dealing with UAVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> Long range and SHORADS systems are already made, they just need mass production. So no need for the Russians. I would go as far as saying Iranian SHOARDS would be be much better suited to the modern conflict due to Iran's experience in dealing with UAVs.


Yes i agree. The only issue is mass production.


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> Yes i agree. The only issue is mass production.



To be specific, we don't know the mass production rate, so we are essentially guessing. For we know Iran could have far more of these air defence systems than we think.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> To be specific, we don't know the pass production rate, so we are essentially guessing. For we know Iran could have far more of these air defence systems than we think.


I think that’s one thing with 3rd khordad. I believe it is produced in big numbers, but only 2-3 locations are known to be covered by this system.


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> I think that’s one thing with 3rd khordad. I believe it is produced in big numbers, but only 2-3 locations are known to be covered by this system.



We know many of Iran's assets are underground. What you see is usually the tip of the ice-berg, this probably also refers to air defence missiles as well.


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> We know many of Iran's assets are underground. What you see is usually the tip of the ice-berg, this probably also refers to air defence missiles as well.


True, for example zolfaghar basir was ready 2-3 years ago, but they unveiled it a week ago. That’s part of the asymmetric war.


----------



## Shams313

Saleh99 said:


> True, for example zolfaghar basir was ready 2-3 years ago, but they unveiled it a week ago. That’s part of the asymmetric war.


I don't see em....where they r...? Any image ir video..?


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> We know many of Iran's assets are underground. What you see is usually the tip of the ice-berg, this probably also refers to air defence missiles as well.



it wouldn’t make sense to put air defense missiles underground.

Iran doesn’t have as many air defense systems as you think.

S-500 would be great addition to arm forces. S-300 order was actually not sufficient enough in terms of battalions.


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> it wouldn’t make sense to put air defense missiles underground.
> 
> Iran doesn’t have as many air defense systems as you think.
> 
> S-500 would be great addition to arm forces. S-300 order was actually not sufficient enough in terms of battalions.


I think a big number of irgc Air Defense systems are scattered and hidden, especially tabas and 3rd khordad. They creat ambushes for jets or drones penetrating the Iranian airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> I think a big number of irgc Air Defense systems are scattered and hidden, especially tabas and 3rd khordad. They creat ambushes for jets or drones penetrating the Iranian airspace.



They are within a radius of their respective bases. After all they don’t just drive to the middle of no where and stay for days/weeks. They have shifts like all soldiers. Which means there must be a common military point where the system returns to switch out personnel.

During war time it’s a different story.


----------



## Mithridates

Draco.IMF said:


> so there are rumours russia will be ready to delivery the S-400 AD System to Iran as soon as embargo ends
> the question is why iran wants it if its allegedly capable of producing its own system with same capabilities?


it's just my opinion, i think Russia might try to sell s-400 or s-500 for Iran as they are defensive weapons and weapon embargo does not include defensive weapons. now why Iran might want to buy it?? because we already paid the money for su-30 and yak-130s and if Russia can't deliver them we have to buy other things they can provide.
Russia is gauging it's options i guess.


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> it's just my opinion, i think Russia might try to sell s-400 or s-500 for Iran as they are defensive weapons and weapon embargo does not include defensive weapons. now why Iran might want to buy it?? because we already paid the money for su-30 and yak-130s and if Russia can't deliver them we have to buy other things they can provide.
> Russia is gauging it's options i guess.



Dadash, Who said Iran already paid the money for Su-30?


----------



## Mithridates

Philosopher said:


> Dadash, Who said Iran already paid the money for Su-30?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Mithridates said:


> View attachment 676140



 I hope not dadash, I think Iran should at minimum go for su-35. But we'll see how it turns out. We'll know soon enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> I hope not dadash, I think Iran should at minimum go for su-35. But we'll see how it turns out. We'll know soon enough.


The newest version of su-30 (su-30sm2) is approximately the same as su-35 btw. Best plane iran can get is the su-35, because I dk if Russia will export the su-57 To iran, or china the J-20.


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> The newest version of su-30 (su-30sm2) is approximately the same as su-35 btw. Best plane iran can get is the su-35, because I dk if Russia will export the su-57 To iran, or china the J-20.



We're going off topic here, I have moved the discussion to the airforce thread.


----------



## Philosopher

jupiter2007 said:


> Just compare the R&D budget of Iran, Russia and China. Iranian does have the technology to build anything even closer to Russian defence system. Iranian system (Babar-373) is crap compare to Russian S-300, S-350 and S-400.



Iranian Bavar-373 is superior to S-300/350 in every parameter, read article below:









Iranian Bavar-373 long range air defence system- A quantum leap in Iran's air defence capability


Author: Philosopher Category: Air defence In 2007, an Iran with a very limited air defence network signed a contract with the Russians for the S-300 air defence system to help protect its air space from a potential airstrike. That deal ended up being embroiled in the tense political...



defence.pk





Morever, Iranian air defences have shown their capabilities in practise already, see RQ-4 incident etc. Do some research before commenting on such topics.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## IranDefence

Mithridates said:


> it's just my opinion, i think Russia might try to sell s-400 or s-500 for Iran as they are defensive weapons and weapon embargo does not include defensive weapons. now why Iran might want to buy it?? because we already paid the money for su-30 and yak-130s and if Russia can't deliver them we have to buy other things they can provide.
> Russia is gauging it's options i guess.



No man it's almost a norm in maket of sellers , if you wanna some technologies you should buy sth else too

Iran needed some air defense and anti ship missiles Chinese forced Iran to but their Abgarmkon (F7) too ....I remember one of commanders said this in a documentary show

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313046629398740992Afaik, mersad-16 is operational, but upgrading all the mersad systems to mersad-16 gives the IRIAD a huge boost and makes it more survivable.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Iskander

https://msai.ir/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Iranian-radars.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*2 more +1000 KM phased array Qadir radars came on stream today, bringing the number of active IRGC-made Qadir radars in Iran to 8. Iran army (Artesh) chief Abdolrahim Mousavi and IRGC Aerospace Force chief Hajizadeh attended the launch.*
















پایگاه خبری سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی - الحاق دو سامانه راداری قدیر نیروی هوافضای سپاه به شبکه پدافندی کشور


سپاه نیوز ؛دو سامانه راداری قدیر ساخته شده توسط نیروی هوافضای سپاه با حضور فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم الانبیا (ص) و سردار امیرعلی حاجی زاده به...




www.sepahnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## skyshadow

*These two radars are located in Yazd and Kerman provinces, and another Qadir radar is scheduled to be launched in Chabahar in the next three months - according to Sardar Hajizadeh, commander of the IRGC aerospace Force.*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

skyshadow said:


> *These two radars are located in Yazd and Kerman provinces, and another Qadir radar is scheduled to be launched in Chabahar in the next three months - according to Sardar Hajizadeh, commander of the IRGC aerospace Force.*



When the Chabahar one goes live, then it would be 9 total Qadir radars? I'm guessing they're planning for over 10 in the long run.


----------



## skyshadow

Blue In Green said:


> When the Chabahar one goes live, then it would be 9 total Qadir radars? I'm guessing they're planning for over 10 in the long run.


yes, well they never said they going to stop so no not even 10 is the final goal


----------



## Philosopher

These radars are very capable and important as early warning systems. Now awaiting for the 3000km ranged Seperh to be _officially_ inaugurated.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Philosopher

" Qadir radar images that joined the country's air defense network today
The main change compared to the previous model of Qadir radar is the increase of transmitter antennas and their installation outside the center of the radar as four sets of dual antennas (8 antennas in total).
The previous model had only one transmitter antenna in the center of the radar."


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313529275740557312

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> These radars are very capable and important as early warning systems. Now awaiting for the 3000km ranged Seperh to be _officially_ inaugurated.


Did they unveil the seperh? If yes, any pictures?


----------



## Philosopher

Saleh99 said:


> Did they unveil the seperh? If yes, any pictures?



Nothing official has been shown. Only pictures of it were some old satellite photos.


----------



## aziqbal

is this the system that shot down the civilian airliner?


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313536279292850178

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

aziqbal said:


> is this the system that shot down the civilian airliner?


how can a* radar *shoot down an *object *?


the system that shot down civilian airliner was a *Russian* *Tor surface to air missile system* not Iranian.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313511837284130825

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

I was watching the documentary on 3rd khordad, I realized there is a radar in Abu Musa Island with approx 300km range. Could it be Bashir Radar ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Philosopher said:


> Iran must not waste a single penny on S-400. Iran has stated already that Bavar itself will surpass the S-400 in the next 2 years. To be frank, this should not be a problem as Bavar is already quite close to S-400. Iran's long range air defence focus should become producing systems capable of dealing with next generation threats, i.e the manoeuvring hypersonic systems. Depending on its capability, the S-500 *may* be a potential canditate for purchase.
> 
> As I have said already, Iran could make a one time large purchase of fighter jets to give its airforce a major boost but all other investments must go into its own industries. Iran has many impressive projects in field like ground forces and navy, but the rate of development/manufacture is too slow. This needs to be dealt with.



Exaclty, dont forget guys, the price for an S-400 battery is around ~ 150mln$ afaik, thats a lot of money which Iran should put in its own R&D and get more out of it...

Furthermore, if you look at todays warfare (Syria, Armenia/Azerbaidschan...) SHORAD systems are very important, you cant waste huge and expensive missiles against drone swarms, cheaper and other solutions are necessary

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

4 x 6 truck mounted 100 mm Sarir AAA to counter Harop. Create secure operation zones.

8 x 3rd Khordad TELAR to kill TB-2 at 100km

3 x Najm-802B to acquire TB-2 at long range

This small group would be enough to completely deny Azeri air operations...

If you lack it, highly vulnerable TB-2 can operate and kill at will...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher

*IRGC Aerospace Commander: Iran among 10 Top World Radar Manufacturers*

TEHRAN (FNA)- Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh underlined his country’s high capability in production of different military equipment, saying that Iran stands among the world's 10 top states manufacturing radars.

“Out of 20 radar manufacturing states in the world, certainly the Islamic Iran is among the 10 ten,” General Hajizadeh said, addressing a ceremony to put into operation two home-made Qadir-class radars in the Central and Southeastern provinces of Yazd and Kerman on Tuesday.

He added that overlapping of the radar networks developed by the Iranian Army and the IRGC is one of the major military achievements of Iran, noting that the young Iranian experts are able to produce all radars needed by the operational forces.

“The next radar will be launched in Chabahar city (in Sistan and Balouchestan province) in the next three months and the number of the Qadir-class radars will increase to 8,” Hajizadeh said.



FarsNews Agency - IRGC Aerospace Commander: Iran among 10 Top World Radar Manufacturers

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Iran is moving up very fast in the radar sector, Hajidazeh ranked Iran 12th in 2019 and at the time had stated the 12th spot was gained after 13 years (great achievement). With this current statement, it means we've moved up 2 spots in just over a year. More investments need to be made in this sector and our goal should be to enter the top 5. The export potential in this sector alone could gain Iran 100's of millions if not in the billions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

1. U.S
2. Russia
3. China
4. France
5. Israel
6. Japan (Iran in most optimistic ranking)
7. Italy
8. UK
9. India/South Korea
10. Iran (least favourable ranking)
11. Taiwan
12. Germany

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raghfarm007

What does Izraeel make to rank it above Iran in Radars?


----------



## Philosopher

Israel has access to American technology so this boosts them greatly. They have developed AESA radars for planes, something Iran has yet to do (officially anyway). But this is no issue, given Iran's rate of growth in this sector, they will be overtaken soon enough. Minus the distant future systems such as quantum and photonics radars which I hope Iran is thinking about, in the near future I hope to see Iran produce Gallium Nitide based TRMs on an economical scale. Given Iran's prowess in the nanotechnology field, I am expecting to see innovations by Iran in this microelectronics sector too.

The next generation Bavar air defence is also something to look forward to in order to see what improvement they will make to its radar systems. Generally speaking, I think in all of Iran's radars, ranging from small to big, we can expect to see great improvement in their range.


----------



## PeeD

Raghfarm007 said:


> What does Izraeel make to rank it above Iran in Radars?



They have very good BMD radars and due to access to U.S industry, good airborne X-band AESAs. Their S-band AESA are expensive but technologically superior to Irans S-band AESAs. Their SARs are also better.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> 4 x 6 truck mounted 100 mm Sarir AAA to counter Harop. Create secure operation zones.
> 
> 8 x 3rd Khordad TELAR to kill TB-2 at 100km
> 
> 3 x Najm-802B to acquire TB-2 at long range
> 
> This small group would be enough to completely deny Azeri air operations...
> 
> If you lack it, highly vulnerable TB-2 can operate and kill at will...


Can’t another long range radar work besides najm-802B? For example Bashir or najm-802A or kasta or mutla Fajr? All these have a good range...


----------



## Draco.IMF

PeeD said:


> 1. U.S
> 2. Russia



US over russia in radar?

Landbased radar -> Russia numero 1
Spacebased radar -> US numero 1

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314636987140276224 translate please?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314636987140276224 translate please?


3 rackets that came to Iran were tracked and destroyed by national air defense network

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> 3 rackets that came to Iran were tracked and destroyed by national air defense network


Interesting, looks like they moved ADs to this area. Maybe Tor and 3rd khordad.


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> 3 rackets that came to Iran were tracked and destroyed by Army air defense system



This appears to be the first open demonstration of Iran's AD downing rockets. Great news! We obviously knew this was well within Iran's capability even many years ago, but it's good to see it in practise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Interesting, looks like they moved ADs to this area. Maybe Tor and 3rd khordad.


i don't know but its small to be 3rd khordad soo maybe Tor


Philosopher said:


> This appears to be the first open demonstration of Iran's AD downing rockets. Great news! We obviously knew this was well within Iran's capability even many years ago, but it's good to see it in practise.


well its a good time to test some Iranian ADs this is as close to a war as we can get, no amount of training can be this real and unpredictable

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

The Iranian Counter battery radar "Boshra" is one of the radar candidates that may have been taken there to detect and track such off track projectiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raghfarm007

I want to hear Azarbademjooni positions harbouring Takfiri scum destroyed, as well as any posiion that "accidentally" shoots into Iran.... and want to see Pan TOORKS that demonstrate againt Iran´s interest crushed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

skyshadow said:


> i don't know but its small to be 3rd khordad soo maybe Tor



Not cost effective. My guess would be automated, radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery or CIWS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

SalarHaqq said:


> Not cost effective. My guess would be automated, radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery or CIWS.


agreed on the cost, can't be a radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery or CIWS as it has smoke trail which means soiled fuel missiles but its to small of a trail to be 3th of khordad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

skyshadow said:


> agreed on the cost, can't be a radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery or CIWS as it has smoke trail which means soiled fuel missiles but its to small of a trail to be 3th of khordad.
> 
> View attachment 677951



Ah, I didn't open the Twitter link, only read the posts here. Thanks for the info. Can Manpad-type SAMs carry out such a mission?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

SalarHaqq said:


> Ah, I didn't open the Twitter link, only read the posts here. Thanks for the info. Can Manpad-type SAMs carry out such a mission?


don't mention it brother, Manpads alone ? noooooooooo these targets are too fast and too small for Manpads to have lock on it, it has to be radar guided or at least with EO to back them up , like Tor or pantsir


----------



## Stryker1982

skyshadow said:


> don't mention it brother, Manpads alone ? noooooooooo these targets are too fast and too small for Manpads to have lock on it, it has to be radar guided or at least with EO to back them up , like Tor or pantsir



It's obviosuly some short of shorad, could it be a Crotale type system?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

skyshadow said:


> don't mention it brother, Manpads alone ? noooooooooo these targets are too fast and too small for Manpads to have lock on it, it has to be radar guided or at least with EO to back them up , like Tor or pantsir



I know, I didn't mean Manpads only but the missiles they use (like Misagh), obviously associated with some external guidance asset.


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> i don't know but its small to be 3rd khordad soo maybe Tor


Yes I know Tor by I don’t think they sent it alone to the border. Tabas or 3rd Khordad are the best mobile ones to protect at medium ranges.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> It's obviosuly some short of shorad, could it be a Crotale type system?


yes most probably its a Tor system, no Iranian Ya zahra dose not leave a soiled fuel trail behind it as you can see below , maybe its Iranian Ogab system we don't know for now.








SalarHaqq said:


> I know, I didn't mean Manpads only but the missiles they use (like Misagh), obviously associated with some external guidance asset.


well if you can add them to a radar or a powerful EO camera then yes they can












Saleh99 said:


> Yes I know Tor by I don’t think they sent it alone to the border. Tabas or 3rd Khordad are the best mobile ones to protect at medium ranges.


yes most probably they have sent something big too


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> Not cost effective. My guess would be automated, radar-guided anti-aircraft artillery or CIWS.


Exactly my guess n Tor is too expensive to be used in that role.


SalarHaqq said:


> Ah, I didn't open the Twitter link, only read the posts here. Thanks for the info. Can Manpad-type SAMs carry out such a mission?


Doubt that those airdefence can be used against drones and cruise missile but usuall are too slow for artillery


----------



## Philosopher

An interesting North Korean SHORAD based on Tor system was revealed last night:







On a similar note, here is the Chinese HQ-17 also based in small parts on Tor:







I think one of the upcoming SHOARD systems, i.e the Oghab will also fit into such a category.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

Philosopher said:


> An interesting North Korean SHORAD based on Tor system was revealed last night:
> 
> View attachment 678180
> 
> 
> On a similar note, here is the Chinese HQ-17 also based in small parts on Tor:
> 
> View attachment 678181
> 
> 
> 
> I think one of the upcoming SHOARD systems, i.e the Oghab will also fit into such a category.


Man, we’re all waiting for Iran New AD unveiling. They are promising🔥

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

@skyshadow is there a new AD called 9th dey?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow is there a new AD called 9th dey?


9th of Day, Day is the name of Iranian month ( January - December ), 9th of Day is a short range missile, not an AD but a missile

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Armenian incompetence continues.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314894788945154049


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> Armenian incompetence continues.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314894788945154049


I won’t be surprised if those radars can’t detect Those loitering munitions. Those are old radars for the old s-300 systems developed in 1980.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

TheImmortal said:


> Armenian incompetence continues.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314894788945154049



We cant treat all the whole S-300 family as the same items-suystems-tech. They share the prefix "S-300" but there are A LOT of differences between them. We can ask @yavar to talk about the s-300 PMU2 (the one finally Iran got from Russia) compared to S-300V (the one Russia wanted to transfer to Iran). Maybe @PeeD knows more about this subject.

Armenian S-300 are VERY OLD. In http://charly015.blogspot.com, a very known internet blog about mainly Russian weapons, Valen (the author) tells us (it's a spanish blog, I google-traslated it):



> También decir que uno de los males del internet en su nicho militar son los expertos. Hay demasiados y muchos hablan sin conocer lo suficiente de qué hablan. En el caso de esta primera posición S-300 del conflicto armenio-azerí se habla de S-300 como haciendo tabla rasa, o sea, como si esa denominación significase lo mismo para todo y no es así. Esta S-300PT armenia es antediluviana y, por lo tanto, absolutamente obsoleta.
> 
> Los conjuntos de defensa aérea S-300PT forman parte de las primeras generaciones de la familia S-300. Todos sus equipos son obsoletos e incluso su misil interceptor es el 5V55 que fue abandonado hace tiempo en favor de la familia de SAMs 48N6. Sus capacidades y sus prestaciones son muy inferiores a la familia 48N6.



Traslation:



> Also say that one of the evils of the internet in its military niche is the experts. There are too many and many speak without knowing enough what they are talking about. In the case of this first position S-300 of the Armenian-Azeri conflict, S-300 is spoken of as a clean sweep, that is, as if that name meant the same for everything and it is not. This Armenian S-300PT is antediluvian and therefore absolutely obsolete.
> 
> The S-300PT air defense kits are part of the first generations of the S-300 family. All of their equipment is obsolete and even their interceptor missile is the 5V55 which was abandoned long ago in favor of the 48N6 family of SAMs. Its capabilities and benefits are much lower than the 48N6 family.



There are two recent posts about this subject (armenian S-300, azeris TB-2 etc):

http://charly015.blogspot.com/2020/10/azerbaiyan-ataca-una-s-300-armenia.html

http://charly015.blogspot.com/2020/10/las-coberturas-s-300-en-el-conflicto.html


I think AD systems in Armenia are poor and outdated, and also Armenia does NOT have airpower (only 4 SU-30 but we dont know their availability to combat), so the TB-2 etc are in the "paradise" for ground attacking, with almost no oposition.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Navigator

Armenia have very old and unmodernized S-300PT and S-300PS system from last 1970s-80s. Differences between early S-300 and last S-300PMU-2 even more significal than between latest S-300PMU2 and S-400. There different radars and different missiles.
To be honest, if the system isn't ready for combat and the launchers are in marching mode, as in the video above, then even the new systems can also be destroyed with impunity.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Philosopher

I have said this countless times, it is not just about the systems but also how they're used. S-300/400/500, Bavar etc are all vulnerable system if you just stick them somewhere without the layered protections. Nations like Syria, Armenia not only have limited and relatively older systems, but they have nothing close to an air defence network. This is how these UAVs are being used in a opportunistic manner against them. Not to say that you have to have a fully integrated air defence network to be able to handle such low-mid level threads such as UAVs but they at minimum they need the relevant sensors and AD assets places properly. PeeD mentioned yesterday how Armenia can essentially create a strong no fly zones by just a relatively small number of air defence assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

@agarrao a las kalandrakas 

Navigator basically said it all.

The step from PM to PM-2 was huge. The best Armenia got is P afaik, but that system was not operating.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Iranian S-300 has parts of the S-400 and S-350 so it is not a PMU 2 but a PMU-3 unique in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315589136737357833

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IranDefence

Iranian air defense downed another Israeli drone of Azerbaijan (Harop)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315913108586672128


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315924560055865344

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315929496466358272

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315924560055865344
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315929496466358272


This is just getting ridiculous.
I think there needs to be a clear "demonstration" of some sort arranged to convince the azerbaijanis that its really in their own best interests to keep their drones a nice safe minimum distance,say at least 10kms,away from the iranian border at all times in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aspen

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315924560055865344
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315929496466358272



I wonder how Israel feels about giving away their tech to Iran for free


TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315589136737357833



Damn that is a huge f***ing explosion for a drone. Good that Iran shot it down, no drone carrying that much explosives has good intention.

If Israel is testing Iran's AD, it must be going pretty badly for Tel Aviv lmaooo. I would hate to be the dude at Mossad who has to break the bad news to Netanyahu that they just lost another drone to Iran.

Guess giving drones to Azerbaijan wasn't such a good idea after all lmaooooo 

I bet Tel Aviv won't be dumb enough to make that mistake again. Next time Israel will let Baku get some drones from their best buddy Turkey instead. I'm sure Erdogan can't resist sending in a couple of drones to Azerbaijan so they can get shot down just like their Israeli friends. I hope Erdogan signs the drone so he can find his piece later.

When the Iranians shoot it down, they can send back the Turks and Azeris a pink toy drone like they sent Obama a cute toy RQ-170.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Aspen said:


> I wonder how Israel feels about giving away their tech to Iran for free
> 
> 
> Damn that is a huge f***ing explosion for a drone. Good that Iran shot it down, no drone carrying that much explosives has good intention.
> 
> If Israel is testing Iran's AD, it must be going pretty badly for Tel Aviv lmaooo


Iran doesn’t need like that drone. They already have one similar to it but they didn’t unveil it😂

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aspen

Saleh99 said:


> Iran doesn’t need like that drone. They already have one similar to it but they didn’t unveil it😂



Would not be surprised if Iranian drones have already surpassed Israel. At this point, Israelis can learn more from Iranian drones than the other way around.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Sineva said:


> This is just getting ridiculous.
> I think there needs to be a clear "demonstration" of some sort arranged to convince the azerbaijanis that its really in their own best interests to keep their drones a nice safe minimum distance,say at least 10kms,away from the iranian border at all times in future.



The only plus from all these Azerbaijani drone incursions is that we now safely know Iran has good enough air-defenses against these smaller loitering munition type weapons. They do work, they're effective and they're evidently reliable. 

Good training and data will be gleamed from all these shoot-downs. But a point _should _come where Iran has to conduct some sort of reprisal attack against Azerbaijani military positions in order to send some sort of message. What if one of these IAI HAROP's falls on a village and kills 10-20 people? It seems like Azerbaijan (or rogue elements) are trying to goad Iran into getting involved with the conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Aspen said:


> I wonder how Israel feels about giving away their tech to Iran for free
> 
> 
> Damn that is a huge f***ing explosion for a drone. Good that Iran shot it down, no drone carrying that much explosives has good intention.
> 
> If Israel is testing Iran's AD, it must be going pretty badly for Tel Aviv lmaooo. I would hate to be the dude at Mossad who has to break the bad news to Netanyahu that they just lost another drone to Iran.
> 
> Guess giving drones to Azerbaijan wasn't such a good idea after all lmaooooo
> 
> I bet Tel Aviv won't be dumb enough to make that mistake again. Next time Israel will let Baku get some drones from their best buddy Turkey instead. I'm sure Erdogan can't resist sending in a couple of drones to Azerbaijan so they can get shot down just like their Israeli friends. I hope Erdogan signs the drone so he can find his piece later.
> 
> When the Iranians shoot it down, they can send back the Turks and Azeris a pink toy drone like they sent Obama a cute toy RQ-170.


By the way, the Cocarde logo is used by several countries on fighter planes with different colors.


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316088714087587840Iran should do something, drones infiltrating the iranian Airspace more than 100km is something unacceptable. The blue area marked is a huge gap, that if we exclude the easter and south eastern part of Iran which Includes a VERY small number of ADs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1316088714087587840Iran should do something, drones infiltrating the iranian Airspace more than 100km is something unacceptable. The blue area marked is a huge gap, that if we exclude the easter and south eastern part of Iran which Includes a VERY small number of ADs.
> View attachment 679232



Iran doesn't have as many AD systems as we'd like to see. It's unlikely we have tons of 3rd Khordad and Talash systems in general, and most if not all are concentrated in the south.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Iran doesn't have as many AD systems as we'd like to see. It's unlikely we have tons of 3rd Khordad and Talash systems in general, and most if not all are concentrated in the south.



Another reason why Iran needs S-400/S-500. The S-300 order was too small. We also do not know how fast Iran produces Bavar 373 and other significant AD systems. It could take 12+ months to build a B-373 battalion let alone a battery... who knows, no one has a clue.

But it is unacceptable how few AD systems Iran has in the North. Not to mention the East and west borders.

What’s the point to having all these fancy radars if you don’t have enough ADs to engage them?

As Armenia-Azeri conflict has shown. You can lose 10 AD systems overnight. You need to be prepared.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> Another reason why Iran needs S-400/S-500. The S-300 order was too small. We also do not know how fast Iran produces Bavar 373 and other significant AD systems. It could take 12+ months to build a B-373 battalion let alone a battery... who knows, no one has a clue.
> 
> But it is unacceptable how few AD systems Iran has in the North. Not to mention the East and west borders.
> 
> What’s the point to having all these fancy radars if you don’t have enough ADs to engage them?
> 
> As Armenia-Azeri conflict has shown. You can lose 10 AD systems overnight. You need to be prepared.


Besides the Bavar-373, 3rd Khordad and Talash systems have been around since years, yet they are deployed to very very small number of sites. Iran has all the systems but production line is slow, or systems are hidden. No one is saying cover all the country, but there are huge gaps as you mentioned in the eastern and western borders, and other areas.


----------



## skyshadow

*Another UAV likely from Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict has been crashed inside Iran. This time it's 65 km inside Iran. Would be interesting to see how Iran reacts. 















*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Another reason why Iran needs S-400/S-500. The S-300 order was too small. We also do not know how fast Iran produces Bavar 373 and other significant AD systems. It could take 12+ months to build a B-373 battalion let alone a battery... who knows, no one has a clue.
> 
> But it is unacceptable how few AD systems Iran has in the North. Not to mention the East and west borders.
> 
> What’s the point to having all these fancy radars if you don’t have enough ADs to engage them?
> 
> As Armenia-Azeri conflict has shown. You can lose 10 AD systems overnight. You need to be prepared.



Indeed, as much as I am extraordinarily proud in the Iranian Air defense industry and the products they create. I'm doubtful as to the number of deployed systems, and I'm guessing the main cause of it is $$$ and lack there of it.

We have a wide range of systems in all types of altitudes fulfilling various different functions that really puts Iran among the highest levels in terms of air defense, but as you say whether or not such products from Oghab, to Talash, to 3rd Khordad, Automated AA guns and Bavar-373 can be produced, it doesn't appear that their are many battalions out there. IADS is limited in this regards despite great early warning radars, to me it does not seem it will survive a saturation strike from the U.S or even the Saudis if they lift their whole airforce up equipped with Shadow Storm missiles.


skyshadow said:


> *Another UAV likely from Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict has been crashed inside Iran. This time it's 65 km inside Iran. Would be interesting to see how Iran reacts.
> 
> 
> View attachment 679257
> 
> 
> View attachment 679258
> 
> 
> View attachment 679259
> *



The likely hood the Azerbaijanis are trying to use Iranian Airspace to infiltrate into Artaskh to strike a high value target by surprise I think is the most likely conclusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> Indeed, as much as I am extraordinarily proud in the Iranian Air defense industry and the products they create. I'm doubtful as to the number of deployed systems, and I'm guessing the main cause of it is $$$ and lack there of it.
> 
> We have a wide range of systems in all types of altitudes fulfilling various different functions that really puts Iran among the highest levels in terms of air defense, but as you say whether or not such products from Oghab, to Talash, to 3rd Khordad, Automated AA guns and Bavar-373 can be produced, it doesn't appear that their are many battalions out there. IADS is limited in this regards despite great early warning radars, to me it does not seem it will survive a saturation strike from the U.S or even the Saudis if they lift their whole airforce up equipped with Shadow Storm missiles.
> 
> 
> The likely hood the Azerbaijanis are trying to use Iranian Airspace to infiltrate into Artaskh to strike a high value target by surprise I think is the most likely conclusion.


agreed as this one is Russian made, its strange 4 rackets also hit Iran but did not exploded non of them either they have no warhead meaning they knew its going to hit Iran or Iran jamming them midair i don't know which one


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Iranian army is very tactical and may suspect that their defenses are being tested. They can practice stealing data on the fly through cyber warfare, using radars. Iran has a lot of air defense systems but I think for the moment that they are unveiling their more intense war plan .... I'm not worried about their powerful air defense

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

Sineva said:


> This is just getting ridiculous.
> I think there needs to be a clear "demonstration" of some sort arranged to convince the azerbaijanis that its really in their own best interests to keep their drones a nice safe minimum distance,say at least 10kms,away from the iranian border at all times in future.


Why? They make a great target practice opportunity for Iran's air defense, don't you think?

And by the way how does this guy know how it was brought down?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Azeri Blooper Risks Gifting Israeli Military Technology to Iran • MassisPost


YEREVAN (Armenpress) -- Residents of a village in northwestern Iran woke up to an unusual scene on October 13 in the local agricultural field: a crashed



www.google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

Blue In Green said:


> But a point _should _come where Iran has to conduct some sort of reprisal attack against Azerbaijani military positions in order to send some sort of message. What if one of these IAI HAROP's falls on a village and kills 10-20 people? It seems like Azerbaijan (or rogue elements) are trying to goad Iran into getting involved with the conflict.



As long as Iran is not deliberately hit by foreign drones, striking their forces (and causing deaths) probably wouldn't constitute an adequate response. What can and should perhaps be done, however, is to fly some Iranian drone(s) over their positions, in particular over the locations of armed elements imported from Syria. That would send several messages at once.



Stryker1982 said:


> Iran doesn't have as many AD systems as we'd like to see. It's unlikely we have tons of 3rd Khordad and Talash systems in general, and most if not all are concentrated in the south.





Stryker1982 said:


> Indeed, as much as I am extraordinarily proud in the Iranian Air defense industry and the products they create. I'm doubtful as to the number of deployed systems, and I'm guessing the main cause of it is $$$ and lack there of it.
> 
> We have a wide range of systems in all types of altitudes fulfilling various different functions that really puts Iran among the highest levels in terms of air defense, but as you say whether or not such products from Oghab, to Talash, to 3rd Khordad, Automated AA guns and Bavar-373 can be produced, it doesn't appear that their are many battalions out there. IADS is limited in this regards despite great early warning radars, to me it does not seem it will survive a saturation strike from the U.S or even the Saudis if they lift their whole airforce up equipped with Shadow Storm missiles.
> 
> 
> The likely hood the Azerbaijanis are trying to use Iranian Airspace to infiltrate into Artaskh to strike a high value target by surprise I think is the most likely conclusion.



I woulnd't rely on those maps published on the internet to draw any definite conclusions, since they are based on open source material and more likely than not, they are far from showing Iran's complete air defence arsenal. Not saying the maps are uninteresting, but chances are they don't offer an exhaustive picture.

Specially when it comes to highly mobile, "all in one" units with no fixed ground structures and meant to be used as asymmetric "ambush" weapons, such as the Talash / 3rd of Khordad series, these will not be parked in the open at all times. So Iran certainly has more of them in stock than the couple of examples identified by open intelligence analysts in weblogs or on Twitter.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

SalarHaqq said:


> As long as Iran is not deliberately hit by foreign drones, striking their forces (and causing deaths) probably wouldn't constitute an adequate response. What can and should perhaps be done, however, is to fly some Iranian drone(s) over their positions, in particular over the locations of armed elements imported from Syria. That would send several messages at once.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I woulnd't use those maps published on the internet to draw any definitive conclusions, as they are based on open sources and more likely than not, they are far from showing Iran's complete air defence arsenal. I'm not saying the maps are uninteresting, but chances are they don't offer an exhaustive full picture.
> 
> Specially when it comes to ultra-mobile, "all in one" units with no fixed ground positions such as the Talash / 3rd of Khordad series, meant to be used as asymmetric "ambush" AD weapons, these will not be parked somewhere in the open at all times. So Iran definitely has more of these in stock than the ones identified thanks to readily accessible satellite images by open intelligence analysists in weblogs or on Twitter .


I agree about the mobile ADs 3rd khordad/ Talash. As I said above, iran has the ADs and equipment, but that’s related to the production line and If Iran is willing to deploy all their ADs or keep them hidden as part of asymmetric warfare, as you said also. Regarding the map, it was created by @AmirPatriot


----------



## Draco.IMF

Rumours the IAI Harpy was shot down by 3rd Khordad and the radar guided Samavat 35mm AAA (Iranian Oerlikon)

3rd Khordad is being produced like cookies, I dont believe in shortage of this kind of AD systems

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

It seems Iran is "allowing" these azeri drones to enter its airspace in order to see where they go, which are their "objectives". And after a while, Iran downs these drones. Iran knows they are spying and testing defenses for the big storm to come.

*Iran's AD network is extremely powerful*, it has no sense these drones getting well deep into Iran if Iran itself is not allowing this to happen, in order to know its enemy thoughts.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## sha ah

They can try but their drones will merely get shot down and Iran will respond with a hail of missiles that will devastate the enemy.

In Syria half a dozen TB2s were shot down with old Soviet era air defense systems

In Libya 20 Turkish drones were shot down with Pantsir systems that were operated by barely trained mercenaries.

In Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) countless drones have been shot down. Again Armenia doesn't have a serious airforce and their air defense capabilities are very limited.

Iran has an extremely potent and layered air defense system. Iran has even upgraded and modified many of its older fighter jets to be able to launch cruise missiles and Iran produces air to air missiles.

Iran has built up an extremely formidable air defense network that is designed to withstand a saturated cruise missile attack from the USA. 

That would mean close to 200 Tomahawks launched nearly simultaneously. That is what Iran's air defenses have been built to withstand. No regional country really has the capability to launch anything remotely even close to that.

In my opinion, any regional country that tries attacking Iran will quickly find itself on the losing end.



agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> It seems Iran is "allowing" these azeri drones to enter its airspace in order to see where they go, which are their "objectives". And after a while, Iran downs these drones. Iran knows they are spying and testing defenses for the big storm to come.
> 
> *Iran's AD network is extremely powerful*, it has no sense these drones getting well deep into Iran if Iran itself is not allowing this to happen, in order to know its enemy thoughts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> Rumours the IAI Harpy was shot down by 3rd Khordad and the radar guided Samavat 35mm AAA (Iranian Oerlikon)
> 
> 3rd Khordad is being produced like cookies, I dont believe in shortage of this kind of AD systems



3rd Khordad wouldn’t be used on a small drone. 3rd Khordad missile useS a top attack pattern to align itself with the drone. Thus drones it targets are usually high altitude MALE drones. Not small low flying loitering drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> Iran has an extremely potent and layered air defense system. Iran has even upgraded and modified many of its older fighter jets to be able to launch cruise missiles and Iran produces air to air missiles.
> 
> Iran has built up an extremely formidable air defense network that is designed to withstand a saturated cruise missile attack from the USA.
> 
> That would mean close to 200 Tomahawks launched nearly simultaneously. That is what Iran's air defenses have been built to withstand. No regional country really has the capability to launch anything remotely even close to that.
> 
> In my opinion, any regional country that tries attacking Iran will quickly find itself on the losing end.



Defending against 200 Tomahawks is not enough.


----------



## skyshadow

2 secret long range and short range AD systems that has not been unveiled yet but the second one look like Oghab AD

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

*some Iranian made AD systems
*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VEVAK

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> It seems Iran is "allowing" these azeri drones to enter its airspace in order to see where they go, which are their "objectives". And after a while, Iran downs these drones. Iran knows they are spying and testing defenses for the big storm to come.
> 
> *Iran's AD network is extremely powerful*, it has no sense these drones getting well deep into Iran if Iran itself is not allowing this to happen, in order to know its enemy thoughts.




These drones are relatively small with very small cross sections and intercepting them would require relatively expensive missiles & Iran is sure as hell not going empty out it's stock of SAM on relatively harmless drones unless absolutely necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Arminkh said:


> We have not used them in any actual conflict yet. At least not publicly.





VEVAK said:


> These drones are relatively small with very small cross sections and intercepting them would require relatively expensive missiles & Iran is sure as hell not going empty out it's stock of SAM on relatively harmless drones unless absolutely necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> 2 secret long range and short range AD systems that has not been unveiled yet but the second one look like Oghab AD
> 
> 
> View attachment 680236


These images were taken from where?


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

VEVAK said:


> These drones are relatively small with very small cross sections and intercepting them would require relatively expensive missiles & Iran is sure as hell not going empty out it's stock of SAM on relatively harmless drones unless absolutely necessary.



Iran has TONS of types of Air Defence systems, and TONS of numbers of these systems. As Draco said before, Iran is making 3rd Khordad like cookies, and so with many systems.
Also, Iran has many types of SHORAD systems, including radar guided, EO guided AAA systems, extremely cheap and efficient.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> These images were taken from where?


IRGC exercise

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> IRGC exercise





skyshadow said:


> IRGC exercise


I mean those two satellite images, Not the tabas Sayyad and 3rd khordad ones


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> I mean those two satellite images, Not the tabas Sayyad and 3rd khordad ones


somewhere in Iran doesn't say where


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> somewhere in Iran doesn't say where


So they are operational but not unveiled?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*wow Iran has started its campaign to sell arms*








*








 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1317501546578534402*


Saleh99 said:


> So they are operational but not unveiled?


correct

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> 2 secret long range and short range AD systems that has not been unveiled yet but the second one look like Oghab AD
> 
> 
> View attachment 680236



Were these pictures taken with a potato?


agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Iran has TONS of types of Air Defence systems, and TONS of numbers of these systems. As Draco said before, Iran is making 3rd Khordad like cookies, and so with many systems.
> Also, Iran has many types of SHORAD systems, including radar guided, EO guided AAA systems, extremely cheap and efficient.



No, No, and No.


----------



## Saleh99

TheImmortal said:


> Were these pictures taken with a potato?
> 
> 
> No, No, and No.


So the no,no is about what?


----------



## 925boy

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> It seems Iran is "allowing" these azeri drones to enter its airspace in order to see where they go, which are their "objectives". And after a while, Iran downs these drones. Iran knows they are spying and testing defenses for the big storm to come.
> 
> *Iran's AD network is extremely powerful*, it has no sense these drones getting well deep into Iran if Iran itself is not allowing this to happen, in order to know its enemy thoughts.


BUUUUUUUT....you have to remember that Pakistanis on the Az-AM war forum DO NOT BELIEVE Azerbaijan flying these drones into IRan is "harmful" to IRan, just like our strong suspicion of ISI allowing Saudis and US use Jundllah on Pakistani territory to hit Iran wasnt any "intent of harm"...THE DENIAL level is ridiculous!


sha ah said:


> In my opinion, any regional country that tries attacking Iran will quickly find itself on the losing end.


if the Azerbaijan-supporting Pakistani members of PDF know whats good for Azerbaijan, they will not do what you've said here. Iran will DECAPITATE Azerbaijan if Azerbaijan tests Iran...why not? just wait till they slip(LIKE US has done many times) and just take them over...


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> So the no,no is about what?



Iran doesn’t have tons of systems
Iran doesn’t have tons of numbers 
Iran doesn’t make 3rd Khordad like cookies

AD systems are expensive even if completely built by Iran with not even a single screw imported they are expensive items even considering the cheap labor in Iran and cost of materials.

While the Iranian arms industrial complex is not purely profit driven like Western arms complexes, they still require profit in order to expand operations, pay personnel, and conduct r&d.

Furthermore, as we saw with how eager Iranian officials are to export arms, one reason is due to the massive nature of the Iranian military industrial complex. It has gotten so big that it needs more clients than just Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

I hope Iran develops a SPAAG like that. Your thoughts @skyshadow @Mithridates

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Were these pictures taken with a potato?
> 
> 
> No, No, and No.


satellite


Saleh99 said:


> View attachment 680407
> 
> I hope Iran develops a SPAAG like that. Your thoughts @skyshadow @Mithridates


no they work as a network they each have a small EO on them but only 1 or 2 of radars for each network

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

TheImmortal is in the potato field. Yes Iran has a lot of air defense systems, no doubt about it and it's impressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Yes Iran has a lot of air defense systems, no doubt about it and it's impressive.



Thanks for posting proof Iranian Donald Trump.

Just like the super duper F-4’s you talk about that can shoot down F-35’s.


Sineva said:


>



Needs more lasers and spotlights.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## VEVAK

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Iran has TONS of types of Air Defence systems, and TONS of numbers of these systems. As Draco said before, Iran is making 3rd Khordad like cookies, and so with many systems.
> Also, Iran has many types of SHORAD systems, including radar guided, EO guided AAA systems, extremely cheap and efficient.



AAA is cheap and efficient however they have a very limited range and are deployed at key locations and yes if they get within range of AAA or SHORAD system located at key locations they will get intercepted. 

But that doesn't mean Iran is going to use up its stock of ta'er or Sayad type SAMS (Let alone any thing more expensive) for a dinky little drone not unless there is a clear and present threat. 

And the question isn't whether Iran can or not it's whether Iran is stupid enough to show which areas are protected which areas are not! The Republic of Azerbaijan does not have the power to pose a treat to Iran and Iran can at any time and within 24hr wipe out that entire government so the only real threat is the intelligence being gathered and giving off the position of your SAM is a rather stupid way to respond to that threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aspen

Don't know if somebody posted this earlier but I found it absolutely fascinating

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

Aspen said:


> Don't know if somebody posted this earlier but I found it absolutely fascinating


me


----------



## skyshadow

Aspen said:


> Don't know if somebody posted this earlier but I found it absolutely fascinating


there's alot of pics of it too


----------



## aryobarzan

Aspen said:


> Don't know if somebody posted this earlier but I found it absolutely fascinating export


Iran's opening shot for a large export oriented marketting effort...current head of parliament (and hopefully the next iranian president) gets to be the first visitor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

The early version of the third of khordads interceptor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*breaking news : Armature video purportedly shows moment #Iran air defenses shoot down an "intruding drone" over northwestern province of East Azarbaijan. It's not immediately clear which country the downed UAE belongs to. 


 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310906150901215232*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*did defense minister just said 3th of khordad AD raped US drone?     *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *did defense minister just said 3th of khordad AD raped US drone?    *



Do you have link to his full interview?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> Do you have link to his full interview?


let me check







بررسی ابعاد پایان تحریم تسلیحاتی ایران - تیتر امشب | شبکه خبر - 27 مهر 1399


بررسی ابعاد پایان تحریم تسلیحاتی ایران - تیتر امشب | شبکه خبر - 27 مهر 1399 ، تلوبیون مرجع پخش زنده شبکه های تلویزیون ، دانلود رایگان فیلم ایرانی و خارجی ، دانلود انیمیشن و کارتن ، سریال آرشیو و برناهه های صدا و سیما - 22:14




www.telewebion.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

Blue In Green said:


> At the very least openly move military assets to the North and send overt signaling to either side that such incidents like this one should not be repeated and if they are, swift military responses will be enacted.
> 
> Iran holds military supremacy over both Azerbaijan and Armenia and could easily destroy tactical assets on both sides in short order if needed.
> 
> Azerbaijans use of foreign Jihadi mercenaries is quite concerning though... I can't imagine such a course of action would be good for the caucus region in the long-run. Iran has openly stated it won't allow terrorists to set up shop right on their border. What remains to be seen is what I.R.I is willing to do about it.


Azarbaijan alone is really no threat to Iran. Iran can just artillery the f. out of that tiny republic with only the IRGC's artillery division. The problem here is Turkey and the West involvement if such a thing occurs. Iran and AZ right now enjoy both good relations and have embassies. I do not see any conflict anytime soon unless AZ suddenly starts to behave insane.


TheImmortal said:


> Azeri drones are absolutely demolishing Armenia infantry and vehicles.
> 
> It’s similar to how Syria got demolished by Turkish drones.
> 
> It makes you wonder why they cannot detect these drones?


First of all, we see some destruction of Armenian armor and infantry by Turkish drones (Azari drones and capabilities overall do not have the effectiveness as displayed in the videos. Obvious that these are Turkish controlled). Yes. But it is nowhere near to ''absolutely demolishing''. Poor choice of words.

Second, if it really had any major effect we would have witnessed major frontline changes in these 3 weeks.
Same with Syria, nice for fancy videos but little effect on the ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Dariush the Great said:


> Azarbaijan alone is really no threat to Iran. Iran can just artillery the f. out of that tiny republic with only the IRGC's artillery division. The problem here is Turkey and the West involvement if such a thing occurs. Iran and AZ right now enjoy both good relations and have embassies. I do not see any conflict anytime soon unless AZ suddenly starts to behave insane.



It's really just some Turks and Azeri idiots who say stupid shit that really bothers me. They act like all of a sudden they can waltz straight into Iran and "liberate" Iranian lands that have significant Iranian Azeri populations just cause'. That's the only problem I have with this whole debacle honestly lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Blue In Green said:


> It's really just some Turks and Azeri idiots who say stupid shit that really bothers me. They act like all of a sudden they can waltz straight into Iran and "liberate" Iranian lands that have significant Iranian Azeri populations just cause'. That's the only problem I have with this whole debacle honestly lol.



Let them dream. Syria was 10 times harder than Azerbaijan. Syria was our geographic limitation. Aliev and the only Georgian corridor is their bottleneck. Georgian corridor is easy to close if we decide.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dariush the Great

Blue In Green said:


> It's really just some Turks and Azeri idiots who say stupid shit that really bothers me. They act like all of a sudden they can waltz straight into Iran and "liberate" Iranian lands that have significant Iranian Azeri populations just cause'. That's the only problem I have with this whole debacle honestly lol.


Azarbaijan's name itself is a pure Persian name. Same with most countries that border Iran. They never escaped the Persian influence and adopted them.

If some fanboys want to bring in the gray wolves, be my guest. They will be thrown away by the local population loyal to Iran, anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Begzaarin Chan maahi be havaaye gereftane Chan deh khub zaeef shan. Hanuz vaghte voroode iran nis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dariush the Great

Shawnee said:


> Begzaarin Chan maahi be havaaye gereftane Chan deh khub zaeef shan. Hanuz vaghte voroode iran nis.


Meh... i really do not care about these 2 former Iranian provinces. Let them fight it out. But slap them each time a stray bullet or drone falls on our territory. I wouldn't waste our nation's precious resources on these soviet stolen fake republics anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Just imagine how difficult Idlib was. It was walking distance to Turkey. We had nothing in common with the people of Idlib, not our sect, not our race, no common history. No friendly tribe like Baqara in Deirozur.
Iran had to militarily impose its force.

Azerbaijan is different. Same sect and same race.

Majority of Iranian Azerbaijanis are strong Shiite Muslims who remember Chaldiran and Turkmanchai. Minority are secular pan turks who will never bear any arm ever and they dislike Erdogan anyway because Erdogan is not prowest enough. They like Cavusoglu and Ecevit types. They want to have a chill good life and not fight. You will find a lot of them online though making comments and sipping coffee.

Have you ever seen an Iranian Azerbaijani bearing arm outside of Iran, not for Iran?

Look how many Kurds of Turkey bear arm against Turkey.

Does this ring a bell?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raghfarm007

Dariush the Great said:


> Meh... i really do not care about these 2 former Iranian provinces. Let them fight it out. But slap them each time a stray bullet or drone falls on our territory. I wouldn't waste our nation's precious resources on these soviet stolen fake republics anyway.




You have picture of Dariush the great..... and you dont care about land stolen from Iran?!!!!!

Thats rather telling.....fake nationalism come to mind

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Dariush the Great said:


> Azarbaijan's name itself is a pure Persian name. Same with most countries that border Iran. They never escaped the Persian influence and adopted them.
> 
> If some fanboys want to bring in the gray wolves, be my guest. They will be thrown away by the local population loyal to Iran, anyway.



It shouldn't even be called Azerbaijan, that that territory is historically called Shirvan, they just went ahead and stole the name of our provinces because they want to lay claim to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dariush the Great

Raghfarm007 said:


> You have picture of Dariush the great..... and you dont care about land stolen from Iran?!!!!!
> 
> Thats rather telling.....fake nationalism come to mind


 There is something as sane nationalism my braindead friend. You can not go conquer lands in the 21th century without any consequences. The territories in question have nothing in common with anything Iran anymore. Goodluck convincing a Russian Aliyov that he is sitting on Iranian land and that he needs to return it.

SMH

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Dariush the Great said:


> There is something as sane nationalism my braindead friend. You can not go conquer lands in the 21th century without any consequences. The territories in question have nothing in common with anything Iran anymore. Goodluck convincing a Russian Aliyov that he is sitting on Iranian land and that he needs to return it.
> 
> SMH



Agreed, this isn't an issue about if they're Iranian lands/Iranian peoples (they are) but rather the practical problems Azerbaijan of today presents for Iran if it were to be absorbed back into its proper homeland.

Idk about you guys but Azerbaijanis come off as excessively stubborn and radical when it comes to their Pseudo-Turkish pride. It's almost as if they're on some sort of drug that makes them lash-out like rabid animals when it comes to their nationality. Trying to tame such a people and integrate them back into greater Iranian society would prove near futile as all Iran would be inviting onto itself is a domestic insurgency that would spur local instability. Doesn't really seem to be worth the time, money, resources and human capital.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Dariush the Great said:


> There is something as sane nationalism my braindead friend. You can not go conquer lands in the 21th century without any consequences. The territories in question have nothing in common with anything Iran anymore. Goodluck convincing a Russian Aliyov that he is sitting on Iranian land and that he needs to return it.
> 
> SMH





Blue In Green said:


> Agreed, this isn't an issue about if they're Iranian lands/Iranian peoples (they are) but rather the practical problems Azerbaijan of today presents for Iran if it were to be absorbed back into its proper homeland.
> 
> Idk about you guys but Azerbaijanis come off as excessively stubborn and radical when it comes to their Pseudo-Turkish pride. It's almost as if they're on some sort of drug that makes them lash-out like rabid animals when it comes to their nationality. Trying to tame such a people and integrate them back into greater Iranian society would prove near futile as all Iran would be inviting onto itself is a domestic insurgency that would spur local instability. Doesn't really seem to be worth the time, money, resources and human capital.



100 years of Russian influence does this. They are not the same people as we are.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Stryker1982 said:


> 100 years of Russian influence does this. They are not the same people as we are.



Honestly, I don't want them nor do I really like them, most of my online experiences in talking with Azerbaijanis has been nothing short of horrible too downright hostile. I know it isn't fair to judge an entire group based on just online interactions but my cursory sentiment on them is this way thus far due to their actions. 

Let them rot for all I care... If they one day decide to embrace their true heritage then I'm all game but for now they're just a delusion group of lost souls who have been brainwashed.


----------



## Dariush the Great

Blue In Green said:


> Honestly, I don't want them nor do I really like them, most of my online experiences in talking with Azerbaijanis has been nothing short of horrible too downright hostile. I know it isn't fair to judge an entire group based on just online interactions but my cursory sentiment on them is this way thus far due to their actions.
> 
> Let them rot for all I care... If they one day decide to embrace their true heritage then I'm all game but for now they're just a delusion group of lost souls who have been brainwashed.


It is just aliyov republic and a bunch of their supporters on our side. But the mass of Iranian Azaris reject their ridicilous claims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Dariush the Great said:


> It is just aliyov republic and a bunch of their supporters on our side. But the mass of Iranian Azaris reject their ridicilous claims.



Dadash, for me the equation is very simple, an Iranian who falls under the Iranian people(s) group is an individual who shares a deep, meaningful history amongst both the people of the region and the very land that gave them nourishment. The Iranian Plateau is an almost magical place and the people (our people) who traveled down there from the Northern Caucuses all those thousands upon thousands of years ago, made a home for themselves and paved the way for many pivotal human civilizations that set standards and edicts which still reverberate around the world till this day. 

We are Human but we are also a specific type of human, WE ARE IRANIAN!!

So sad that millions of our OWN PEOPLE have decided (through Turkishification) to forgo such storied history for false Turkish sentiments.... I have nothing against Turks personally but this one issue does bother me from time-to-time.

I'm sorry lol, I seem to be rambling again.


----------



## Stryker1982

Blue In Green said:


> Honestly, I don't want them nor do I really like them, most of my online experiences in talking with Azerbaijanis has been nothing short of horrible too downright hostile. I know it isn't fair to judge an entire group based on just online interactions but my cursory sentiment on them is this way thus far due to their actions.
> 
> Let them rot for all I care... If they one day decide to embrace their true heritage then I'm all game but for now they're just a delusion group of lost souls who have been brainwashed.



Everyone in the online community thats from the region knows that turks, specifically pan-turks are the most toxic in social media. It's not a unique experience. I have also dealt with these types and they are not reasoned with. They are lost, if they knew how closely related to Iranians they are, they'd probably commit mass suicide.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

Stryker1982 said:


> Everyone in the online community thats from the region knows that turks, specifically pan-turks are the most toxic in social media. It's not a unique experience. I have also dealt with these types and they are not reasoned with. They are lost, if they knew how closely related to Iranians they are, they'd probably commit mass suicide.


I think Indians can match them in online warfare though. I found out that Indians are massive trolls... especially after their recent conflict with China.


----------



## OldTwilight

Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :

Stealth Cruise Missiles 
UCAV
Drone 
Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
Modern Ballistics Missiles ... 
We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )

The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ... 
*
We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *

OldTwilight / Ghalam ...


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

Please stay on topic.

All of you can open a new thread for discussing Aserbaijan-Iran-Turkey topics. But this one is for Air Defense Systems!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

OldTwilight said:


> Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :
> 
> Stealth Cruise Missiles
> UCAV
> Drone
> Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
> Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
> Modern Ballistics Missiles ...
> We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )
> 
> The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ...
> 
> *We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *
> 
> OldTwilight / Ghalam ...


I tend to agree with you about the survivability of any AD when faced with powerful enemy such as the US. Countering hundreds of assets in the air any AD will be degraded fast .Faced with an enemy like the US the job of AD will be to buy enough time to allow Iran to lunch offensive assets. So yes as you said "Offence" is the best "Defence"... everyone else around Iran if they are foolish enough to try can be dealt with using what is currently available .


----------



## Lehrasap

OldTwilight said:


> Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :
> 
> Stealth Cruise Missiles
> UCAV
> Drone
> Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
> Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
> Modern Ballistics Missiles ...
> We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )
> 
> The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ...
> 
> *We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *
> 
> OldTwilight / Ghalam ...



I don't think that development of anti air defence systems are a hurdle in the development of hypersonic missiles or ballistic missiles for Iran.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

OldTwilight said:


> Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :
> 
> Stealth Cruise Missiles
> UCAV
> Drone
> Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
> Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
> Modern Ballistics Missiles ...
> We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )
> 
> The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ...
> 
> *We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *
> 
> OldTwilight / Ghalam ...



Totally anything your comment! On the contrary, it is important to have many air defense systems because it is very effective. Your proof is rubbish !! The air force will get stronger anyway

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

Iran is pursuing both offensive and defensive systems, you do not chose between them. It is essential for Iran to continue working on air defence systems because this is how we will perfect them and create highly economical systems. Just look at Iranian ballistic missiles, compare Ra'ad-500 to the older Fateh-110 for example.

Don't base your expectations on a hermetic air defence, such a thing does not exist in practise. Instead, You focus on increasing the cost on the adversary, such as _Loss-exchange ratio, _that way, they would be foolish to deliberately start a war. Iran is there today and has been for a while. Meaning yes, the Americans could penetrate through Iran's defences, but the damage they will suffer in the process makes such campaign simply out of question for them. The Americans never start a war without the Pentagon's blessing and they laugh at the idea of a war with Iran.

And this is just a beginning for Iran. What we have achieved so far is impressive, but frankly nothing compared to where we will be in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## OldTwilight

Lehrasap said:


> I don't think that development of anti air defence systems are a hurdle in the development of hypersonic missiles or ballistic missiles for Iran.


Resources , we have limited financial resource .... 

if you going to street fight and you have limited resource , do you buy armor our a sword !? in best case you avoid fight , in better choose , you buy both of these , but if you only have money for buying one , you probably go to buying sword because fights cant be with by defensive measure alone ...


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :
> 
> Stealth Cruise Missiles
> UCAV
> Drone
> Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
> Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
> Modern Ballistics Missiles ...
> We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )
> 
> The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ...
> 
> *We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *
> 
> OldTwilight / Ghalam ...



So much wrong information in this post. I won’t even bother counter arguing it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OldTwilight

TheImmortal said:


> So much wrong information in this post. I won’t even bother counter arguing it.



Did I ask for your opinion in first place !? 
and the truth is that you actually "counter arguing it " ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

OldTwilight said:


> Did I ask for your opinion in first place !?
> and the truth is that you actually "counter arguing it " ...



You should probably refrain from saying idiotic things like AD systems are useless.

If it wasn’t for 3rd Khordad or other Iranian AD systems that Global Hawk would be flying over every sensitive military site in Iran along with RQ-170. Not to mention U2 spy planes.

But if you wish to use the AD network (or lack thereof) of a 3rd world country like Armenia to make your thesis than so be it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

No body is saying AD is not required.....sitting at home sipping tea thinking you are safe because you have top of the line AD is not going to be wise either...you need a mix of AD and offensive weapons tailored to your most potent enemy Capabilities...AD buys you time and extracts some blood from attacking force..but what really scares the enemy is your offensive response...remember Saddam got to shoot some US planes and captured some pilots but the idiots had no way of punching back where all those planes were coming from.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318441143449903107Let’s hope the bavar-373 will be present in the drills, and some new AD, but basically I want to see the bavar-373 for the first time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AmirPatriot

Saleh99 said:


> I agree about the mobile ADs 3rd khordad/ Talash. As I said above, iran has the ADs and equipment, but that’s related to the production line and If Iran is willing to deploy all their ADs or keep them hidden as part of asymmetric warfare, as you said also. Regarding the map, it was created by @AmirPatriot


The map is 2 years old now so it's a bit outdated, things have changed. I also exclude some sites when I make those maps for opsec reasons

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

Anyone knows in what part of the country will the AD exercise will take place?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Anyone knows in what part of the country will the AD exercise will take place?


half of Iran, which is basically half of west EU


----------



## zectech

OldTwilight said:


> Resources , we have limited financial resource ....
> 
> if you going to street fight and you have limited resource , do you buy armor our a sword !? in best case you avoid fight , in better choose , you buy both of these , but if you only have money for buying one , you probably go to buying sword because fights cant be with by defensive measure alone ...



You use the developments in AD to develop missiles that can overcome them, and then develop ADS that can overcome the missiles, and so on. They work hand-in-hand. You have multiple projects, each trying to get better.

Buying SU-30SM2 with no engine ToT, is a waste of resources. billions of euros wasted, for target practice for US F-22s. SU-35s are even more expensive target practice.

Kowsars are half the price, develop your own radars, keep working on those engines, have 6th gen kowsars with commanding drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

Drone a2a seem to be the near future with cheaper options just like drone a2g is getting more used. As from long ranges it is difficult for radar to precisely track stealth objects and gives away your position which is subject to very long range attacks especially if radar is on the ground.

In Paf seciton I also posted this a ramjet drone would have the speed about mach 3 , almost no moving parts in the ramjet engine making it cheaper than jet engine and can take out the target precisely getting closer to it. The ground or awacs radar wont be revealed by tracking the target with stronger signals. This one needs a nose radar, landing gear and internal bays to store aams though. Taking off can be made by jettisonable rockets to give it some altitude or ZEL launch(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-length_launch) and initial speed for ramjet to take over.

This one does not have a rocket engine but only a ramjet engine so under its both wings two disposable rockets can be used to shoot it directly upwards like a space shuttle to give it altittude and speed necessary for ramjet to take over rest of the flight. After its mission it can glide down and land to an airfield if landing gear is installed.









Lockheed D-21 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org











Another ramjet missile that was used previously and converted to a drone later is Bomarc which has about 700km range with about mach 2.5 speed









CIM-10 Bomarc - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org










It needs a landing gear but in this example a landing skid would be better to land on unprepared ground requiring no airfield similar to ww2 rocket engine fighters like me-163 . Since it flies at higher altitudes than jets the ramjets can be replaced above the wings and wont contribute to increase its radar cross section for ground radars and enemy aircraft. Also its tail configuration and cylinder body is a radar reflector and it needs to be refurbished to a better shape(hexagon body maybe wings - elevators at the middle of the body and V tail). Something like below as a picture is worth a thousand words.









However even without modification cim-10 bomarc with its current shape has about mach 2.8 . It can intercept other planes effectively.

Some countries started to turn old aircraft into drones possibly for a2a purpose.

dont give up sams as if the radars are protected well they can be of good use and combined with other systems like IRST tracking they can stay stealthy but there should be alternatives for emerging threats.


Su-30 is a good aircraft and its powerful radar can be used as a semi awacs role which can protect itself to a degree at least against 4th-4.5 generation aircraft. However Iran should be careful about at least producing its own software for ew , radar, even avionics-control software parts. It wont be a big surprise at all when putin gives all the codes behind to israel as there seems to be some "influence" or "connection" on him. This is most evidently true after he stayed silent for a long time after Usa assasination of Iranian general showing that he might have prior knowledge about the attack or at least he was told immediately by someone to stay out until israel-usa finishes its job with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*and here we go. Sky Defenders 99 exercise 



















*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*i see new systems new radar*

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## zectech

OldTwilight said:


> Anti Aire Defense System are proven to be weak and useless against modern threats such as :
> 
> Stealth Cruise Missiles
> UCAV
> Drone
> Long Rang Guided Bomb and Missiles
> Fast Projectile ( such as Super fast Cruise missiles , Hypersonic missiles )
> Modern Ballistics Missiles ...
> We shouldn't spend our limited resource on Anti Air Defense System or purchase something like S400 ( Armenia S300 was destroyed by 10,000$ drone ... )
> 
> The best defense is offense , we should build up our offensive capabilities and in any war , just destroy our enemies assets as soon as possible ...
> 
> *We should have dirty nukes and hypersonic missiles for ultimate defensive system ... *
> 
> OldTwilight / Ghalam ...



US has EW/mini-emp air defense missile that destroy the missiles electronics in flight (instead of kinetic explosion) to make the target a dump missile. Develop this technology and the radiation-hardened microchips and electronics and faraday cages and ECM to defeat these EW weapons against your missiles.

Then there is laser air defenses, along bettering your CiWS and AA artillery and Gatling guns air defense.

Bavar 373 is not the top out there, Bavar 373 is better than anything you can buy from Russia though. You have to get to the point where it is futile for your enemy to use any missiles. That is your goal. Then is the war of railguns and lasers and droid robots.


----------



## skyshadow

*i stand corrected , Iran has confirmed some of the systems used in the exercise are being seen for the first time and that all the systems used are Iranian made systems. soo all the systems you see here are Iranian built.

برخی سامانه های مورد استفاده در این رزمایش برای اولین بار استفاده خواهند شد. 










رزمایش مشترک ارتش و سپاه /به پرواز در آمدن بمب افکن ها و پهپادهای بدون سرنشین


امیر سرتیپ قادر رحیم‌زاده فرمانده رزمایش تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت ۹۹ گفت: این رزمایش در منطقه‌ای به وسعت بیش از نیمی از کشور، به صورت مشترک بین ارتش و سپاه با هدایت و کنترل عملیاتی قرارگاه پدافند هوایی کشور از فردا آغاز می‌شود.




www.khabaronline.ir




*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

"Bavar" was mentioned in the promo, so we can expect to see it operational.

I only wonder if IRGC feels ready to show the Alam ol Hoda after all these years to the public. Its such an important system to break enemy airpower kill chain.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ Mersad-16 TEL for Shalamche-2 missiles




^ Mersad-16 TEL for Shalamche-2 missiles




^ Hadi HPIR




^ Kavosh or Soroush 2D PAR





^ 9K331E Tor-M1E TELAR




^ 9S737MK Ranzhir-M1 mobile command post





^ Tabas TELAR




^ Tabas TELAR




^ Tabas TELAR

Some videos from the first day of the exercise: https://www.iribnews.ir/00C3Fk

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran hints that it has secret AD systems that will not show to surprises enemies in the time of war. and 15th of khordad and 3th of khordad had destroyed there targets.*


تنها بخشی از این توان بوده و بخش مهم دیگری از تجهیزات و توانمندی‌های پدافند هوایی در فضای جنگ واقعی است که برای دشمنان غافلگیری رقم خواهد زد. 








انهدام اهداف متخاصم با سامانه‌های بومی «سوم خرداد» و «۱۵ خرداد»


در رزمایش مشترک تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت ۹۹ اهداف ارتفاع متوسط و ارتفاع بلند مهاجم با شلیک سامانه‌های بومی سوم خرداد نیروی هوافضای سپاه و ۱۵ خرداد نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش سرنگون شدند.




defapress.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*so it seems this is Morageb which is AESA radar with 400 Km range, specialises on detecting and tracking small UAVs*










*soooo i just saw Bavar-373 radars so 99% Bavar is in the exercise too.*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Army is equipping its Tor M-1 with EO / IR cameras for day and night conformation of the target something i wish IRGC had done long time ago*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

skyshadow said:


> *Army is equipping its Tor M-1 with EO / IR cameras for day and night conformation of the target something i wish IRGC had done long time ago*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318861763266437121

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ Bavar-373's acquisition radar can be seen in the video





























































Source: https://tn.ai/2374261

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

Source: https://tn.ai/2374261


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318887062855208962

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

zectech said:


> US has EW/mini-emp air defense missile that destroy the missiles electronics in flight (instead of kinetic explosion) to make the target a dump missile. Develop this technology and the radiation-hardened microchips and electronics and faraday cages and ECM to defeat these EW weapons against your missiles.


Why didnt US use this technology against the 17 missiles that his the Al-Ain base in Iraq after SOleimani's murder? Aso, if this technology really works why did US empty the Al-Udeid base in Qatar US uses to controll ALL its Middle East air operations?
instead US sent a CIWS system to the base...smh

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Basically today we saw iran majority of Air Defence systems. Tabas, 3rd khordad, mersad-16, khordad-15, and Tor system. Bavar-373 radar presence indicates that the system will be tested which confirms it is operational. Two days left, let’s hope for surprises.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Those two radars that are used in hawk systems are also used in mersad-16.
Does anyone know if those radars are upgraded? @Mithridates @skyshadow @PeeD 
Or just moved to digital area?




Comparison

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318922365384990721

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Khordad air defence:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318976320315904000

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Sayyad-3 missile from Iranian "15th Khordad" SAM system. *
















*









Iranian "Mersad-16"SAM system. *






*













*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *Sayyad-3 missile from Iranian "15th Khordad" SAM system. *
> 
> View attachment 681528
> 
> 
> View attachment 681530
> 
> 
> View attachment 681533
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 681527
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian "Mersad-16"SAM system. *
> 
> View attachment 681539
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 681535
> 
> 
> View attachment 681538
> 
> 
> View attachment 681536
> *


The radar used by 15th khordad is najm-804? Any specifications about it?


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318996463075155970New footage of bavar-373

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*hit Iran today *








Saleh99 said:


> The radar used by 15th khordad is najm-804? Any specifications about it?


its najm-802B, not that i know of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

15th Khordad:















Mersad-16:
























3rd Khordad:












Tabas:









Source: https://defapress.ir/422876

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *hit Iran today *
> 
> 
> View attachment 681558
> 
> 
> its najm-802B, not that i know of.


As far as I know it is najm-804 used by 15th khordad not najm-802B. najm-802B is X band while 804 is S band.


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> As far as I know it is najm-804 used by 15th khordad not najm-802B. najm-802B is X band while 804 is S band.



look at this and see the one in the video , its an updated Najm - 802B radar more mobile more advance , not officially unveiled yet

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

Seems electronic warfare is a big part of these drills, as expected,


*"Iran’s Armed Forces have launched large-scale aerial drills involving electronic warfare units and featuring the country’s domestically-built air defense systems and equipment.*

Air defense divisions of Iran’s Army and Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) are participating in the joint aerial maneuvers codenamed Modafean Aseman Velayat 99.

On the first day of the drills, the participating troops practiced a wide range of electronic warfare tactics.

During the exercises, the performance and capabilities of Iranian air defense systems were evaluated by simulating real electronic warfare conditions and exposing them to jamming generated by drones equipped with jammer devices.

Meanwhile, air defense units carried out jamming operations against mock hostile drones and successfully took control of them, preventing them from reaching the drill zone, which covers more than half of the
country."









Iran air defense maneuvers: Forces perform massive electronic warfare drills


Iran’s Armed Forces have launch large-scale aerial drills involving electronic warfare units and featuring the country’s domestically-built air defense systems and equipment.




www.presstv.com

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> Seems electronic warfare is a big part of these drills, as expected,
> 
> 
> *"Iran’s Armed Forces have launched large-scale aerial drills involving electronic warfare units and featuring the country’s domestically-built air defense systems and equipment.*
> 
> Air defense divisions of Iran’s Army and Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) are participating in the joint aerial maneuvers codenamed Modafean Aseman Velayat 99.
> 
> On the first day of the drills, the participating troops practiced a wide range of electronic warfare tactics.
> 
> During the exercises, the performance and capabilities of Iranian air defense systems were evaluated by simulating real electronic warfare conditions and exposing them to jamming generated by drones equipped with jammer devices.
> 
> Meanwhile, air defense units carried out jamming operations against mock hostile drones and successfully took control of them, preventing them from reaching the drill zone, which covers more than half of the
> country."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran air defense maneuvers: Forces perform massive electronic warfare drills
> 
> 
> Iran’s Armed Forces have launch large-scale aerial drills involving electronic warfare units and featuring the country’s domestically-built air defense systems and equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.presstv.com


told you guys those Hormuz-2 missiles could be used as target because of the radar and guidance sections





*soooo IRGC had something surprising for us today, knew these guys are not going down without a fight ( meaning they are going to use old systems and let army humiliate them with new systems like 15 of khordad and Bavar-373 )


IRGC said : today we used new secret systems and new Air defense systems that will be shown in future.










رزمایش مشترک تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت 99 آغاز شد- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم - Tasnim


رزمایش مشترک تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت 99 با اعلام رمز یا رسول الله(ص) با گسترش و استقرار سامانه‌های بومی موشکی، راداری، اطلاعات شناسایی، جنگ الکترونیک، سامانه های ارتباطی و شبکه دیده بانی بصری آغاز شد.




www.tasnimnews.com




*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> told you guys those Hormuz-2 missiles could be used as target because of the radar and guidance sections
> *soooo IRGC had something surprising for us today, knew these guys are not going down without a fight ( meaning they are going to use old systems and let army humiliate them with new systems like 15 of khordad and Bavar-373 )
> 
> 
> IRGC said : today we used new secret systems that will be shown in future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> رزمایش مشترک تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت 99 آغاز شد- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم - Tasnim
> 
> 
> رزمایش مشترک تخصصی پدافند هوایی مدافعان آسمان ولایت 99 با اعلام رمز یا رسول الله(ص) با گسترش و استقرار سامانه‌های بومی موشکی، راداری، اطلاعات شناسایی، جنگ الکترونیک، سامانه های ارتباطی و شبکه دیده بانی بصری آغاز شد.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Is that true? That new short range system And EW system were tested, will be unveiled in future?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Is that true? That new short range system And EW system were tested, will be unveiled in future?
> View attachment 681568


if its not unveiled im not going to comment on it and you know why. what i can tell you is that IRGC has confirmed they used new air defense systems, and its something big and powerful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*All in one





*

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## EvilWesteners

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 681579
> 
> 
> View attachment 681580
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *All in one
> 
> 
> View attachment 681582
> *



Must admit, GREAT accomplishments by Iran. Only little over 15 years ago they were trying to reverse engineer P12 radar. Excellent work. Viva la Libertad

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Saleh99 said:


> Basically today we saw iran majority of Air Defence systems. Tabas, 3rd khordad, mersad-16, khordad-15, and Tor system. Bavar-373 radar presence indicates that the system will be tested which confirms it is operational. Two days left, let’s hope for surprises.


I wanted Oghab so we could say we completed all defensive tires sadly it seems we must wait more

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MTN1917

Bavar-373 with new 8x8 TEL, probabley the mass produced version.

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
1


----------



## MTN1917

500 said:


> I wonder what it will be:
> 
> 1) Repainted S-200?
> 2) Repainted Hawk?
> 3) Oil Drums?
> 4) Plastic toy like Qaher-313?


You can see your beloved oil drums above, just becoming operational with IRIADF.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319173130758258690

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

MTN1917 said:


> You can see your beloved oil drums above, just becoming operational with IRIADF.


I remember those clearly, bro...

We used to fight with him... check my signature, since then the unveiling of bavar 373, i have been looking for him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## MTN1917

Shams313 said:


> I remember those clearly, bro...
> 
> We used to fight with him... check my signature, since then the unveiling of bavar 373, i have been looking for him.


I miss those days, users here at pak defence are good comparing to the good old WAFF.

We had a field day with them in WAFF, but as the saying goes first they laugh at you then they will ignore you and then you win.

These achievements have been achieved by dedicated personnel in MODAFL, IRGC and Army, we will be always grateful to them, ten years ago we only copied MIM-23 and HQ-7s but today we are a leading nation in air defense.

As for @500 recently we have seen a lot from another of his favorites, firetrucks(AKA 3rd Khordad, Tabas and Raad).



500 said:


> RAAD = Russian Buk missiles packed on airport fire truck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *+*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *=*



Tabas and 3rd Khordad participating in this exercise.




This baby even has extinguished a Global Hawk.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

MTN1917 said:


> I miss those days, users here at pak defence are good comparing to the good old WAFF.
> 
> We had a field day with them in WAFF, but as the saying goes first they laugh at you then they will ignore you and then you win.
> 
> These achievements have been achieved by dedicated personnel in MODAFL, IRGC and Army, we will be always grateful to them, ten years ago we only copied MIM-23 and HQ-7s but today we are a leading nation in air defense.
> 
> As for @500 recently we have seen a lot from another of his favorites, firetrucks(AKA 3rd Khordad, Tabas and Raad).
> 
> 
> 
> Tabas and 3rd Khordad participating in this exercise.
> View attachment 681631
> 
> This baby even has extinguished a Global Hawk.
> View attachment 681633


LOL!!
I remember that post,the irony is that the pictured Carmichael cobra 2 crash tender is HUGE,heres a picture with some people for comparison.




Now heres the tabbas [same chassis as the 3rd of khordad] for comparison




Bit of a difference,eh?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

EvilWesteners said:


> Must admit, GREAT accomplishments by Iran. Only little over 15 years ago they were trying to reverse engineer P12 radar. Excellent work. Viva la Libertad


thanks its very appropriated , well 30 years of investment in universities and closing the technology gap is finally paying off.


----------



## skyshadow

*look at the sharpness and the angel of the missile this indicate high hypersonic speed mach 8-9 and above a new missile for Bavar for long ranges*

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Saleh99

This 


skyshadow said:


> *look at the sharpness and the angel of the missile this indicate high hypersonic speed mach 8-9 and above a new missile for Bavar for long ranges*
> 
> View attachment 681716


this missile looks different than sayyad-4...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NaCon



Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## MTN1917

They have blurred the video where it shows the TEL in the launch.








Also there is something fishy about this pic




And have used the old video of Bavar-373 TEL.

The only video showing new TEL is this.




There is something else on that truck beside the missile cans and they don't want us to see it for now but appearently Bavar-373 new TEL is a TELAR, it has a radar like S300V.

And there is evidence.
This video shows the manufacturing of TEL(TELAR) and the radar is clearly visible.









I am getting exicetd.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Aspen

Look at this man, this is incredible. I enjoyed watching this so much. Iran has lightning pace of missile development, its stunning. Iranians should be proud of this. It seems like IRGC unveils a new missile every week!

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Source: mehrnews.com/xSY6n

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## NADIM.NAZI

I think baver 373 in 8*8 truck means there is a big surprise in 10*10 truck

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Saleh99

@skyshadow can you explain what happened today? I’m really confused. Is the 8*8 TEL the final version of bavar-373, or it is another variant besides the 10*10 TEL?
Also missiles are different...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arashkamangir

@PeeD 

I have used a generic web based AI based upscaler, here is a zoomed in version. 

There likely is some AI upscaling artifact as the AI training sets may not contain images of military hardware. This may show up as skewed lines and what not. Regardless, take this image with a grain a of salt.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow can you explain what happened today? I’m really confused. Is the 8*8 TEL the final version of bavar-373, or it is another variant besides the 10*10 TEL?
> Also missiles are different...
> View attachment 681812
> View attachment 681813


well first of all it didn't happen today it happened 2 days ago , yes 10*10 is going to have surprise with +400 km missiles heavy missiles mach +12 speeds. the red missile is for aerial targets the other one is for anti BM - anti CM with the ability to go after aerial targets too. so basically this is the anti missile one and probably open for experts the 10*10 is the the S-400 on steroids im guessing with new upgraded radars non expert version.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> @PeeD
> 
> I have used a generic web based AI based upscaler, here is a zoomed in version.
> 
> There likely is some AI upscaling artifact as the AI training sets may not contain images of military hardware. This may show up as skewed lines and what not. Regardless, take this image with a grain a of salt.



Well should be a Sayyad-4, just blurred lines.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

According to Hossein Dalirian (on Instagram), Sayyad-4's max range is 220 km.


----------



## Philosopher

Trust vector control in action:










What a beauty:

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Well should be a Sayyad-4, just blurred lines.



Well, i was thinking that it might be an artifact of motion blur but for a vertically launched missile, the motion blurred artifacts tend to show up as vertically stretched features. Since Sayyad 4 has fins, we should expect to see vertically stretched fins.

Optical artifacts due to air and vapor is a possibility but i don't know how they would manifest.

IMO, resolution artifacts though are less likely as even with original image from Twitter, you can still see the silhouette without any fins. I think the nose cone vertex is on par in size with Sayyad 4 fins, yet still we can still "see" it.


Actually, if we take the image as it appears, a finless chassis with sharp nose cone, would it make sense for a high kinetic AA?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

arashkamangir said:


> Well, i was thinking that it might be an artifact of motion blur but for a vertically launched missile, the motion blurred artifacts tend to show up as vertically stretched features. Since Sayyad 4 has fins, we should expect to see vertically stretched fins.
> 
> Optical artifacts due to air and vapor is a possibility but i don't know how they would manifest.
> 
> IMO, resolution artifacts though are less likely as even with original image from Twitter, you can still see the silhouette without any fins. I think the nose cone vertex is on par in size with Sayyad 4 fins, yet still we can still "see" it.
> 
> 
> Actually, if we take the image as it appears, a finless chassis with sharp nose cone, would it make sense for a high kinetic AA?



Iran is intentionally making a secret of this Bavar-373 test, psyops, disinformation.
So nothing really clear can be said here.

Maybe next year we see a standard full size Bavar-373 battery in action, maybe it is too hot for now to show it's details to enemy Intel.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319307467197734912Looks like this TEL can hold 6 missiles...

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## NaCon

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319307467197734912Looks like this TEL can hold 6 missiles...


Most likely just 3 not 6

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raptor22

Is it the possible plan of attacking Iran?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Sineva

Philosopher said:


> Trust vector control in action:
> 
> View attachment 681825
> 
> 
> View attachment 681826
> 
> What a beauty:
> 
> View attachment 681827


This could actually be the original bavar 373 4axle tel that was originally intended to use an s300v type mast illuminator,thats why theres the large gap between the 2 launch canisters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Keep in mind that we dont know the maximum speed at motor burnout,this could potentially be higher than the estimated speed.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319239908188454918

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Keep in mind that we dont know the maximum speed at motor burnout,this could potentially be higher than the estimated speed.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319239908188454918


i say high hypersonic mach 8-9 at best at least for this missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*so the exercise has just ended ( out of nowhere ) and they don't say why it's extremely wearied this almost never happens 

something is cooking and we don't know what it is.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> *so the exercise has just ended ( out of nowhere ) and they don't say why it's extremely wearied this almost never happens
> 
> something is cooking and we don't know what it is.*



Who said it has ended?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MTN1917

Sineva said:


> This could actually be the original bavar 373 4axle tel that was originally intended to use an s300v type mast illuminator,thats why theres the large gap between the 2 launch canisters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 681844
> 
> View attachment 681845


I believe that the S-300V type that we see been manufactured is not cancelled and as a matter of fact ut is the final and latest version, with TEL being the prototype.

This Bavar test was also possibly conducted by S300v type TELAR.


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> Who said it has ended?


army






*i think the white missile for Bavar-373 uses hit to kill technology as i didn't see explosion not from target drone and not from video released and its in line with almost all western anti BM systems *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> army



They probably achieved all their objectives, so the two days was all it was. You can tell most of the drills was kept quite secret with only very limited information being allowed out. They definitely tested all sorts of new systems we have never seen before. This entire drills was about using their new systems.

I think in the next year we will see new development to Bavar, they did say after 2 years it will surpass S-400. We should definitely expect a new very long range missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 681843
> 
> Is it the possible plan of attacking Iran?


Good catch!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

raptor22 said:


> View attachment 681843
> 
> Is it the possible plan of attacking Iran?


Too obvious?


skyshadow said:


> *look at the sharpness and the angel of the missile this indicate high hypersonic speed mach 8-9 and above a new missile for Bavar for long ranges*
> 
> View attachment 681716


Is it designed to deal with future IRBMs and hypersonic weapons?


----------



## EvilWesteners

Philosopher said:


> They probably achieved all their objectives, so the two days was all it was. You can tell most of the drills was kept quite secret with only very limited information being allowed out. They definitely tested all sorts of new systems we have never seen before. This entire drills was about using their new systems.
> 
> I think in the next year we will see new development to Bavar, they did say after 2 years it will surpass S-400. We should definitely expect a new very long range missile.



U.S. (and her closest allies) know almost all of what Iran does during these war games. I give you one hint: "Trump with his big mouth said that, at the time of RQ4A shooting down, that the Iranian AD unit did not get permission from command center and decided to shoot down the RQ4A on its own". Similar stupid thing was said when the Iranian space launch failed, which U.S. military command cringed at his stupidity to divulge information which tells the other side what U.S. is doing and how much they have infiltrated the networks.

I have no idea how much, but I would assume most of Iran's networks have been compromised and infiltrated.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

MTN1917 said:


> They have blurred the video where it shows the TEL in the launch.
> View attachment 681760
> 
> View attachment 681759
> 
> Also there is something fishy about this pic
> View attachment 681761
> 
> And have used the old video of Bavar-373 TEL.
> 
> The only video showing new TEL is this.
> View attachment 681762
> 
> There is something else on that truck beside the missile cans and they don't want us to see it for now but appearently Bavar-373 new TEL is a TELAR, it has a radar like S300V.
> 
> And there is evidence.
> This video shows the manufacturing of TEL(TELAR) and the radar is clearly visible.
> View attachment 681764
> 
> View attachment 681765
> 
> 
> I am getting exicetd.



That’s an Bavar prototype that lost out to the winner prototype.

It was supposed to be Iran’s S300V.

They may develop it for ABM capability or they may incorporate some aspects for next gen Bavar.


EvilWesteners said:


> U.S. (and her closest allies) know almost all of what Iran does during these war games. I give you one hint: "Trump with his big mouth said that, at the time of RQ4A shooting down, that the Iranian AD unit did not get permission from command center and decided to shoot down the RQ4A on its own". Similar stupid thing was said when the Iranian space launch failed, which U.S. military command cringed at his stupidity to divulge information which tells the other side what U.S. is doing and how much they have infiltrated the networks.
> 
> I have no idea how much, but I would assume most of Iran's networks have been compromised and infiltrated.



You don’t talk on encrypted channels unless it’s times of war or highly sensitive information.

By purposefully communicating on Intercept-able channels you are letting the enemy know of a de-escalation cycle. You are basically telegraphing to the enemy there is not more attacks coming. I’m sure US did the same with Centcom after Solemani assassination so Iranian SIGNIT would understand there isn’t war coming.

And space launch was done by a civilian government agency so they would be using interceptable communication. They were launching a micro satellite not the Death Star.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raptor22

Arminkh said:


> Good catch!





Oldman1 said:


> Too obvious?


No I wondered why no threats is seen from north ... I mean obviously main wave of any aerial attack would be from south & west and then east but nothing from north at all? back in Shah time there was a plan in case of Soviet union invasion of Iran to withdraw to Zagros mountains waiting for allies to come to assistance Iran "Exercise Delawar" :



Sure no SU any more there but as far as I remember back in 2003 american parachuted in north Iraq (Kurdistan) ,despite Turkey refusal to let them use their lands, to open a new front even though by less number of troops ...


----------



## Russel

What does ‘Electro optic guided target’ means in below report from fats news? Is it a wrong reporting? May be they used electro optic guided missile!


FarsNews Agency - Iran's Strategic Bavar 373 Missile Shield Intercepts Electro-Optic-Guided Target in Drills


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> Too obvious?
> 
> Is it designed to deal with future IRBMs and hypersonic weapons?


all ballistic missiles are hypersonic so yes, but new threat Iran face is hypersonic glide vehicles


----------



## skyshadow

Russel said:


> What does ‘Electro optic guided target’ means in below report from fats news? Is it a wrong reporting? May be they used electro optic guided missile!
> 
> 
> FarsNews Agency - Iran's Strategic Bavar 373 Missile Shield Intercepts Electro-Optic-Guided Target in Drills


*they mean this, look at the nose section*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MTN1917

TheImmortal said:


> That’s an Bavar prototype that lost out to the winner prototype.
> 
> It was supposed to be Iran’s S300V.
> 
> They may develop it for ABM capability or they may incorporate some aspects for next gen Bavar.


I have a different opinion, the s300v like TEL we saw on the video is an exact match to the nee TEL, it being a lost prototype is only a speculation as is my view.

Time will tell, sooner or later.


----------



## skyshadow

*look what i found *

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*new image of Sayyad - 4 missile









Tor m1 with EO/IR camera 




*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> *look what i found *
> 
> View attachment 681986


Is this a new AD or only a radar? Looks like that a little bit.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

skyshadow said:


> *new image of Sayyad - 4 missile
> 
> View attachment 681993
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tor m1 with EO/IR camera
> 
> View attachment 681995
> *



This optical camera was there in 2016

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

MTN1917 said:


> I have a different opinion, the s300v like TEL we saw on the video is an exact match to the nee TEL, it being a lost prototype is only a speculation as is my view.
> 
> Time will tell, sooner or later.



@PeeD already posted that picture a while back.

We know there was a standard “bidding” cycle for BAVAR and different organizations submitted their prototypes.

I don’t think Bavar has reached mass production yet and the final version is still undergoing tweaks.


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> @PeeD already posted that picture a while back.
> 
> We know there was a standard “bidding” cycle for BAVAR and different organizations submitted their prototypes.
> 
> I don’t think Bavar has reached mass production yet and the final version is still undergoing tweaks.



Seems like that the Zoljanah actually lost to this smaller one with a S-300V like radar.
I guess they thought that Zoljanah 10x10 would be needed to carry missile and radar but later found out that it was possible to do it with the 8x8.

Not really "lost" as there were no different companies involved maybe two different design teams at best or rather just evolution of the design of one team.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Is this a new AD or only a radar? Looks like that a little bit.
> View attachment 682017


its Kashef-99 radar


Mr Iran Eye said:


> This optical camera was there in 2016


will its something good that army did.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

PeeD said:


> Seems like that the Zoljanah actually lost to this smaller one with a S-300V like radar.
> I guess they thought that Zoljanah 10x10 would be needed to carry missile and radar but later found out that it was possible to do it with the 8x8.
> 
> Not really "lost" as there were no different companies involved maybe two different design teams at best or rather just evolution of the design of one team.


So basically, the bavar-373 battery will include the two AESA radars plus the meraj-4 like the s-300P structure(Flap Lid,Gravestone,tombstone) also adding TELAR instead of TEL like S-300vm? @PeeD


----------



## PeeD

Saleh99 said:


> So basically, the bavar-373 battery will include the two AESA radars plus the meraj-4 like the s-300P structure(Flap Lid,Gravestone,tombstone) also adding TELAR instead of TEL like S-300vm? @PeeD



Seems so.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*hit Iran but didn't explode *


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319928859698040832


----------



## AmirPatriot

Sineva said:


> Keep in mind that we dont know the maximum speed at motor burnout,this could potentially be higher than the estimated speed.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319239908188454918



I should say that the estimate was based on very limited information, with the main caveat being that we don't know exactly when the missile was fired (there was a cut from the command centre screen showing the missile launch to the radar screen). That's why I added this disclaimer at the end. Burnout velocity would likely be similar to the 48N6 (~Mach 6.5).


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1319240307838472192

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 682288



Iranian TOR?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Draco.IMF said:


> Iranian TOR?


Yes, that's most probably the Oghab which appears to be mounted on an Iveco Trakker 6x6 heavy-duty truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

It seems Bavar is a hybrid system. It also makes sense why Iran did not want the S-300V that Russia offered during negotiations. It was already developing an S-300V.

It’s seems there will be at least 3 Bavars.

Bavar-V = S-300V like system can intercept BMs and operate at a lower cost than other Bavars. Battery can operate more autonomously.

Bavar-373 = the traditional unveiled version. Costly but on par with the latest S-300.

Bavar-L = Next gen longer range variant (S-400/S-500) with more capability and potentially a Sayaad-5 missile for hypersonic target interception.

Again just a theory. The Bavar-L is probably in r&d. Right now it seems Bavar-V and Bavar-373 are in a dual hybrid approach for survivability and affordability.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> Iranian TOR?


yes and also 2 Pantsir like systems

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Can you predict the remaining 5 in blue? The one in green looks like pantsir @skyshadow


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> Can you predict the remaining 5 in blue? The one in green looks like pantsir @skyshadow
> View attachment 682379


not really but the one on the left is Mersad-16, the one with green line on it is a radar sooo if im to say i will say the 3 remaining dark green ones

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

skyshadow said:


> all ballistic missiles are hypersonic so yes, but new threat Iran face is hypersonic glide vehicles


What about MARVs?


----------



## skyshadow

Oldman1 said:


> What about MARVs?


even those are, Hajj Qasem is a hypersonic MARV. if Iran test Bavar with Hajj Qasem missile and hit it then its a major major major boost in Bavar and Iran air defense capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320273548187996160

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320771861928693765




Do you think the TEL will only hold 2 missiles like the one variant of s-300V4? Or it can hold two more?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320771861928693765
> View attachment 682877
> 
> Do you think the TEL will only hold 2 missiles like the one variant of s-300V4? Or it can hold two more?


S-300V TEL with two missile hold 2 bigger 9A82 /9A83 Giant missiles while quad TEL holds four smaller missiles 9A83/9A85....it is not just configuration...Giant missiles are much..much bigger and heavier

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320771861928693765
> View attachment 682877
> 
> Do you think the TEL will only hold 2 missiles like the one variant of s-300V4? Or it can hold two more?



This is NOT REAL photo is it ??? it is photoshop-ed correct ???


----------



## TheImmortal

EvilWesteners said:


> This is NOT REAL photo is it ??? it is photoshop-ed correct ???



yes, for security reasons Iran is not showing the entire system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*here we have it Bavar-373 illumination Radar *









__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320781926995795972


*and this, army has installed these cameras on almost all of its radars.*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> if its not unveiled im not going to comment on it and you know why. what i can tell you is that IRGC has confirmed they used new air defense systems, and its something big and powerful.



Are you talking about the "2nd generation" Bavar-373? Bigger missiles, better range, better radars...?
I remember I saw around 2 years ago an interview with Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, he mentioned there is a new, better B-373 in work which will surpass S-400 and it will be ready in 2 years...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> Are you talking about the "2nd generation" Bavar-373? Bigger missiles, better range, better radars...?
> I remember I saw around 2 years ago an interview with Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, he mentioned there is a new, better B-373 in work which will surpass S-400 and it will be ready in 2 years...


no im talking about a* completely new system built by another organization* different from the organization that built Bavar-373, that system is a monster by it self.







*enjoy guys this is the real Bavar-373 ( anti ballistic and cruise missile version )*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> no im talking about a* completely new system built by another organization* different from the organization that built Bavar-373, that system is a monster by it self.



You mean the IRGC? I know IRGC has stated they are working on their own long range air defence, but from what I can see in the open source, there is no more information than that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> no im talking about a* completely new system built by another organization* different from the organization that built Bavar-373, that system is a monster by it self.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *enjoy guys this is the real Bavar-373 ( anti ballistic and cruise missile version )*
> 
> View attachment 682904


So You mean this is the anti ballistic anti cruise version and there is another version for jets?
And another question , the other long range powerful system is the Long Range IRGC talked about? Alm Al Hoda or another one?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> You mean the IRGC? I know IRGC has stated they are working on their own long range air defence, but from what I can see in the open source, there is no more information than that.


yes there is not , i just hope we get to see it they have been working on it for more then 10 years now.


Saleh99 said:


> So You mean this is the anti ballistic anti cruise version and there is another version for jets?
> And another question , the other long range powerful system is the Long Range IRGC talked about? Alm Al Hoda or another one?


yes there is at least 3 version of Bavar-373 , well yes IRGC Alm Al Hoda is one of them IRGC actually working on several of there long range air defense systems


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> yes there is not , i just hope we get to see it they have been working on it for more then 10 years now.
> 
> yes there is at least 3 version of Bavar-373 , well yes IRGC Alm Al Hoda is one of them IRGC actually working on several of there long range air defense systems



One of them should be an anti satellite system, my guess...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Draco.IMF said:


> One of them should be an anti satellite system, my guess...


600 km anti satellite for now


----------



## CatSultan

ResurgentIran said:


> We should deliver our most advanced air defence systems to both Syria and Hezbollah.
> That would really limit Israeli adventurism.
> 
> And to protect ourselves, just mass produce those systems and place it in every corner of the country, not to mention in Abu Musa and Tunb Islands. That would limit American adventurism.



We shouldn't give Syria or Hezbollah anything.

Death to Bashar


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

CatSultan said:


> We shouldn't give Syria or Hezbollah anything.
> 
> Death to Bashar



WTF is "we"???

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

Draco.IMF said:


> One of them should be an anti satellite system, my guess...


So Iran is developing something similar to the A-235?


----------



## Darius77

SOHEIL said:


> Great news ... Bad news for Russians !!!


Russia is beholden to the Zionists and not a credible source of weapons as it has stiffed Iran repeatedly and refused to sell any modern aircraft and took a decade to deliver the antiquated S-300 which Azerbaijan destroyed so easily in the current war against Armenia. Iran must develop its own systems and improve military cooperation with China, which is a more reliable partner.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Darius77 said:


> Russia is beholden to the Zionists and not a credible source of weapons as it has stiffed Iran repeatedly and refused to sell any modern aircraft and took a decade to deliver the antiquated S-300 which Azerbaijan destroyed so easily in the current war against Armenia. Iran must develop its own systems and improve military cooperation with China, which is a more reliable partner.



Iran’s S-300 and Armenia’s S-300 are nothing alike and separate by over 30 years worth of technology advancement.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s S-300 and Armenia’s S-300 are nothing alike and separate by over 30 years worth of technology advancement.


Let's hope so. Iran has pretty capable engineers and has modified the S-300 for local conditions. The Russian S-300 systems in Syria have proved to be totally useless as Israel has attacked Syria in broad daylight over hundreds of time. Armenian S-300 proved totally vulnerable to drones and apprently most have been destroyed. The Russian S-400 have never been used in combat, so the jury is still out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Draco.IMF said:


> Are you talking about the "2nd generation" Bavar-373? Bigger missiles, better range, better radars...?


we don't need bigger missile , we need better rocket engine so smaller rocket can go farther and the system manage to carry more missile

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Darius77 said:


> Let's hope so. Iran has pretty capable engineers and has modified the S-300 for local conditions. The Russian S-300 systems in Syria have proved to be totally useless as Israel has attacked Syria in broad daylight over hundreds of time. Armenian S-300 proved totally vulnerable to drones and apprently most have been destroyed. The Russian S-400 have never been used in combat, so the jury is still out.



The S-300 in Syria is operated by Russia and cannot be used against Israel. It is also doubtful it is actually set up for engagement at this point.

Many S-300 that were destroyed in Armenia were not set up and just sitting in storage. One was destroyed via a BM missile strike. They are Soviet Era S-300s

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

Darius77 said:


> Russia is beholden to the Zionists and not a credible source of weapons as it has stiffed Iran repeatedly and refused to sell any modern aircraft and took a decade to deliver the antiquated S-300 which Azerbaijan destroyed so easily in the current war against Armenia. Iran must develop its own systems and improve military cooperation with China, which is a more reliable partner.



Iran's S-300PMU2s are essentially a step-down from the S-400 itself if I'm not mistaken. This AD system is one of the best versions of the S-300 you could hope to have, but your comments on Russia do hold some weight as far as I'm concerned. Albeit the Russians have their own geopolitical reasons for providing and not providing certain systems to countries, what they did to Iran concerning the original S-300 deal was a very treacherous thing to do. Undoubtedly this has left a bad taste in many peoples mouths but we should learn how to move past it but still be cautious of any future dealings. 

Idk what to say about China, it seems that any 'deal' regarding the upgrading of Iran's Air-Force/general military by foreign nations will encounter severe problems ranging from budget, politics, integration, implementation, sanctions etc... We can only hope that Iran can find a way to work with the Russians and Chinese on this issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321098406727720963 interesting


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Blue In Green said:


> Iran's S-300PMU2s are essentially a step-down from the S-400 itself if I'm not mistaken. This AD system is one of the best versions of the S-300 you could hope to have, but your comments on Russia do hold some weight as far as I'm concerned. Albeit the Russians have their own geopolitical reasons for providing and not providing certain systems to countries, what they did to Iran concerning the original S-300 deal was a very treacherous thing to do. Undoubtedly this has left a bad taste in many peoples mouths but we should learn how to move past it but still be cautious of any future dealings.
> 
> Idk what to say about China, it seems that any 'deal' regarding the upgrading of Iran's Air-Force/general military by foreign nations will encounter severe problems ranging from budget, politics, integration, implementation, sanctions etc... We can only hope that Iran can find a way to work with the Russians and Chinese on this issue.



Iran has the world's only version of the S-300PMU3. it can't be an S-300PMU2 because it contains parts of the S400 and even S-350 Vityaz. It's an S-300 IR

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iran has the world's only version of the S-300PMU3. it can't be an S-300PMU2 because it contains parts of the S400 and even S-350 Vityaz. It's an S-300 IR


Who said that? Any article or source i can see?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Saleh99 said:


> Who said that? Any article or source i can see?



Analyzes have already been done here on this forum


----------



## WudangMaster

Greetings to all. 

I have always been puzzled by the size of the sayyad 4 missile and the bavar launch canister. In all the test footage, we see a missile whose cone sticks out of the top of the canister and seems to be sealed in place as fragments appear to break away in the slow motion footage of the missile launch. This might be the case for all sayyad 4 and bavar TEL canisters, or the missiles whose radomes stick out might be a yet unveiled higher altitude longer range range for the higher tier of the bavar family. My main concern is how safe are the missiles radomes and is there any stress on them when sticking out like that or will the final versions fit tightly all the way into their respective canisters and what is seen in the footage are still testing variants.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

WudangMaster said:


> Greetings to all.
> 
> I have always been puzzled by the size of the sayyad 4 missile and the bavar launch canister. In all the test footage, we see a missile whose cone sticks out of the top of the canister and seems to be sealed in place as fragments appear to break away in the slow motion footage of the missile launch. This might be the case for all sayyad 4 and bavar TEL canisters, or the missiles whose radomes stick out might be a yet unveiled higher altitude longer range range for the higher tier of the bavar family. My main concern is how safe are the missiles radomes and is there any stress on them when sticking out like that or will the final versions fit tightly all the way into their respective canisters and what is seen in the footage are still testing variants.


This exact same sort of thing has been seen before during the testing of the sayyad 2 missile for what would ultimately become the 15th of khordad sam system,on those occasions I think that they used a couple of shortened canisters with the nose cones protruding,so there could be a possibility of a slightly stretched version as this new [old?] 4 axle tel variant has raised more questions than it answers.

Theres usually a guide rail or rails to keep the missile properly restrained and centered during transport,elevation and launch,not to mention that the nose cones are fairly robust as they have to penetrate the front of the canister enclose on launch and cope with the huge friction load generated by traveling at hypersonic speed.

The production models of the b373s sayyad 4 canisters will be completely enclosed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Sineva said:


> This exact same sort of thing has been seen before during the testing of the sayyad 2 missile for what would ultimately become the 15th of khordad sam system,on those occasions I think that they used a couple of shortened canisters with the nose cones protruding,so there could be a possibility of a slightly stretched version as this new [old?] 4 axle tel variant has raised more questions than it answers.
> 
> Theres usually a guide rail or rails to keep the missile properly restrained and centered during transport,elevation and launch,not to mention that the nose cones are fairly robust as they have to penetrate the front of the canister enclose on launch and cope with the huge friction load generated by traveling at hypersonic speed.
> 
> The production models of the b373s sayyad 4 canisters will be completely enclosed.



I found the sayyad 2 early test images as well and it seems that for what ever reason, they use shorter canisters during testing phase of most if not all sam system missiles, maybe to film the action as they launch and they need an unobstructed view of the radome?






Photos: Iran Inaugurates Production-Line of Sayyad 2 Missiles


Iran News



www.payvand.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sha ah

So some analysts believe that Bavar-373 is on par or right below S-400 in various categories. Not getting the S-300 was probably the best thing that could have happened to Iran in the long run. It forced Iran to become self sufficient in that field.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321474929594929153

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sha ah

There is no credible evidence proving that the Azeris have been able to destroy the S-300. 

They might have been able to destroy some components at the most but not an entire battery and system. I highly doubt it. 

Also there are various versions of the S-300 and the version Iran ended up getting finally is quite advanced actually. 

When it comes to air defense systems, it's all a numbers game. Let's say there is a SAM system protecting a site with 4 missiles. Let's say something like a BUK or Pantsir by itself. If the enemy launches 8 cruise missiles and 6 armed drones at the SAM / site, well then we know what the end result will be. 

The best way for modern air defense units to be effective is by having a multi-layered system. So having some Pantsirs, then some Tors moving around, some BUKS and some S-300 and S-400 as the last line of defense for example. 

Then there's jamming and counter measures and anti jamming and all that other fun stuff to worry about. You can also have replacement units waiting in fortified underground facilities. So one radar system gets destroyed, okay you can send more. One battery got destroyed, okay you can send more plus a you send a few missile launchers to confront the enemy at the same time. 

In the end it's all a numbers game, that's all.



Darius77 said:


> Russia is beholden to the Zionists and not a credible source of weapons as it has stiffed Iran repeatedly and refused to sell any modern aircraft and took a decade to deliver the antiquated S-300 which Azerbaijan destroyed so easily in the current war against Armenia. Iran must develop its own systems and improve military cooperation with China, which is a more reliable partner.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

An excellent DEFENCE is a highly 'vocal' offence.

Based on my estimates on what percentage of an F4-E Iran can currently reproduce/manufacture, (it is higher than people actually think), and the amount of modifications needed for this INCREDIBLY SIMPLE AIRCRAFT (relative compared to designing from fresh) to be redesigned/manufactured, and update/upgrade. Iran has incredible amount of experience with this aircraft. The entire wings are rebuilt by Iran as we speak, among other things. Wind tunnel testing of course needed ...

... With AL21F engines (even used engines bought on black market, or license built with Russia's help) this platform would be potent with 3 Ghadir Air To Ground missiles ... plenty of room for top bolt-on fuel tank, slightly modify the main landing gear (titanium-cobolt-gold alloy) to accommodate higher maximum landing weight, chopping off the tail, redistributing the weight with elevated cockpit, vertical stabilizers forward (delta wing), shorter by 2.5-3 meters and more maneuverable, single pilot, glass MFD, and auxiliary power supply unit ...

With AL21F, this aircraft can be configured to go higher altitude, and achieve supercruise (without afterburner). Max speed at 60k ft, above M2.5

Manufacturing cost (currently with so many unemployed engineers): $10m-$15 fly-away cost (in quantities higher than 100).

Could be a great workhorse.



...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xbat

EvilWesteners said:


> An excellent DEFENCE is a highly 'vocal' offence.
> 
> Based on my estimates on what percentage of an F4-E Iran can currently reproduce/manufacture, (it is higher than people actually think), and the amount of modifications needed for this INCREDIBLY SIMPLE AIRCRAFT (relative compared to designing from fresh) to be redesigned/manufactured, and update/upgrade. Iran has incredible amount of experience with this aircraft. The entire wings are rebuilt by Iran as we speak, among other things. Wind tunnel testing of course needed ...
> 
> ... With AL21F engines (even used engines bought on black market, or license built with Russia's help) this platform would be potent with 3 Ghadir Air To Ground missiles ... plenty of room for top bolt-on fuel tank, slightly modify the main landing gear (titanium-cobolt-gold alloy) to accommodate higher maximum landing weight, chopping off the tail, redistributing the weight with elevated cockpit, vertical stabilizers forward (delta wing), shorter by 2.5-3 meters and more maneuverable, single pilot, glass MFD, and auxiliary power supply unit ...
> 
> With AL21F, this aircraft can be configured to go higher altitude, and achieve supercruise (without afterburner). Max speed at 60k ft, above M2.5
> 
> Manufacturing cost (currently with so many unemployed engineers): $10m-$15 fly-away cost (in quantities higher than 100).
> 
> Could be a great workhorse.
> View attachment 683567
> ...


You are defining a new aircraft that iran cant make it until now. if you are able to make one than the shape would be more modern. this shape has huge RCS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

xbat said:


> You are defining a new aircraft that iran cant make it until now.



Sources?


----------



## xbat

ok it is my mistake, i couldnt describe myself, the guy wants to make serious changes on f4 but actually it means a new type of aircraft but iran never achieved to make a fighter until now that is all i wanted to say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ich

xbat said:


> ok it is my mistake, i couldnt describe myself, the guy wants to make serious changes on f4 but actually it means a new type of aircraft but iran never achieved to make a fighter until now that is all i wanted to say.



The point is that Iran knows F4 very well. Also Iran knows AL21F engines very well. Meanwhile Iran also has the ability to produce all the parts of F4 or AL21F engines (you can see it at Jahsh-700).

So the possibility is there. The question is: Does it make sense?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

sha ah said:


> So some analysts believe that Bavar-373 is on par or right below S-400 in various categories. Not getting the S-300 was probably the best thing that could have happened to Iran in the long run. It forced Iran to become self sufficient in that field.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321474929594929153


THis chart confirms that Bavar is an AMAZING Iranian achievement....Iranian science has reached the top of the world in recent times and its showing. Looks like Iran has planned,prepared and studied what it really needs and wants regarding AD systems...so everything about Bavar is impressive.

Once bavar is deployed to Syria, IAF flights will reduce, because there wont be any Russians to disable it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## makranman

925boy said:


> THis chart confirms that Bavar is an AMAZING Iranian achievement....Iranian science has reached the top of the world in recent times and its showing. Looks like Iran has planned,prepared and studied what it really needs and wants regarding AD systems...so everything about Bavar is impressive.
> 
> Once bavar is deployed to Syria, IAF flights will reduce, because there wont be any Russians to disable it.


and what happens if bavar gets wrecked? all it takes is 30 cruise missiles to destroy a battalion. even less if ballistic missile is used. IMO bavar anywhere but in iran mainland is a bad idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

makranman said:


> and what happens if bavar gets wrecked? all it takes is 30 cruise missiles to destroy a battalion. even less if ballistic missile is used. IMO bavar anywhere but in iran mainland is a bad idea.


anything can get wrecked, hell, Armenian S300s got wrecked in NK....no system is beyond getting wrecked. ALso, Bavar wont get hit by 30 cruise missiles because it will intercept multiple ones.....and also, most countries cant fire 30 cruise missiles all at once...and bavar wont by the only AD system active in Syria, so there are multiple complicating factors...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## makranman

925boy said:


> anything can get wrecked, hell, Armenian S300s got wrecked in NK....no system is beyond getting wrecked. ALso, Bavar wont get hit by 30 cruise missiles because it will intercept multiple ones.....and also, most countries cant fire 30 cruise missiles all at once...and bavar wont by the only AD system active in Syria, so there are multiple complicating factors...


unfortunately the enemy is israel here. i think they can fire 100 even more cruise missiles at the same time at a target if they want.
no one else requires a system like bavar. IMO against someone like israel, single systems are not enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

makranman said:


> unfortunately the enemy is israel here. i think they can fire 100 even more cruise missiles at the same time at a target if they want.
> no one else requires a system like bavar. IMO against someone like israel, single systems are not enough.


I understand what you mean about Israel being a competent-enough enemy(NOT ON THE GROUND THOUGH, they suck)....but think about it, if they fire 100 cruise missiles then they will probably have no more than a few hundred more in their inventory, so they will run out fast....if u fire 100 cruise missiles per AD system, you surely will run out within a month, because thats too many and they cost ALOT...

ALso, Israel hasnt fire much(if any) cruise missiles against Syrian AD systems...so i dont believ they prefer that method. will be interesting to see for sure, but i strongly believe syria will buy the Bavars..no question.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

925boy said:


> I understand what you mean about Israel being a competent-enough enemy(NOT ON THE GROUND THOUGH, they suck)....but think about it, if they fire 100 cruise missiles then they will probably have no more than a few hundred more in their inventory, so they will run out fast....if u fire 100 cruise missiles per AD system, you surely will run out within a month, because thats too many and they cost ALOT...
> 
> ALso, Israel hasnt fire much(if any) cruise missiles against Syrian AD systems...so i dont believ they prefer that method. will be interesting to see for sure, but i strongly believe syria will buy the Bavars..no question.





The problem is with static classic air defense doctrine and mentality. Once the position is found out by drones-spy satellites,radio location etc. it doesnt matter by low cost low flying harop style suicide drones, gps guided missiles or bombs that can be carried hundres of kms away by planes or drones which can be produced cheaply or even by accurate artillery /ballistic/cruise missile fire the ad system has little chance.

Also ad system if attacked from accross the border needs to take out the attacker platform from accross the border. That requires long range sam and gives the first strike option to attacker side. Laser guided missiles need to be above the target making the carrying platform vulnurable at the same time but gps guided ammunition can be launched further away from very long distances as much as the missile-muniton allows.

Bavar type system mostly static and stationed deep inside the borders having ultralong range can defend an area to an extent(still vulnurable to cruise missiles and other long range attacks after detected by satellites or radio location so they should reposition continiously as well) but frontline short-medium range systems should be paired in at least 2 to cover the same area. One moving and one scouting rotationally. 5-10 mins or less each time they stay stationary at most otherwise they need to rotate and move continiously in the same area repositioning themselves. Otherwise they are like sitting ducks against long range gps-ins guided missile attacks after being detected no matter the number or quality.

fighter interceptor strategy and bvr engagement should support the ad systems by future interceptor drones(wvr / bvr and a cheaper future option than manned planes) or current fighter aircraft. A2a engagement seems to be more promising since future low observable systems would restrict using missiles that require direct location information to hit for the sam at a very high speed. Airbases are vulnurable so many extra long highways should be built in addition to mountain bases. Short-Medium range ad systems should incorporate LPI measures in their radars and need to move continiously

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## EvilWesteners

Ich said:


> The point is that Iran knows F4 very well. Also Iran knows AL21F engines very well. Meanwhile Iran also has the ability to produce all the parts of F4 or AL21F engines (you can see it at Jahsh-700).
> 
> So the possibility is there. The question is: Does it make sense?



GREAT QUESTION ... Ich.

"Does it make sense".

I have toyed with the answer to this question for the past few years. I have run at least 50 design specs (mostly LIFT aircrafts as well as SU-54/55/56 and single engine F4E and single engine YF-23) through my AI Wind Tunnel (a software that emulates wind tunnels and analyzes specs and gives structural analysis charts). I got this running on a super fast computer. The software I got from work a while ago.

When you analyze 50 or so aircrafts and look at things from a dozen different perspectives, AND you change your mind on "making sense" from aircraft to aircraft, it makes you think differently.

Nothing I have analyzed or thought of makes sense long term for Iran, other than a genuinely 5th gen set (2) of aircraft that would be a single engine smaller YF23 and a twin engine larger YF23. Although not necessarily from the "stealth" capability. I don't think much of that for Iran's needs.

However, even if Iran wanted to build these two for the air force to complement its military for defence, even if Iran had the billions of Dollars to invest in this, even if Iran had the talent to build this (I wished everyone knew what happened with Nimrod in UK to understand my point), still with all that .... it would take at least 10-15 years, from building and refining the infrastructure and tooling, to parts manufacturing. It would easily cost Iran some $50b. And remember YF23 is a 1980s design for U.S. i.e. the technology level.

Myself?

I like a twin engines (using J97) Saab Gripen

I also like a single engine (R-35-300) X2 Shinshin

or a a single engine (R-35-300) Mig35 and a F-14 with 2 x R-35-300 engines

The RCS does not concern me much, as we are entering a new dawn by 2024, with SAT (Synchronized Asymmetrical Triangulation), or whatever name they will have for it then. The French are working on this like crazy. They are the best in electronics (in my opinion). U.S. defence industry has 1000s of French engineers working in these companies.

So, the answer to your question ????

NO - it does not make sense. That is an honest non-emotional answer.

But, I have to ask myself ... WHERE IS IRAN TODAY and what are its needs and for defence and deterence?

Then the idea becomes more appealing when I consider Iran's problems, challenges, its funds, and its current air force infrastructure, pilot training, etc. etc..

Then considering how it can protect its interest, and enforce deterence ... Then it becomes forcibly an appealing option.

I heard a U.S. top level general make a comment that was not publicly wise ... what I concluded from his comment was that .... If Iran builds a fighter jet of its own (even a modified F4E, but higher level than F5) then Russians and Chinese are more likely to sell Iran a TOT and assembly line for a SU35 or J31.

When Iran demonstrated its WILL and its ABILITY to shoot down a U.S. RQ-4A, Russia started to think of Iran as a potential partner (one that it can seriously rely on). Unfortunately, when Qassem Sullaimani was assassinated, and Iran's response was "disappointing" from Russia's point of view, the calculus changed again.

The Russians had suggested to Iran that it should wait for a meeting between Pompeo and MBS and then retaliate by taking them out. Zarif and Ruhani are connected in hips to Europe, they think is the saviour of Iran's circumstances. So they disagreed and never took that advice. They are not thinking about the ripple effect, although I admit Iran's security apparatus is a million times smarter than me. But Europe is not much different than U.S. in many ways. Look at how they are sanctioning Libya for no freaking reason. Just because they can.

Thanks for your comments.





Ich said:


> The point is that Iran knows F4 very well. Also Iran knows AL21F engines very well. Meanwhile Iran also has the ability to produce all the parts of F4 or AL21F engines (you can see it at Jahsh-700).
> 
> So the possibility is there. The question is: Does it make sense?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321870755039240194





Also IRGC is deploying TOR system in addition to 3rd khordad pictured days ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321870755039240194



*first image *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321918943204904962Ugh men are still behind 23mm guns...

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321919287498575881

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

EvilWesteners said:


> GREAT QUESTION ... Ich.
> 
> "Does it make sense".
> 
> I have toyed with the answer to this question for the past few years. I have run at least 50 design specs (mostly LIFT aircrafts as well as SU-54/55/56 and single engine F4E and single engine YF-23) through my AI Wind Tunnel (a software that emulates wind tunnels and analyzes specs and gives structural analysis charts). I got this running on a super fast computer. The software I got from work a while ago.



Yes, i also talked here about simulating the complete air plane building process in virtual reality, sometimes. With the new supercomputers Iran now can do the same you do and maybe a bit better. So design and development isnt a long process for Iran now.



> When you analyze 50 or so aircrafts and look at things from a dozen different perspectives, AND you change your mind on "making sense" from aircraft to aircraft, it makes you think differently.
> 
> Nothing I have analyzed or thought of makes sense long term for Iran, other than a genuinely 5th gen set (2) of aircraft that would be a single engine smaller YF23 and a twin engine larger YF23. Although not necessarily from the "stealth" capability. I don't think much of that for Iran's needs.
> 
> However, even if Iran wanted to build these two for the air force to complement its military for defence, even if Iran had the billions of Dollars to invest in this, even if Iran had the talent to build this (I wished everyone knew what happened with Nimrod in UK to understand my point), still with all that .... it would take at least 10-15 years, from building and refining the infrastructure and tooling, to parts manufacturing. It would easily cost Iran some $50b. And remember YF23 is a 1980s design for U.S. i.e. the technology level.



Iran also needs transport aircrafts (plane and choppers), air tankers, medium AWACs and so on. But yes, 2 standard: A fighter/interceptor and a bomber/multirole.

Me think Iran developed and tested its "building and refining the infrastructure and tooling, to parts manufacturing" over the last 30 years. This went hand in hand with the development of all the F5 variants. The long learning process. Also the organization of an air plane production line and how to connect different air plane parts industries to this production line to let the production flow. Hmm, my englisch isnt efficient  But there are Vids one can see it with the production line of one of the F5 variants. Like here






It is clear to see that it is an modular approche and for every section there are the needed parts standing left and right, like it is in the automobile industry. One can see this approche also in the production line of their missiles or UAVs ect.. So for me its clear that Iran know how to build an air plane production line for a newer aircraft type and also know how to implement the parts industry in its flow.




> Myself?
> 
> I like a twin engines (using J97) Saab Gripen
> 
> I also like a single engine (R-35-300) X2 Shinshin
> 
> or a a single engine (R-35-300) Mig35 and a F-14 with 2 x R-35-300 engines
> 
> The RCS does not concern me much, as we are entering a new dawn by 2024, with SAT (Synchronized Asymmetrical Triangulation), or whatever name they will have for it then. The French are working on this like crazy. They are the best in electronics (in my opinion). U.S. defence industry has 1000s of French engineers working in these companies.



Haha, yes, there is no such thing like "optimal RCS". Even a ball would make problems under some conditions. One even dont need a SAT to highlight "stealth" planes from above. Even the HAARP system can do it if it let bounce the frenquency from the ionosphere down to the area where the "stealth" plane is. 




> So, the answer to your question ????
> 
> NO - it does not make sense. That is an honest non-emotional answer.
> 
> But, I have to ask myself ... WHERE IS IRAN TODAY and what are its needs and for defence and deterence?
> 
> Then the idea becomes more appealing when I consider Iran's problems, challenges, its funds, and its current air force infrastructure, pilot training, etc. etc..
> 
> Then considering how it can protect its interest, and enforce deterence ... Then it becomes forcibly an appealing option.
> 
> I heard a U.S. top level general make a comment that was not publicly wise ... what I concluded from his comment was that .... If Iran builds a fighter jet of its own (even a modified F4E, but higher level than F5) then Russians and Chinese are more likely to sell Iran a TOT and assembly line for a SU35 or J31.
> 
> When Iran demonstrated its WILL and its ABILITY to shoot down a U.S. RQ-4A, Russia started to think of Iran as a potential partner (one that it can seriously rely on). Unfortunately, when Qassem Sullaimani was assassinated, and Iran's response was "disappointing" from Russia's point of view, the calculus changed again.
> 
> The Russians had suggested to Iran that it should wait for a meeting between Pompeo and MBS and then retaliate by taking them out. Zarif and Ruhani are connected in hips to Europe, they think is the saviour of Iran's circumstances. So they disagreed and never took that advice. They are not thinking about the ripple effect, although I admit Iran's security apparatus is a million times smarter than me. But Europe is not much different than U.S. in many ways. Look at how they are sanctioning Libya for no freaking reason. Just because they can.
> 
> Thanks for your comments.



So you like the R-35-300 cause of its very good output while it is still a "simple" turbojet. But as i read this engine needs up to 8 tons fuel per hour in normal modus (dry) and up to 25 tons fuel per hour in afterburner modus (wet). So me wonder how far/long a mig23 with that engine would fly. And low fuel consumption and long range due to that, while having the same or better output is recomended for the next new iranian planes in my opinion. And it looks like that a turbofan would be the solution for that.

Edit:

sorry for spamming air defence thread

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

@skyshadow did iran manage to copy the Oerlikon AA gun with its EO and radar? Or they only have the original ones?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> @skyshadow did iran manage to copy the Oerlikon AA gun with its EO and radar? Or they only have the original ones?


they made one by them self

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> they made one by them self


The radar is still the same though right?


----------



## skyshadow

Saleh99 said:


> The radar is still the same though right?


yes but upgraded and EO/IR cameras added too


----------



## Philosopher

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322463620358377472

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Stryker1982

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322496040986152962
Some more equipment spotted in Tabriz.

The nature of the equipment to me suggests their is more than the Syrian elements in the Karabakh war that their is concern about.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Stryker1982 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322496040986152962
> Some more equipment spotted in Tabriz.
> 
> The nature of the equipment to me suggests their is more than the Syrian elements in the Karabakh war that their is concern about.



Could it be elements of the IDF working in Azerbaijan that these more heavy-duty equipment are meant to tackle?

I can't imagine Azerbaijan or Armenia will overtly start acting antagonistic towards Iran, neither would Turkey or Russia so that really only leaves America or Israel that would try and pull something.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ashool

ابتکار جالب پدافندی در کشور با ترکیب هوشمندانه «کمند و آذرخش» / کروزهای دشمن با یک نسخه دریاپایه زمین‌گیر می‌شوند +عکس


در ادامه تلاش متخصصان دفاعی کشور جهت افزودن یک لایه جدید به سیستم پدافندی ارتفاع پایین و ضد کروز کشور، یکی از سامانه‌های دفاعی دریاپایه به نام «کمند»، تبدیل به نمونه‌ای زمینی و مدرن شده است.




www.mashreghnews.ir




iranian new defense systen

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

ashool said:


> ابتکار جالب پدافندی در کشور با ترکیب هوشمندانه «کمند و آذرخش» / کروزهای دشمن با یک نسخه دریاپایه زمین‌گیر می‌شوند +عکس
> 
> 
> در ادامه تلاش متخصصان دفاعی کشور جهت افزودن یک لایه جدید به سیستم پدافندی ارتفاع پایین و ضد کروز کشور، یکی از سامانه‌های دفاعی دریاپایه به نام «کمند»، تبدیل به نمونه‌ای زمینی و مدرن شده است.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mashreghnews.ir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iranian new defense systen


Translate please?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322496040986152962
> Some more equipment spotted in Tabriz.
> 
> The nature of the equipment to me suggests their is more than the Syrian elements in the Karabakh war that their is concern about.



Nope, just mersad 16 system.

The drones exposed a vulnerability gap in Iranian air defenses and it is being closed now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Probably about the best pic I think we`ve seen of the old Ofoogh 2 fire control radar for what would ultimately become the 15th of khordad sam system.





The only other pics showed it either in its folded configuration or in profile view.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Saleh99

Sineva said:


> Probably about the best pic I think we`ve seen of the old Ofoogh 2 fire control radar for what would ultimately become the 15th of khordad sam system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only other pics showed it either in its folded configuration or in profile view.


This radar is still used as a fire control radar for the talash system?
BTW there is a better version I guess

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Those radars look to be the original fire control radars for the standard missiles (mihrab) of the navy. Seems that these radars were needed to adapt the mihrab to sayyad 2 level until the najm radars were available. I still see them in use for irgc exercises, indicating they are still used by them, but artesh has better najm radars for their sayyads. I always assumed talash was simply a testing phase for what would eventually become the 15th khordad and bavar systems, but it seems they might be operating in parallel and possible competition. The total system looks a bit bulky and seems to use an amalgam of older radars coupled with sayyad2 & 3 launchers and it seems to have different configurations of radars, ;aunchers, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Saleh99 said:


> This radar is still used as a fire control radar for the talash system?
> BTW there is a better version I guess
> View attachment 684793


Yes,the one they use today is the ofoogh 3,which at a minimum has a greatly beefed up mounting system for the dish,plus the dish itself looks different.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

WudangMaster said:


> Those radars look to be the original fire control radars for the standard missiles (mihrab) of the navy. Seems that these radars were needed to adapt the mihrab to sayyad 2 level until the najm radars were available. I still see them in use for irgc exercises, indicating they are still used by them, but artesh has better najm radars for their sayyads. I always assumed talash was simply a testing phase for what would eventually become the 15th khordad and bavar systems, but it seems they might be operating in parallel and possible competition. The total system looks a bit bulky and seems to use an amalgam of older radars coupled with sayyad2 & 3 launchers and it seems to have different configurations of radars, ;aunchers, etc.


IRGC uses najm-802A for its sayyad launchers

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Saleh99 said:


> IRGC uses najm-802A for its sayyad launchers
> View attachment 684807


That's the reason why I'm leaning to talash originally being a testing platform for what evolve into the later systems, though I am very curious as to what the talash looks in complete form rather than fleeting glimpses we've seen so far. Seems like every radar Iran has developed has been in this system. I also think talash was an endeavour to network all of these technologies for them to function effectively in the national air defense grid.


----------



## TheImmortal

Different types of Turkish drones that Iran needs to look out for near the border region:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1236902828049944576

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 684823
> 
> 
> View attachment 684824


Looks like a crane off loading something,but what that "something" is exactly.......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Looks like a crane off loading something,but what that "something" is exactly.......



A crane is generally used to load missiles/container onto the AD battery.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

Kashef-99 radar

can detect 300 targets at the same time
can detect cruise missiles with a RCS of 0,1 m² traveling at Mach 2 at a distance of 30 km
can be linked to Abarserat (?) and Jalal (?) EO systems
can be linked to air-defense systems that use rotary cannons (they probably refer to the land-based Kamand), the yet-to-be unveiled Majid surface-to-air missile system and another unnamed surface-to-air missile system

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## zectech

Hear me out, can you put enough lead bullets from CiWS out 5km at the projected path of the hypersonic/ballistic missile (ballistic missile moving at Mach 10+) and destroy the missile with CiWS, if you have enough CiWS to put up walls of lead for the missile to go into the path of those bullets and destroy the missile in flight. Mach 10 at 5km distance is split second close, so can you put up a armor sheet barrier to protect ADS targeted by the said ballistic missile, the destroyed missile would explode for the 5km into the armor sheet protecting the ADS. Othwise you have a live missile disintergrating into a Bavar radar or other target, which would severely damage the radar.

Anybody with thought on using 10-20 or more CiWS linked with the best radars to protect ADS from Mach 10+ targets. High initial cost, however, bullets are cheap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

zectech said:


> Hear me out, can you put enough lead bullets from CiWS out 5km at the projected path of the hypersonic/ballistic missile (ballistic missile moving at Mach 10+) and destroy the missile with CiWS, if you have enough CiWS to put up walls of lead for the missile to go into the path of those bullets and destroy the missile in flight. Mach 10 at 5km distance is split second close, so can you put up a armor sheet barrier to protect ADS targeted by the said ballistic missile, the destroyed missile would explode for the 5km into the armor sheet protecting the ADS. Othwise you have a live missile disintergrating into a Bavar radar or other target, which would severely damage the radar.
> 
> Anybody with thought on using 10-20 or more CiWS linked with the best radars to protect ADS from Mach 10+ targets. High initial cost, however, bullets are cheap.



Wouldn’t work because this “wall” your imagining wouldn’t be a wall. And you would need to use timed exploding rounds like AA guns to be sure you bring it down. Which is basically what Skyguard is.

At 5 KM the likelihood of interception is extremely low because the missile is traveling magnitudes faster than that a second. So by the time the systems start firing the missile already has impacted.

This type of system would also be easily overwhelmed by a Savlo of missile.

Add in the fact these systems needed to be constantly reloaded and can only protect a TINY area and this idea doesn’t work.

The future would rely on a constellation of lasers either on the ground or in space. That would seem more effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324719776556552192🔥🔥

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324719776556552192🔥🔥


Can you get a larger version of the whole poster?


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324755901295792130Tabas with EO system.


WudangMaster said:


> Can you get a larger version of the whole poster?


Unfortunately, no. But it’s clear in the pic below👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324755901295792130Tabas with EO system.
> 
> Unfortunately, no. But it’s clear in the pic below👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻
> View attachment 686386



I realize the radar mast that was being discussed a week or so ago but I was wondering what all the writing in the chart above was all about, perhaps a comparison of the two systems?


----------



## Saleh99

WudangMaster said:


> I realize the radar mast that was being discussed a week or so ago but I was wondering what all the writing in the chart above was all about, perhaps a comparison of the two systems?


Ahh I think comparison brother👌🏻


----------



## Raghfarm007

Tasnim article on the new Bavar:






سبقت باور ایرانی از S300 روسی| مهمترین سامانه پدافندی ایران چه تغییراتی کرده است؟- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


طبق تصاویر منتشرشده از باور373 به‌نظر می‌رسد یکی از عمده تغییرات صورت‌گرفته در پرتابگر آن اضافه‌شدن یک دکل حدوداً 10متری است که احتمالاً تجهیزات راداری، اپتیکی، ارتباطی یا ترکیبی از این موارد روی آن نصب می‌شود.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325000589168816128

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325842721718808579Deployment of EO System with Azerbaijan Border.
Looks like a new one....?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

SIGNIT/ELINT systems?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

Saleh99 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325842721718808579Deployment of EO System with Azerbaijan Border.
> Looks like a new one....?


You can see the video here
https://www.iribnews.ir/files/fa/news/1399/8/19/5572266_917.mp4
https://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/2904351/بازدید-جانشین-قرارگاه-پدافند-هوایی-خاتم-الانبیا-از-یگان-پدافندی-مسقر-در-اصلاندوز


----------



## karamany98

How good are domestic Iranian Radars?


----------



## skyshadow

karamany98 said:


> How good are domestic Iranian Radars?


pretty good , why ?









*good to see Arash radars mass produced and on the move to Iran border in north *


----------



## Raghfarm007

karamany98 said:


> How good are domestic Iranian Radars?




Ask the Americans:

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Oldman1

Raghfarm007 said:


> Ask the Americans:


Ask the Iranians, they felt it personally.


----------



## sha ah

Maybe ask the 100+ American soldiers who got traumatic brain injuries. Oh wait Trump said they just had headaches. I'm sure some Tylenol will be more than enough for them. Trump said so, it must be true.



Oldman1 said:


> Ask the Iranians, they felt it personally.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> Maybe ask the 100+ American soldiers who got traumatic brain injuries. Oh wait Trump said they just had headaches. I'm sure some Tylenol will be more than enough for them. Trump said so, it must be true.


No the Iranians got more than just traumatic brain injuries compared to the U.S. troops, literally. Think glue would fix it?


----------



## sha ah

Sounds as if some glue might fix you ? Who knows, sniffing some glue might help Trump cope with reality as well ?



Oldman1 said:


> No the Iranians got more than just traumatic brain injuries compared to the U.S. troops, literally. Think glue would fix it?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Oldman1

sha ah said:


> Sounds as if some glue might fix you ? Who knows, sniffing some glue might help Trump cope with reality as well ?


Did the glue fix the Iranian passengers when they experienced first hand Iran's capable air defense?


----------



## Shams313

Oldman1 said:


> Did the glue fix the Iranian passengers when they experienced first hand Iran's capable air defense?


Sorry but u guys even do intentional mistake...mind blowing


----------



## Oldman1

Shams313 said:


> Sorry but u guys even do intentional mistake...mind blowing


Yeah its mind blowing. The Iranians can understand and sympathize with us on that. They try to deny it at first, but admit it because they know how it feels.


----------



## Shams313

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah its mind blowing. The Iranians can understand and sympathize with us on that. They try to deny it at first, but admit it because they know how it feels.



ask yourself, how many years u have faking WMD baking factory in Iraq, Than had a hard time spiting the truth.

and terrorists in caves, what a story, then massacre people for years, now having a peace deal with em.why are so done, right now, it could be years earlier..bcz u guys were feeding ur propaganda, but that is already rotten to the entire civilization, people see through it and ,now,u changing ur tone...

let alone downing Iranian airline.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SubWater

take glue to fix your yankees kabab

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

This is one of the better threads in this forum, please do not derail it with this feceal matter vomit!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Oldman1 said:


> Yeah its mind blowing. The Iranians can understand and sympathize with us on that. They try to deny it at first, but admit it because they know how it feels.


Childish and short sighted oldmannnn


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Oldman liked it better when it was the USN that shot down an Iranian Passenger plane!


----------



## foxhoundbis

karamany98 said:


> How good are domestic Iranian Radars?


The fact that Iranian air defense had detected the F-22, F-35, and the B-2 last year, proves that Iranian air defense is among the best in the world. This deterred any US retaliation after Iranian attacked the US basis. I even wonder whether Iran had already built radio photonic radars?
Can someone confirm, please?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## un4given.1991

karamany98 said:


> How good are domestic Iranian Radars?



*Iranian made military radars*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

Caspian Parsi said:


> Im saying USA is no Angel either and you being hypocritical !!


Glad you agree on that with Iran.


----------



## Caspian Parsi

Oldman1 said:


> Glad you agree on that with Iran.


Just being realistic ,. regardless of what Iranian Gov says .


----------



## Raghfarm007

Don´t feed the trole please...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

Raghfarm007 said:


> Don´t feed the trole please...


 Indeed, considering how one sided this forum is against a certain kind of people, one has to tread very lightly and the best thing is to ignore the ones who start trouble because they know they can get away with it. Sadly, until we get a forum that does not fall apart after a few months, this is what it is...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IranDefence

Akhgar + R27 + Spike = secret Iranian missile that hit Saudi F15 in Yemen !😬

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Arminkh

IranDefence said:


> Akhgar + R27 + Spike = secret Iranian missile that hit Saudi F15 in Yemen !😬


I thought it was identified as a Russian SAM that hit the F15


----------



## IranDefence

Arminkh said:


> I thought it was identified as a Russian SAM that hit the F15



See the video , it was a loitering missile that was roaming with its jet engine for a while in the sky before its IR seeker sees how hot is F15 😈

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

IranDefence said:


> See the video , it was a loitering missile that was roaming with its jet engine for a while in the sky before its IR seeker sees how hot is F15 😈



Link to video? 

Would love to see it!


----------



## IranDefence

Blue In Green said:


> Link to video?
> 
> Would love to see it!




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228732502354931714
Sorry a Tornado ...F15 was downed with R27

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

Just a question guys:
This youtube tv channel claims that Iran is receiving S-500 from Moscow. Is it true, or fake news?






Because I see nowhere Iran is receiving S-500. On contrary, I don't think Iran is really interesting neither in the S-400 nor the S-500,. Your general Esmaelly, a few months ago, said Iran is developing its own S-500 dubbed Sayyad-6. As Iran masters hypersonic, and vector thrust missile technologies, Iranians are more interesting to develop indigenous technologies.
Am I right?


----------



## Shams313

foxhoundbis said:


> Just a question guys:
> This youtube tv channel claims that Iran is receiving S-500 from Moscow. Is it true, or fake news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I see nowhere Iran is receiving S-500. On contrary, I don't think Iran is really interesting neither in the S-400 nor the S-500,. Your general Esmaelly, a few months ago, said Iran is developing its own S-500 dubbed Sayyad-6. As Iran masters hypersonic, and vector thrust missile technologies, Iranians are more interesting to develop indigenous technologies.
> Am I right?


BS channel

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

Shams313 said:


> BS channel


 ????


----------



## WudangMaster

foxhoundbis said:


> Just a question guys:
> This youtube tv channel claims that Iran is receiving S-500 from Moscow. Is it true, or fake news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I see nowhere Iran is receiving S-500. On contrary, I don't think Iran is really interesting neither in the S-400 nor the S-500,. Your general Esmaelly, a few months ago, said Iran is developing its own S-500 dubbed Sayyad-6. As Iran masters hypersonic, and vector thrust missile technologies, Iranians are more interesting to develop indigenous technologies.
> Am I right?


From the recent discussion regarding bavar, it is quickly evolving into S-400/500 level with the addition of a telar and possibly sayyad 5 or 6 for higher altitude/abm engagement so I doubt it will be acquiring S-500 unless it has something radically new technologically that Iran would want to get a hold of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ali_Baba

un4given.1991 said:


> *Iranian made military radars*



Good for Iran. They have mastered the various levels of radar technology. Shame that Pakistan cannot compete with Iran in this area, Iran is so far ahead of Pakistan in radar technology it is not funny anymore.. Hell, even Egypt is now head.. sigh...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Messerschmitt said:


>



Those kids are getting extremely annoying to watch, I've been fast forwarding to the informative portions and the parts where the officer speaks and no more. 
In part 6, the fat hairy stupid oaf is molesting every item it can gets its beast hands on and babbles non stop. They were fine in part 1 or 2 but are very annoying hemorrhoids to watch by part 4...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

WudangMaster said:


> From the recent discussion regarding bavar, it is quickly evolving into S-400/500 level with the addition of a telar and possibly sayyad 5 or 6 for higher altitude/abm engagement so I doubt it will be acquiring S-500 unless it has something radically new technologically that Iran would want to get a hold of.



I think it is a matter of -short -time to see Iran with its hypersonic S-500. And not only, they are developing an indigenous new version of Pantsir, it will include thrust vector hypersonic missiles, like the Pantsir SM.
Do not forget that the NK's ally succeeded by building its own version of S-400, surely Iran will follow next. Once Iran will reach this achievement, it will jeopardize any western attack against Iran and the survival of Israel .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

When bavar was first in development, it was assumed to be more like S-300 and the sayyad 2, 3, & 4 were originally thought by many to be used by the Bavar. 15th of Khordad was kind of a surprise when it appeared and when it did, the conclusion drawn was that the final product was split into 2 systems giving Bavar more emphasis on abm and very high altitude and very long ranges.
So it looks like 15th Khordad and Bavar fill S-300/400/500 role, with Bavar focusing more on the the higher level threats and 15 Khordad on high altitude to mid altitude threats. Rather than one system utilizing 4 missiles, you have two systems with 2 missile variants each and some likely overlap in the high altitude range where sayyads 3 & 4 might overlap. 
Likewise, there is some overlap with 3rd Khordad and 15th Khordad with both using sayyad 2 and a bit of overlap with the newer Kamin 2 system; lower than that is the area of point defenses like Oghab, Herz 9, Tor, Saer, kamand, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

WudangMaster said:


> So it looks like 15th Khordad and Bavar fill S-300/400/500 role, with Bavar focusing more on.... lower than that is the area of point defenses like Oghab, Herz 9, Tor, Saer, kamand, etc.



I forgot to mention the other air defense built by Iran. Anyway, it is more effective for Iran to develop its own weaponry instead of relying on Russia, which showed very low reliability, especially when Iran was in a critical position at the end of the 2000s. Do not forget that at this time G.W. Bush was on the verge to attack Iran. Iran bought S-300, and Russia did refuse to deliver this weapon.


Moreover, if Russia sells you S-400, or S-500, it imposes conditions of use it, and you don't know what this hardware contains, even more, you don't know if against Israel at the worst critical moment this hardware will be disabled, not by US, or Israel, but by Russia itself. North Korea succeeded on its own to reach self-sufficiency, I think Iran is on the same road. It is better like that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IranDefence

foxhoundbis said:


> Just a question guys:
> This youtube tv channel claims that Iran is receiving S-500 from Moscow. Is it true, or fake news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I see nowhere Iran is receiving S-500. On contrary, I don't think Iran is really interesting neither in the S-400 nor the S-500,. Your general Esmaelly, a few months ago, said Iran is developing its own S-500 dubbed Sayyad-6. As Iran masters hypersonic, and vector thrust missile technologies, Iranians are more interesting to develop indigenous technologies.
> Am I right?



Fake news , Iran prefers to invest its resources on home grown Bavar 373 ... we just need some technologies of turbofan engines

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

The IRGC official's comment (watch from 14:30) on the Ghadir radar below confirms that the Iranian Ghadirs are indeed an upgraded version created by Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

WudangMaster said:


> Those kids are getting extremely annoying to watch, I've been fast forwarding to the informative portions and the parts where the officer speaks and no more.
> In part 6, the fat hairy stupid oaf is molesting every item it can gets its beast hands on and babbles non stop. They were fine in part 1 or 2 but are very annoying hemorrhoids to watch by part 4...


The kids are not as annoying as the piano track that plays over the whole video.


----------



## aryobarzan

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The kids are not as annoying as the piano track that plays over the whole video.


I must say not being in Iran since 1981, I get mildly shocked to see female university student in this so called "Islamic" dress..I know it is Islamic republic but it is still hard to watch them wrapped in that pinguine dress..The Islamic system has done great things... industrializing Iran and making her strong and independent but that part of the deal (islamic dress for women) just can not get through my head..sorry...lol


----------



## WudangMaster

I get what they were going for, it's too much for 7 episodes. The short little clips were 


Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The kids are not as annoying as the piano track that plays over the whole video.


I get what they were going for but it was a bit much. The best segments were the clip videos and some tidbits from the 2 officers. The younger officer couldn't get away fast enough at one point in the video.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1328371720810590208

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## karamany98

aryobarzan said:


> I must say not being in Iran since 1981, I get mildly shocked to see female university student in this so called "Islamic" dress..I know it is Islamic republic but it is still hard to watch them wrapped in that pinguine dress..The Islamic system has done great things... industrializing Iran and making her strong and independent but that part of the deal (islamic dress for women) just can not get through my head..sorry...lol



Iran now has a higher percentage of females in STEM subjects than men. I think its around 55%-60% which is also way higher than the western world.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*a unified Middle East air defense network under control of Iran national Air Defense unit that would be legendary  


Commander of Iran's Army Air Defense Force Alireza Sabahifard today proposed a joint integrated air defense network between Iran and Iraq, and offered Iraqi students places at the Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Academy. *








*





Iranian Air Defense Ready to Train Iraqi Cadets - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The Iranian Air Defense university is ready to run training courses for the Iraqi cadets, a top commander said.




www.tasnimnews.com




*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1329478990483124227

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

*Official: Iran Needs to Develop Space-Based Radars*

*TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian deputy defense minister called for the development of space-based radars inside the country.*






In comments at a conference on radar and monitoring systems on Saturday, Brigadier General Qassem Taqizadeh said Iran will have to employ space-based radars sooner or later.

He called for the development of the space-based radar technology in the country’s scientific centers and preparation of the ground for such technical know-how to prevent a “strategic” surprise.

Hailing Iran’s progress in radar technologies, the general said local experts have manufactured a broad range of phased array passive and active radars and have strengthened the country’s capabilities in the electromagnetic sphere.
“We are trying to thwart the enemy’s electromagnetic onslaught,” Taqizadeh said.
In remarks in October, Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Aerospace Force Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh said Iran is one of the ten best manufacturers of military radars in the world.

He said the new radars, manufactured by the IRGC Aerospace Force, are capable of detecting stealth aircraft within a range of 350 kilometers and all other targets within a distance of above 1,000 km.





__





Official: Iran Needs to Develop Space-Based Radars - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency


TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Iranian deputy defense minister called for the development of space-based radars inside the country.




www.tasnimnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Philosopher

@PeeD What are your thoughts on using a long range "ballistic" type missile against enemy bombers during flight? If we use cluster warheads on this missile, would it viable to send it within the vicinity of the bombers, warheads releases bomblets and destroyed target from above? Bomber are not very manoeuvrable, so I could envisage such cluster systems being used as long as the missile can receive inflight flight update. Could this work kinematically speaking? I know Russians already use relatively bulky 400km range missile against AWACs etc in their S-400, but I am thinking of much longer ranges.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Philosopher said:


> @PeeD What are your thoughts on using a long range "ballistic" type missile against enemy bombers during flight? If we use cluster warheads on this missile, would it viable to send it within the vicinity of the bombers, warheads releases bomblets and destroyed target from above? Bomber are not very manoeuvrable, so I could envisage such cluster systems being used as long as the missile can receive inflight flight update. Could this work kinematically speaking? I know Russians already use relatively bulky 400km range missile against AWACs etc in their S-400, but I am thinking of much longer ranges.



its highly unlikely the better option is a cruise missile hovering above the air base , ballistic missiles need time to reach its target and we don't have real time track of the bombers on the ground so a missile like 385 would be perfect for the job it has real time tracking and its hard to find and most importantly its waaaaaaay cheaper then ballistic missiles allowing you to deploy them in numbers


----------



## Philosopher

skyshadow said:


> its highly unlikely the better option is a cruise missile hovering above the air base , ballistic missiles need time to reach its target and we don't have real time track of the bombers on the ground so a missile like 385 would be perfect for the job it has real time tracking and its hard to find and most importantly its waaaaaaay cheaper then ballistic missiles



These bombers have a high RCS and thus we should be able to easily detect and track them using long range radars so I do not think real time tracking is the issue. Regarding the cost, these are high value targets and we would not need many long range missiles to deal with them. The issue with the cruise missile strategy is we are considering dealing with the bombers when they are in flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Philosopher said:


> @PeeD What are your thoughts on using a long range "ballistic" type missile against enemy bombers during flight? If we use cluster warheads on this missile, would it viable to send it within the vicinity of the bombers, warheads releases bomblets and destroyed target from above? Bomber are not very manoeuvrable, so I could envisage such cluster systems being used as long as the missile can receive inflight flight update. Could this work kinematically speaking? I know Russians already use relatively bulky 400km range missile against AWACs etc in their S-400, but I am thinking of much longer ranges.



Detection and identification at such long ranges are the problems.

One secret weapon the IRGC apparently has since quite long is the Alam ol Hoda. For special "VIP" targets such as tankers, AWACS, JSTARS and B-52.

But 500-600km is the maximum due to earth curvature.

I expect an Alam ol Hoda 2 with 600km range, maybe based on the Raad-500 Zoheir solid motor. Your idea of a cluster warhead is unconventional and interesting but generally these "super SAM" view their very large target with their large ARH seekers from above and jamming intensity of self defense jammers are not sufficient in such a situation. This, plus the lack of evasive maneuvering and large warheads means high PK for the super SAM.

Unfortunately such a special "wonderwaepon/black" asset will not be shown anytime soon.

Once targeting allows for longer ranges, such as via space based radars, your ballistic trajectory idea could become attractive.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

*Saeer AA Gun destroying its target in Syria *



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331436235412307968

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shawnee

You guys know this but just another reminder. They can fly back and forth from mainland US.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337787871550447616

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Shawnee said:


> You guys know this but just another reminder. They can fly back and forth from mainland US.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337787871550447616



That would be a long turn-around time for each strike with a subsonic B-52 in a high intensity conflict. But principally yes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

Shawnee said:


> You guys know this but just another reminder. They can fly back and forth from mainland US.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337787871550447616


I hope this guys also knows that which ever side is contributing ONLY airforce capabilities to a conflict is the ultimate LOSER. Look over the past 20 years, the force with greater air force capability LOSES, and that makes sense...wars are won on the ground, so if you are too afraid ,unable or unmotivated to put boots on the ground, you will end up holding the BIG L in that conflict. Airforce will help you in a war, but airforce wont win the war for you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

Shawnee said:


> You guys know this but just another reminder. They can fly back and forth from mainland US.



There are plenty of figures available that demonstrate the ineffectiveness of these kinds of bombing campaigns. I had these figures but due to crash disks, and uninstall, reinstall, etc...it is hard for me to refind them. However, there are all available on the net.
During the gulf war 1991, when US coalition did several hundred thousand raids against Iraqi targets, on 19 critical targets, just one was totally destroyed -the rest of the nuclear power plant- because... this target was abandoned by Iraqis.

Against Serbia in 1999, during three months, US coalition did around 90.000 raids. At this time US, UK loudly claimed -via their shit of media like CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS etc...- that all Serbian ground forces were wiped out of the map. After international UN inspections, they all realized that Serbian ground forces were intact. The losses of Serbian ground forces were neglectable.

During Lebanon's war in 2006, Israel air forces launched several dozens of airstrikes each day, with the goal to reduce the number of Lebanon's militias' roquets fired against Israel. At the beginning of the war if I recall there were around 100 roquets/day fired against Israel. At the end of the war, August 15, until the last hour there were around 100 roquets that were still fired against Israel's infrastructures.

Recently April 2018 western aggression against Syria, on 108 cruise missiles launched against Syria, in order to wipe out of the map all Syrian air defense, in fact around 70 cruise missiles were intercepted, many others were jammed, and finally, just a handful of cruise missiles reached their target with very limited effectiveness.


In fact, all air weapon as a tool is more than questionable. In 1971 or 72 -I don't recall exactly- President R. Nixon asked why the air bombing are so "Zilch".

Understand why Iran is no longer afraid of the US, and doesn't bet for something that is very expensive, but its effectiveness is at best questionable.

Conclusion
At this stage, whatever the US threats, Westerners can no longer stop Iran on the road to become a new power not only in the Middle East but in the world, because Iran is a powerful industrial country. The only significant threat that the US still have is the use of Nuclear weapons, however, if they use it will be a monstrous suicide. Because Iranians can build immediately nuclear warheads weapons -if it is not already done-, and they can quickly adapt to their new hypersonic ICBM -Haj Qassem- and they will strike back on US infrastructures inside America. This will force most of the countries in the world to have nuclear weapons. For these reasons I don't think the US will dare to use it.
Like or Not, Iran is a new emerging power.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

foxhoundbis said:


> There are plenty of figures available that demonstrate the ineffectiveness of these kinds of bombing campaigns. I had these figures but due to crash disks, and uninstall, reinstall, etc...it is hard for me to refind them. However, there are all available on the net.
> During the gulf war 1991, when US coalition did several hundred thousand raids against Iraqi targets, on 19 critical targets, just one was totally destroyed -the rest of the nuclear power plant- because... this target was abandoned by Iraqis.
> 
> Against Serbia in 1999, during three months, US coalition did around 90.000 raids. At this time US, UK loudly claimed -via their shit of media like CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS etc...- that all Serbian ground forces were wiped out of the map. After international UN inspections, they all realized that Serbian ground forces were intact. The losses of Serbian ground forces were neglectable.
> 
> During Lebanon's war in 2006, Israel air forces launched several dozens of airstrikes each day, with the goal to reduce the number of Lebanon's militias' roquets fired against Israel. At the beginning of the war if I recall there were around 100 roquets/day fired against Israel. At the end of the war, August 15, until the last hour there were around 100 roquets that were still fired against Israel's infrastructures.
> 
> Recently April 2018 western aggression against Syria, on 108 cruise missiles launched against Syria, in order to wipe out of the map all Syrian air defense, in fact around 70 cruise missiles were intercepted, many others were jammed, and finally, just a handful of cruise missiles reached their target with very limited effectiveness.
> 
> 
> In fact, all air weapon as a tool is more than questionable. In 1971 or 72 -I don't recall exactly- President R. Nixon asked why the air bombing are so "Zilch".
> 
> Understand why Iran is no longer afraid of the US, and doesn't bet for something that is very expensive, but its effectiveness is at best questionable.
> 
> Conclusion
> At this stage, whatever the US threats, Westerners can no longer stop Iran on the road to become a new power not only in the Middle East but in the world, because Iran is a powerful industrial country. The only significant threat that the US still have is the use of Nuclear weapons, however, if they use it will be a monstrous suicide. Because Iranians can build immediately nuclear warheads weapons -if it is not already done-, and they can quickly adapt to their new hypersonic ICBM -Haj Qassem- and they will strike back on US infrastructures inside America. This will force most of the countries in the world to have nuclear weapons. For these reasons I don't think the US will dare to use it.
> Like or Not, Iran is a new emerging power.


Great post bro and what a nice read! I completely agree about the air dominance NOT WINNING THE WARS...look at Afghanistan too..US has bombed Afghanistan so much already, but the Taliban have never been stronger than they are today, so that in itself is such a contradiction...and this unwillingness to use and commit ground forces is the undoing of ISraeli and US forces..Israel essentially vacated its border with Lebanon and only used some dummies and robots to patrol it now, but this is after Hezbollah only made a threat of attacking the border region...how afraid are those mighty IDF with all their "technology"...military technology cant replace the human aspects of war and conflict..robots wont win wars for us for a while.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Iran has extremely well rounded and potent air defenses. Limited bombing runs with long range bombers won't work. They're big, bulky and slow. Iran will shoot them down and they cost too much to be honest. The US won't go to war with an adversary that can retaliate like Iran. They've been in Afghanistan for 20 years and the Taliban controls 1/3rd of the country as we speak.



925boy said:


> Great post bro and what a nice read! I completely agree about the air dominance NOT WINNING THE WARS...look at Afghanistan too..US has bombed Afghanistan so much already, but the Taliban have never been stronger than they are today, so that in itself is such a contradiction...and this unwillingness to use and commit ground forces is the undoing of ISraeli and US forces..Israel essentially vacated its border with Lebanon and only used some dummies and robots to patrol it now, but this is after Hezbollah only made a threat of attacking the border region...how afraid are those mighty IDF with all their "technology"...military technology cant replace the human aspects of war and conflict..robots wont win wars for us for a while.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

LOL B-52 bombers are a joke. A relic of a forgotten past. One S-200 and that thing is up in smokes. 

Any serious person that wants to see the US Airforce go check the target preparedness goal of every aircraft in US airforce, almost all aircraft failed their 70% active target by huge margin.

Meaning = most of US airforce is grounded due to issues at any given time.

Of course Twitter arm chair generals don’t care for such facts and think 2 B-52s send any type of “message” to iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## foxhoundbis

TheImmortal said:


> LOL B-52 bombers are a joke. A relic of a forgotten past. One S-200 and that thing is up in smokes.
> ....
> Of course Twitter arm chair generals *don’t care for such facts and think 2 B-52s send* any type of “message” to iran.



Indeed 2 B-52 is just a show, theater, but cannot impact the situation.
During the air war of Vietnam, the most important moment was Linebacker I&II. early May to end October; and December 18–29, 1972. During Linebacker II US had lost at least 30 B-52 and several dozens of other aircraft. Most people forgot and were jammed, mislead by Western propaganda that spread fake news with their so-called "historians", "specialists", "experts", "pundits", in fact, real propagandists.
In fact, the Linebacker air campaign was a total disaster, but in such "shit" like Wikipedia, you are asked to believe it was a success, in spite of the total evidence of the contrary. To summarize, and straight forward US left Vietnam, in such a way as a dog flees with its dick between its legs.




925boy said:


> ....US has bombed Afghanistan so much already, but the Taliban have never been stronger than they are today, ...



The situation in Afghanistan is somehow more complicated than it would seem. If the Taliban had received weapons from Pakistan, the western coalition might be left Afghanistan for a while. West use Pakistan's territory for its precious logistic.

In the previous post, I forgot to add
- 1991 in spite of several hundreds of thousands of air raids of the US coalition, the Iraqi army was nearly intact too. The US slaughtered Iraqi ground forces in Kuwait only after the foolish Saddam's order to evacuate Kuwait -February 25, 1991- without taking any international guarantees. US profits to massacre an army that was withdrawing. Iraqis did the awful error to deactivate their anti-aircraft defense. It was one of the worst barbaric war crimes in history. But for the US, it is like Joker, U can use it only once, but not twice. In Venezuela, Iran, Syria, China, North Korea, etc...all are already recorded this, and they did not forget, meanwhile West forgot. Notice in 1999, the US did not dare to confront Serbians ground forces.

-It is noteworthy to add, since Russia's intervention in Syria 2015. *None western aircraft* had dared to penetrate Syria"s air skies. Westerners attacked Syria only by missiles with an efficiency equal to null.

Thus, the era of Western dominance is going toward the end. In this context, a war between the West and Iran could never happen, because the West cannot afford another war with Iran. Your high responsibles said that in the next months they will deploy *new hypersonic air defense hardware, like Iranian own Pantsir, and own S-400/500*. The sky of Iran will be completely close, then If a war happens US coalition will undergo a defeat worst than the simple Dien Bien Phu, or Khe Sahn.

Consequently, a war between the West and Iran could be unlikely. Let's hope.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sha ah

I already posted this in the Chill thread but its relevant here as well.



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337817856969502722

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> LOL B-52 bombers are a joke. A relic of a forgotten past. One S-200 and that thing is up in smokes.
> 
> Any serious person that wants to see the US Airforce go check the target preparedness goal of every aircraft in US airforce, almost all aircraft failed their 70% active target by huge margin.
> 
> Meaning = most of US airforce is grounded due to issues at any given time.
> 
> Of course Twitter arm chair generals don’t care for such facts and think 2 B-52s send any type of “message” to iran.


FACTS!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> LOL B-52 bombers are a joke. A relic of a forgotten past. One S-200 and that thing is up in smokes.
> 
> Any serious person that wants to see the US Airforce go check the target preparedness goal of every aircraft in US airforce, almost all aircraft failed their 70% active target by huge margin.
> 
> Meaning = most of US airforce is grounded due to issues at any given time.
> 
> Of course Twitter arm chair generals don’t care for such facts and think 2 B-52s send any type of “message” to iran.



Most countries would love to have a B-52 bomber. I know that It is only useful for bombing an enemy without air defenses and they wouldn't be dumb enough to send them into contested airspace. But it is still an excellent plane for mass bombing lets be honest here.

When I heard they sent 2, I audibly laughed because it's clear how useless they are against Iran. It's probably for domestic consumption.
I don't fear any US weapon. 

My main fear is their cyber capabilities, my main fear is that they can shut down every facet of Iranian life from communications, to traffic lights if conflict arises.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthHurtz

B-52 is a mobile cruise missile platform for launching standoff munitions, ofc it would be torn a part in an environment where it's not suited for operationally.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## foxhoundbis

sha ah said:


> I already posted this in the Chill thread but its relevant here as well.



Decades ago, here is the remains of US B-52 downed by VPAF's air defense above Hanoi end Dec. 1971. The same fate is waiting for their B-52, B-1B, and B-2 -notice serbian air defense downed a B-2, but as it crashed in Croatia, US denied this claim....as usual- and even their new "Miracle" weapon B-21

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## F-22Raptor

TheImmortal said:


> LOL B-52 bombers are a joke. A relic of a forgotten past. One S-200 and that thing is up in smokes.
> 
> Any serious person that wants to see the US Airforce go check the target preparedness goal of every aircraft in US airforce, almost all aircraft failed their 70% active target by huge margin.
> 
> Meaning = most of US airforce is grounded due to issues at any given time.
> 
> Of course Twitter arm chair generals don’t care for such facts and think 2 B-52s send any type of “message” to iran.



This is simply not true. Just in the last few months a US AF General stated he could have 75-80 bombers ready to go in the first 24 hours of conflict. B-52s could launch long range JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles well outside of Iranian air defense range. The 1,200 mile JASSM-XR will also be added to its inventory in a few years.

And finally B-52s will add the AGM-183 ARRW hypersonic missile within 2 years. B-52s will be capable of unloading huge amounts of cruise and hypersonic missiles on Iranian targets.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337833492433022977

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

F-22Raptor said:


> The 1,200 mile JASSM-XR will also be added to its inventory in a few years.


Speaking of future development, in the coming years IRGC will increase its A2/AD capabilities from Current 2500 KM to upto 5000 KMs. And i am talking about precisely bombing of your naval assets with ballistic missiles that have already proved to be capable of bombing manuevering targets in the sea. In the future IRGC will keep an on your naval assets from Yemen. Increasing it to beyond Middle East to North Africa.


F-22Raptor said:


> And finally B-52s will add the AGM-183 ARRW hypersonic missile within 2 years. B-52s will be capable of unloading huge amounts of cruise and hypersonic missiles on Iranian targets.


Within 2 years, IRGC will send its naval assets to Middle of Indian Ocean besides their UCAV capability is increasing month by month let alone year by year. You suppose the conflict will happen within Persian Gulf, forgetting that IRGC is extending its capabilities to oceans. They will Launch ballistic missiles from their transformed ship supported by land launched ballistic missiles. You also forgot Iran's islands in Persian Gulf which are a unique asset to bomb the 5th fleet to ashes. You might also forgot the ballistic missile that sent your ladyboys into under ground bunkers in Qatar. Adding the fact that all of your bases around Iran will smoke in the First moments of War.Even your bases in East of Europe will go under fire. Let us suppose your subs will Launch ballistic missiles towards our cities then count on IRGC's response by dirty bombs. We don't need to immediately Launch a nuclear bomb towards Washington, a dirty bomb having some Uranium inside the warhead would do the job. Also you can count on cruise missiles from Soumar to Howeizeh with a range of 1300 to 2500 KMs. If you were so much in advantage then you wouldve done something instead of playing the role of a spoiled keyboard Warrior here in PDF.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

F-22Raptor said:


> This is simply not true. Just in the last few months a US AF General stated he could have 75-80 bombers ready to go in the first 24 hours of conflict. B-52s could launch long range JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles well outside of Iranian air defense range. The 1,200 mile JASSM-XR will also be added to its inventory in a few years.
> 
> And finally B-52s will add the AGM-183 ARRW hypersonic missile within 2 years. B-52s will be capable of unloading huge amounts of cruise and hypersonic missiles on Iranian targets.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337833492433022977



So instead of actually proving me wrong you decided to make an incorrect claim then spend the rest of your nonsense post discussing cruise missiles and HGV.

Here you go cupcake:





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com






_The GAO’s review of 46 military aircraft found only one, the Air Force’s UH-1N Huey, reached its goal every year. Most missed their goals a majority of the time, with 24 never making the target and five hitting their goals only once._


But you go ahead and believe the propaganda they feed you. After all it’s for the brainless masses mostly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## F-22Raptor

TheImmortal said:


> So instead of actually proving me wrong you decided to make an incorrect claim then spend the rest of your nonsense post discussing cruise missiles and HGV.
> 
> Here you go cupcake:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The GAO’s review of 46 military aircraft found only one, the Air Force’s UH-1N Huey, reached its goal every year. Most missed their goals a majority of the time, with 24 never making the target and five hitting their goals only once._
> 
> 
> But you go ahead and believe the propaganda they feed you. After all it’s for the brainless masses mostly.




"On any given day, I probably can fly well over 20 of the B-1s," Ray said, referencing the fleet's mission-capable rate, or the ability to fly at a moment's notice to conduct operations. 

Despite "the engine issue," Ray said airmen can fly more than 30 B-52s on any given day out of the service's 76-aircraft inventory. And aside from one or two bombers rotating through depot maintenance, all 20 B-2 Spirits are ready at a moment's notice, he added. 

https://www.military.com/daily-news...hs-ahead-of-repair-schedule-general-says.html

That's from the head of USAF Global Strike Command in September. Straight from the horses mouth. 

Read and weep pal....


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Too funny !! The B-52 will be very easy to shoot down. American pros watch too many Hollywood movies

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

F-22Raptor said:


> This is simply not true. Just in the last few months a US AF General stated he could have 75-80 bombers ready to go in the first 24 hours of conflict. B-52s could launch long range JASSM-ER stealth cruise missiles well outside of Iranian air defense range. The 1,200 mile JASSM-XR will also be added to its inventory in a few years.
> 
> And finally B-52s will add the AGM-183 ARRW hypersonic missile within 2 years. B-52s will be capable of unloading huge amounts of cruise and hypersonic missiles on Iranian targets.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337833492433022977



Yes he is right, the B-52s role with Iran would be to use standoff weapon systems. No one thinks they will try to penetrate Iran's airspace. Although the deployment of B-52's in Qatar is pretty ridiculous.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

F-22Raptor said:


> "On any given day, I probably can fly well over 20 of the B-1s," Ray said, referencing the fleet's mission-capable rate, or the ability to fly at a moment's notice to conduct operations.
> 
> Despite "the engine issue," Ray said airmen can fly more than 30 B-52s on any given day out of the service's 76-aircraft inventory. And aside from one or two bombers rotating through depot maintenance, all 20 B-2 Spirits are ready at a moment's notice, he added.
> 
> https://www.military.com/daily-news...hs-ahead-of-repair-schedule-general-says.html
> 
> That's from the head of USAF Global Strike Command in September. Straight from the horses mouth.
> 
> Read and weep pal....
> 
> View attachment 696373



Once again you didn’t prove anything. Most of the US Air Force is grounded. So unless US plans to wage a war with just B-1 and B-52 running on fumes then this whole move was theater.

Which is my whole point.

Anyone can claim US will use 20 B-52s to fire loads of cruise missiles just like someone on the other side will claim Iran will fire 1000 BMs at various targets. The issue is what happens AFTER the first punches are thrown. What is the price of oil? What is the cost of insuring tankers? What is the state of bases across the Middle East?

Hence why this is all stupid theater has been since 2003 when this whole brinkmanship started.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

F-22Raptor said:


> "On any given day, I probably can fly well over 20 of the B-1s," Ray said, referencing the fleet's mission-capable rate, or the ability to fly at a moment's notice to conduct operations.
> 
> Despite "the engine issue," Ray said airmen can fly more than 30 B-52s on any given day out of the service's 76-aircraft inventory. And aside from one or two bombers rotating through depot maintenance, all 20 B-2 Spirits are ready at a moment's notice, he added.
> 
> https://www.military.com/daily-news...hs-ahead-of-repair-schedule-general-says.html
> 
> That's from the head of USAF Global Strike Command in September. Straight from the horses mouth.
> 
> Read and weep pal....
> 
> View attachment 696373


Hey kid, i give you a homework. Be a good kid and do it. Find the RCS difference between an RQ-4 and a flying coffin B-52. When you done with that then come back here and tell us the result of your homework. Good kid

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Baibars_1260

foxhoundbis said:


> Decades ago, here is the remains of US B-52 downed by VPAF's air defense above Hanoi end Dec. 1971. The same fate is waiting for their B-52, B-1B, and B-2 -notice serbian air defense downed a B-2, but as it crashed in Croatia, US denied this claim....as usual- and even their new "Miracle" weapon B-21




S-75 Dvina, (the S-400 of the era ). 1106 aircraft were downed by S-75 Dvinas operated by the VPAF. This does not include South Vietnamese Air Force losses. For point defence, and high altitude targets the S-75 Dvinas remain a formidable weapon, especially when integrated with AWAC assets. In the reverse mode the Dvina radars can be integrated with AAA guns giving a lethal CIWS and low altitude target acquisition capabilities. Downside is handling and operating the Dvinas requires highly trained crew which is a severe limitation in replacing manpower killed or injured during battle.
Pakistan operates the Chinese variant of the Dvina ( HQ-2B ) and Iranians operate their own copy called Sayyad.



View attachment 696302

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 925boy

Stryker1982 said:


> Although the deployment of B-52's in Qatar is pretty ridiculous.


cuz this is the same base in Qatar that US SPent $bns on but cleared out recently due to threat to US military staff and airforce planes that could get smashed quickly by Iranian missiles across the gulf? SMFH!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*missile 358 at work ( too slow to be a supersonics missile, too high to be MANPAD as the engine is clearly still on, look at the top attack capabilities and smokeless engine , down side ? well as you can see way too slow in maneuvering to hit anything moving faster 400-500 km/h)





*

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
3 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Iranian Shalamche missile hitting its target in exercise ( unbelievable, real photos )










*

Reactions: Like Like:
11 | Love Love:
6 | Wow Wow:
6


----------



## foxhoundbis

skyshadow said:


> *Iranian Shalamche missile hitting its target in exercise ( unbelievable, real photos )*


Thx.
In previous posts, I wanted to tell you that the idea of a US-Iran war is rather unlikely, except for a few violent incidents. I expressed my point of view about the myth of Israelis' air raid that would destroy all Iranian's nuclear installations. This last idea is more than laughable because I tried to explain to you during the Desert Storm in 1991 when the US coalition had nearly 3.000 aircraft, and during 45 days of air raids, the US failed to destroy most of their objectives. On 19 critical targets, the US succeeds to destroy just one target, an old Iraqi nuclear power plant, because this target Iraqi's high command chose to not defend. If too many of the targets were somehow damaged, however, they were not destroyed because Americans cannot.

During this time, the US coalition enjoyed a superiority of the Iraqi sky but *failed* to achieve the *supremacy* of the skies. At such point, Saddam ordered its IL-76 Mainstay AWACS, besides several dozens of aircraft to flee to Iran. Everybody among you, knows very well that an IL-76 Mainstay is famous for its maneuverability, especially its aptitude to dodge air-air missiles.....

US coalition achieved this modest victory, not because of their courage, and fights, but because Saddam ordered its army to withdraw from Kuwait without taking any international guarantee. This is the moment that chose US coalition to slaughter an army during its withdrawals when Iraqis decided to deactivate their air defense. Iraq was under blockade, made by Syria, Turkey, and Iran. USSR, Gorbachov via its last foreign minister E. Shevardnadze said "Iraq was a predator state". Thus Iraqis could hope for any help, any support neither from China, USSR nor from its neighborhood.


Now let's talk a little bit about a so-called US attack against Iran. Can they win? What I wrote above is enough to make the good conclusion.
Here are conclusions made by Israelis secret services :

Meir Dagan





and later Yakov Kedmi





In fact, since the end of the 2000s, the US high command and Israelis understood they could nothing against Iran, not more, not less.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

foxhoundbis said:


> Thx.
> In previous posts, I wanted to tell you that the idea of a US-Iran war is rather unlikely, except for a few violent incidents. I expressed my point of view about the myth of Israelis' air raid that would destroy all Iranian's nuclear installations. This last idea is more than laughable because I tried to explain to you during the Desert Storm in 1991 when the US coalition had nearly 3.000 aircraft, and during 45 days of air raids, the US failed to destroy most of their objectives. On 19 critical targets, the US succeeds to destroy just one target, an old Iraqi nuclear power plant, because this target Iraqi's high command chose to not defend. If too many of the targets were somehow damaged, however, they were not destroyed because Americans cannot.
> 
> During this time, the US coalition enjoyed a superiority of the Iraqi sky but *failed* to achieve the *supremacy* of the skies. At such point, Saddam ordered its IL-76 Mainstay AWACS, besides several dozens of aircraft to flee to Iran. Everybody among you, knows very well that an IL-76 Mainstay is famous for its maneuverability, especially its aptitude to dodge air-air missiles.....
> 
> US coalition achieved this modest victory, not because of their courage, and fights, but because Saddam ordered its army to withdraw from Kuwait without taking any international guarantee. This is the moment that chose US coalition to slaughter an army during its withdrawals when Iraqis decided to deactivate their air defense. Iraq was under blockade, made by Syria, Turkey, and Iran. USSR, Gorbachov via its last foreign minister E. Shevardnadze said "Iraq was a predator state". Thus Iraqis could hope for any help, any support neither from China, USSR nor from its neighborhood.
> 
> 
> Now let's talk a little bit about a so-called US attack against Iran. Can they win? What I wrote above is enough to make the good conclusion.
> Here are conclusions made by Israelis secret services :
> 
> Meir Dagan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and later Yakov Kedmi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, since the end of the 2000s, the US high command and Israelis understood they could nothing against Iran, not more, not less.


Israeli F35 over Iran without being detected ? man that creaks me up every time, some time i ask my self how much uninformed a person can be to believe this, to believe this shows that person knows nothing about Radar or how they work or missiles , agreed well its foolish to believe Iran hasn't analyzed the 💩 out of every single US war moves you cant defeat your enemies in there own game but Iraqis thought they could and that was there biggest mistake, a missile like 358 show Iran is thinking out of the box to defeat US air superiority but don't get me wrong if it happens its going to be very bloody for both side

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## foxhoundbis

skyshadow said:


> .... but don't get me wrong if it happens its going to be very bloody for both side


Of course, no one does know the science of the future. Nevertheless, as I explained above, seeing the status of the US as the main superpower, for the self-proclaimed "_Arsenal of Democracies", a defeat_ will be lethal for US because it will have heavy consequences. At this stage, the Americans cannot win a war against Iran, and they know. Moreover, Iran became de facto a great industrial power, as it can not only produce nuclear ICBM, but hypersonic ICBM with nuclear warheads, and next fighter bombers. Moreover, Iran won't be isolated, it will be helped by Russia and China, and maybe even by Pakistan. For the West, a war in such a position will be a suicide, the defeat is guaranteed. 
For these reasons I think, a war between Iran and the US is unlikely, because too risky for the US.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> *missile 358 at work ( too slow to be a supersonics missile, too high to be MANPAD as the engine is clearly still on, look at the top attack capabilities and smokeless engine , down side ? well as you can see way too slow in maneuvering to hit anything moving faster 400-500 km/h)
> 
> 
> View attachment 699001
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 699007
> 
> 
> View attachment 699004
> 
> 
> View attachment 699008


Yemeni people must be among the highest IQ on Earth! Their military tech achievements during last 1 years is comparable to that of other countries in 50 years!

How do you know the type of missile used?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Arminkh said:


> Yemeni people must be among the highest IQ on Earth! Their military tech achievements during last 1 years is comparable to that of other countries in 50 years!
> 
> How do you know the type of missile used?


well as i explained you have to look for the missile characteristics then you can see if its similar to other known air defense missiles see if you can find a match.

we don't have alot of options when it comes to subsonic anti aircraft missiles 

*( too slow to be a supersonics missile, too high to be MANPAD as the engine is clearly still on, look at the top attack capabilities and smokeless engine , down side ? well as you can see way too slow in maneuvering to hit anything moving faster 400-500 km/h)*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Arminkh

skyshadow said:


> well as i explained you have to look for the missile characteristics then you can see if its similar to other known air defense missiles see if you can find a match.
> 
> we don't have alot of options when it comes to subsonic anti aircraft missiles
> 
> *( too slow to be a supersonics missile, too high to be MANPAD as the engine is clearly still on, look at the top attack capabilities and smokeless engine , down side ? well as you can see way too slow in maneuvering to hit anything moving faster 400-500 km/h)*


Mashregh confirmed your opinion. Good job man!








جزئیات عملیات شکار پهپاد تهاجمی نیروی هوایی آل‌سعود / آیا انصارالله یمن از موشک اسرارآمیز خود رونمایی کرده است؟ +فیلم و تصاویر


نخستین نکته‌ای که در فیلم جدید منتشر شده خودنمایی میکند سرعت بسیار پایین و مادون صوت موشک مذکور است که مشابه با هیچ کدام از سامانه‌های پدافندی در حال خدمت ارتش یمن نیست.




www.mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## NaCon

skyshadow said:


> who can tell me which IRGC air defense missile is this? before you bomb me with Sayyad-2 or Taeer 3 missiles , no, its way more bigger then either Sayyad-2 or Taeer 3 the shape of its wings isn't similar to neither of those and it does not have as nearly sharp and pointy nose then of Sayyad-2 or Taeer 3 ( it clearly has a round nose ) so i ask you again which air defense missile is this?
> 
> it looks more like a cruise missile
> 
> View attachment 700675


It is the same as sayyed 2
Same fin layout and cone
It doesnt have a round nose its just the angle at which the picture was taken that gives the Illusion that it has a rounded nose

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1342763108457205761

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow

NaCon said:


> View attachment 700694
> View attachment 700697
> 
> 
> It is the same as sayyed 2
> Same fin layout and cone
> It doesnt have a round nose its just the angle at which the picture was taken that gives the Illusion that it has a rounded nose


size and sharpness don't add up look at the human size to its nose and he has its hands on the nose not nearly as sharp , agree to disagree , thanks for the work you put up


----------



## NaCon

skyshadow said:


> size and sharpness don't add up look at the human size to its nose and he has its hands on the nose not nearly as sharp , agree to disagree , thanks for the work you put up



Look at the size of the missile its not as small as you might think




from this angle the nose also looks rounded

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## skyshadow

*new bavar-373 version *

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sina-1

skyshadow said:


> *new bavar-373 version *
> 
> View attachment 701541
> 
> 
> View attachment 701543


Context:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1344311030512541696

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Heres an interesting pic








It looks like its part of a remote operated land based portable ciws type mount,or perhaps a semi automated manned mount.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

Dear Tehrani Moghadam talking about Iranian surface to air missiles (amongst others) and mentioning how resistant they are to E-warfare:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1347722880554037252

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Philosopher said:


> Dear Tehrani Moghadam talking about Iranian surface to air missiles (amongst others) and mentioning how resistant they are to E-warfare:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1347722880554037252


I wonder what the system He was referring to? He was alive during the development of Talash that would eventually become the 15th of Khordad and Bavar 373, so maybe the sayyad series and their radars, etc?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

WudangMaster said:


> I wonder what the system He was referring to? He was alive during the development of Talash that would eventually become the 15th of Khordad and Bavar 373, so maybe the sayyad series and their radars, etc?



It was probably one of the early systems in the Taer missile family as part of the IRGC's Sevome khordad/Tabas family. The good news is that it is apparent Iran is placing very extensive efforts in the e-warfare aspect of its system. This is obviously very important given how extensively the Americans and their allies rely on this domain.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> It was probably one of the early systems in the Taer missile family as part of the IRGC's Sevome khordad/Tabas family. The good news is that it is apparent Iran is placing very extensive efforts in the e-warfare aspect of its system. This is obviously very important given how extensively the Americans and their allies rely on this domain.



Iran can only defend against weapons it knows. Saying Iranian weapons are very resistant to EW is against KNOWN EW techniques and threats.

US/Israel have many techniques they are saving for major wars. Just as Iran has several plans it is saving for major war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

That statement becomes true and certain, if the system does not use traditional radar


----------



## Philosopher

TheImmortal said:


> Iran can only defend against weapons it knows. Saying Iranian weapons are very resistant to EW is against KNOWN EW techniques and threats.
> 
> US/Israel have many techniques they are saving for major wars. Just as Iran has several plans it is saving for major war.



Indeed all militaries will have hidden cards, however it is extremely important to nullify as much as possible the assets which the enemy uses openly and extensively. When it comes to e-warfare, that is a domain the science of which is very well understood thus Iran should be in a good position to predict the threats it could face. But as is always the case with war, expect the unexpected.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VEVAK

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1348926903621742592

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
3 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Philosopher said:


> Indeed all militaries will have hidden cards, however it is extremely important to nullify as much as possible the assets which the enemy uses openly and extensively. When it comes to e-warfare, that is a domain the science of which is very well understood thus Iran should be in a good position to predict the threats it could face. But as is always the case with war, expect the unexpected.



There is literally no benefit for Israel or US to unveil their real EW techniques because the second they reveal it, Iran builds a counter.

There is major concern here for Iran since everything from its chips to the OS of its air defense command and control centers use Western processors and Microsoft Windows.

Even the US is dumping technology that has Chinese processors for fears of backdoors being implemented into them.

Reactions: Like Like:

3


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> There is literally no benefit for Israel or US to unveil their real EW techniques because the second they reveal it, Iran builds a counter.
> 
> There is major concern here for Iran since everything from its chips to the OS of its air defense command and control centers use Western processors and Microsoft Windows.
> 
> Even the US is dumping technology that has Chinese processors for fears of backdoors being implemented into them.


Nothing will go to plan for Iran in a conflict with the U.S, contingencies must be prepared for even a possibility of the entire power grid of the country to be offline.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

The 4th Ghadir radar is deployed.





The publishing website claims it has 1600 KM Range also its so very capable of detecting radar evading targets such as stealth aircrafts and low flying cruise missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
14 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

1600 KM Ghadir radar coverage. I needed 3 of them to cover Arabian sea, Israel and KSA.
Red one deployed to Kermanshah, the black one deployed to Semnan province, the blue one deployed to Makran shores.


----------



## Stryker1982

mohammad45 said:


> 1600 KM Ghadir radar coverage. I needed 3 of them to cover Arabian sea, Israel and KSA.
> Red one deployed to Kermanshah, the black one deployed to Semnan province, the blue one deployed to Makran shores.
> View attachment 706708



Can't even have them so close to the border as a special forces team can neutralize it and escape rapidly.


----------



## Muhammed45

Stryker1982 said:


> Can't even have them so close to the border as a special forces team can neutralize it and escape rapidly.


I don't think so sir. Kermanshah and Semnan are both well known hosts of military hardwares. About Makran, don't forget that Iran is a country surrounded by mountains. 







Small shields for our airdefense systems but protective.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

I wonder why Ghadir after Ghadir , why no operational Sepehr.
you can put a single sepehr in central Iran and cover a lot more than those Ghadir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> Can't even have them so close to the border as a special forces team can neutralize it and escape rapidly.


I think there is one on the coast to serve as early warning for cruise missiles and objects flying low over the water, with the understanding that such a system would be destroyed in a barrage but provide the needed early warning and time for counter actions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

WudangMaster said:


> I think there is one on the coast to serve as early warning for cruise missiles and objects flying low over the water, with the understanding that such a system would be destroyed in a barrage but provide the needed early warning and time for counter actions.



That would make sense. I suppose a clever adversary would attempt to disable it before launching a barrage but I believe that in itself would be the early warning.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philosopher

Incredible news!

Salehi confirmed Iran is working on quantum radars!

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

Philosopher said:


> Incredible news!
> 
> Salehi confirmed Iran is working on quantum radars!


That is a typical example of how "new technologies" can make multi billion dollars stealth aircraft investments useless.....and here is a historical story

in the late 70's IBM was the top builder of type writers..They spent huge amounts of $$$ and built the ultimate type writer called "Selectric", close to a thousand dollars and heavy as hell . I have one under my desk .It is a marvel of mechanics and to this day I have not figured how it works..That type write came out to the market for few months...then some joe invented the $5 dollar plastic "daisy wheel" and a $10 dollar solenoid hammer...vala...you could buy that supper light, supper cheap and supper accurate type writer for $50...IBM sweared a lot and went out of type writer business for good..lol

Sounds familiar F-35 !!!!!

PS: for those of you who do not know what a "type writer" is ..It is a keyboard and printer in one..all mechanical..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Philosopher

aryobarzan said:


> That is a typical example of how "new technologies" can make multi billion dollars stealth aircraft investments useless.....and here is a historical story
> 
> in the late 70's IBM was the top builder of type writers..They spent huge amounts of $$$ and built the ultimate type writer called "Selectric". I have one under my desk .It is a marvel of mechanics and to this day I have not figured how it works..That type write came out to the market for few months...then some joe invented the $5 dollar plastic "daisy wheel" and a $10 dollar solenoid hammer...vala...you could buy that supper light, supper cheap and supper accurate type writer for $50...IBM sweared a lot and went out of type writer business for good..lol
> 
> Sounds familiar F-35 !!!!!



It is absolutely essential that Iran prioritises these new quantum technologies. From what I am seeing from Salehi, it is clear they are thinking big in this quantum sector. Iran needs to think very big and try to become a top player in this quantum arena. Given the crucial nature of this technology, I would go as far as saying the requirements for its development needs to put into law by making sure it is getting the necessary budget and attention. Another key importance is making sure Iranian school children from young age are exposed to this quantum reality. This should not be be something that is only taught at higher academic level i.e university. 

If these quantum technologies mature more quickly than anticipated, that means not just stealth will become much less useful but it means the arrival of UCAVs that can be controlled by pilots on the ground without the worry that they will be hacked. There are many key technologies that this area will give in terms of military value.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

It would would be very useful for fire control tracking radars, aligned by traditional radar waves.
Later also for volume search to replace radio waves completely.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Philosopher

Assuming quantum radars reach the level that makes current RCS lowering techniques nigh useless, this raises the question if nations will continue to pursue such low RCS designs. One would think the priorities would then shift to other parameters like speed and manoeuvrability. Presumably the future UCAV designs will focus on hypersonic drive systems such as scramjet UAVs and high g force systems. It will certainly be interesting to see how the dynamic changes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Albert Einstein called the Quantum entanglement *"spooky action at far distance"*....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philosopher

aryobarzan said:


> Albert Einstein called the Quantum entanglement *"spooky action at far distance"*....



He did not buy into this quantum mechanics. Not that one could blame him, there is absolutely nothing intuitive about it. No physicist would be insane to claim to understand it; they only know how to use it. It is like someone who knows how to use a computer but does not have a clue how it works.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Quantum mechanics accurately predicts how particles work at sub atomic level. The issue where physicists don’t understand comes in why there hasn’t been a unified level of physics that can explain Quantum mechanics and general relativity. And to be quite Frank, I think the human mind is too dumb to understand this without the help of intelligent A.I. So it will likely be with the aid of A.I. That the secrets of the universe get unlocked.

Quantum mechanics makes a lot of sense if you believe in many worlds theory or simulation theory or parallel worlds theory. For it is no different than Schrödinger’s cat. The cat is both alive and dead in the box until acted upon by an observer.

Quantum mechanics also works the same way, a particle is both a wave and a particle until acted upon by an observer.

Same principle applies to entanglement, when a two particles that are experiencing entanglement are manipulated by an observer the other reacts in real time. Some say this violates the speed limit of the universe (speed of light), but the truth is the particle knows that the other one is going to be observed and reacts to that.

While this may seem “spooky”. It makes sense if the universe is a simulation (power saving mechanism at sub atomic level, it is how modern open world video games operate) or one of many worlds (Parallel universes for every “observable” probability).

It is great to see Iran investing in This field. It to me is the future of the world quantum computers, quantum communication, etc will be a key for next generation world powers to survive. Iran needs to pour ALOT of resources into this field because to me it is more an existential threat than nuclear weapons for a country that hasn’t matured qua

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## foxhoundbis

Philosopher said:


> Incredible news!
> Salehi confirmed Iran is working on quantum radars!


I am not surprised at all if you remember a few months ago in this canal I asked you the question if among you someone was aware of. I had other echoes that suggested to me, Iran was on the verge to build its own radio photonic radar, but I was not sure. I suspect Iran had already built a new radar prototype.
An Iranian F-4 equipped with radio photonic radar can nullify all F-35 assets. A battery of air defense gun like the old AZP S-60 with a radio photonic 's networked radar can easily down an F-22, or B-2.
But from Iran, nothing surprises me,
Here are examples of why I think Iran in next future will overcome the problem of its jet engine and will be able to build a jet engine more powerful than AL-31
Mathematics Olympiads, Iran is among the top 20 countries in the world





The number of patents/country, Iran is among the top 20 countries too -nearly equal to France, in spite of embargo-




Should this unfair blockade lifted, Iran would rank equal to South Korea. It leads me to think that the school level in Iran is among the best -in spite of embargo- thus, nothing is astonishing.

I think for Iran the next step will be its own railgun.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## jauk

These base items, which almost all others can be derived, are required:

*Quantum*
*AI and neural*
*Automation and robotics*
*Space*
*Free unlimited energy*
*Genetic engineering*
*Nano*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## jauk

aryobarzan said:


> Albert Einstein called the Quantum entanglement *"spooky action at far distance"*....


« واژه اش به فارسی: « درهم‌تنیدگی

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

At last some high definition pics of the shot down global hawk and its recovered systems on display

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## HAIDER

Sineva said:


> At last some high definition pics of the shot down global hawk and its recovered systems on display
> View attachment 712076
> 
> View attachment 712077


No engine recovery.


----------



## Aspen

Sineva said:


> At last some high definition pics of the shot down global hawk and its recovered systems on display
> View attachment 712076
> 
> View attachment 712077



Very interesting. Where was this display?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

HAIDER said:


> No engine recovery.


deliberately wasn't shown to public.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

HAIDER said:


> No engine recovery.


Impossible to do that . the missile hit exactly the area that engine was housed.
Even if its recovered its damaged far more than that to be worthy of showcasing.


----------



## Sina-1

Hack-Hook said:


> Impossible to do that . the missile hit exactly the area that engine was housed.
> Even if its recovered its damaged far more than that to be worthy of showcasing.


Not likely. 3rd of Khordad missiles explode in the vicinity of the target in order to increase likelihood of a score. Hence the notion of direct hit on engine is not very likely.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

Khibiny said:


> Iran recovered everything including the navy seals that were sent to recover some critical RQ4 parts


any evidence to point to your statement or is this just some rumor.


----------



## Aspen

aryobarzan said:


> any evidence to point to your statement or is this just some rumor.



I think its just some light humour

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Shawnee

Hack-Hook said:


> Impossible to do that . the missile hit exactly the area that engine was housed.
> Even if its recovered its damaged far more than that to be worthy of showcasing.



The shrapnels covering the body of global Hawk if you look close to it shows that the fuse was activated in proximity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aryobarzan

Khibiny said:


> Before the famous Stena Impero, Iran sized a ship that had a Panama flag on it, later Panama said that the ship wasn't used for the purpose it was intended for therefore Panama won't assume any responsabily on the matter.
> 
> After that, Iran released the sailors that were on the ship (They were from India if I remember correctly) except for 6 navy seals that were on board disguised as sailors.
> 
> it was on twitter at the time, but it didn't get much attention.


That could explain why US is taking Iranians as hostage for a possible exchange .the latest was the iranian analyst..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> Not likely. 3rd of Khordad missiles explode in the vicinity of the target in order to increase likelihood of a score. Hence the notion of direct hit on engine is not very likely.


the video suggested a direct hit or a very close explosion and the explosion and derbies hitting engine resulted in high spped protating part of engine become out of alignment and resulted in destruction of the engine


----------



## TheImmortal

Khibiny said:


> Before the famous Stena Impero, Iran sized a ship that had a Panama flag on it, later Panama said that the ship wasn't used for the purpose it was intended for therefore Panama won't assume any responsabily on the matter.
> 
> After that, Iran released the sailors that were on the ship (They were from India if I remember correctly) except for 6 navy seals that were on board disguised as sailors.
> 
> it was on twitter at the time, but it didn't get much attention.



Theory doesn’t hold much water (no pun intended). It’s hilarious you think 6 navy seals could locate the engine with no support equipment and sonar ship in the dark.

Iran would need to recover the engine very quickly as possible to prevent further damage to critical parts of the engine as well as a wider debris field from water carrying parts away from impact location.

Thus the search and recovery effort was probably launched as soon as confirmation of it being hit. I remember analysts doubting Iran could launch an Search and recovery effort fast enough or have the tools to pull the drones heavy structure out of the depths. But they managed too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## White and Green with M/S

Sina-1 said:


> Not likely. 3rd of Khordad missiles explode in the vicinity of the target in order to increase likelihood of a score. Hence the notion of direct hit on engine is not very likely.


Is your Khordad SAM is radar guided or IR guided SAM, if this SAM system is IR guided than most probably it could directly hit engine compartment or adjacent it, hence upon impact the engine could be destroyed as a result


----------



## skyshadow

White and Green with M/S said:


> Is your Khordad SAM is radar guided or IR guided SAM, if this SAM system is IR guided than most probably it could directly hit engine compartment or adjacent it, hence upon impact the engine could be destroyed as a result


its both, IR and radar guided


----------



## WudangMaster

I think the Sayyad 2 that was used by the 3rd Khordad in bringing down the drone is radar guided. The Taers might also be rdar based; in a war game a few years ago, one can see a Taer exploding near the target as seen from the camera mounted on the target drone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Army and the IRGC establish a joint DCA operations center

On this 4th day of the Decad of Dawn, marking the days from the arrival in the country of the founder of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 until his victory, the first Iranian site for intelligent management and supervision of small aircraft was unveiled in the presence of political and military officials, reports the Tasnim news agency citing the public relations department of the RII army.

"Sepehr" is the name of this first advanced and mostly indigenous Iranian site for intelligent supervision of small aircraft which has just been unveiled this Wednesday (February 3rd) in the area of the DCA of the North-West, adds the source.

"The Sepehr site is capable of performing information management and real-time supervision of all kinds of small aircraft, whether balloons or gliders, or any other object flying across the country," said the sub -Brigadier Azimi, commander of the North West DCA zone.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Philosopher

*Iran inaugurates MANPAD Missiles and Solid Fuel production line*

See link for the video

*Tehran (IP) - Iran Defence Ministry on Saturday inaugurates the mass production line of advanced shoulder-launched missiles and centres for producing solid fuel for ground forces’ missiles.*

Iran Press/Iran News: In a ceremony on Saturday in attendance of Chief of Staff of Iran's Armed Forces Major General Mohamad Bagheri and Defense Minister Brigadier General Amir Hatami, concurrent with the 42nd Islamic Revolution anniversary, these two strategic projects inaugurated.

First-generation of the shoulder-launched missiles were being imported to the country, but today, the advanced generation of them is being manufactured in Iran, Major General Bagheri said, noting that the missiles have different varieties with a range of around 5 kilometers that can counter various targets.
“This is actually one of the unique product lines of short-range air defense missiles in the region and can fulfill the armed forces' operational needs using advanced technologies in the fields of optics, guidance, and control,” Chief of Staff of Iran's Armed Forces added.

Only three or four countries in the world are equipped with the know-how of producing them. However, today Iran has completely attained the technology, and all the parts are being mass-produced inside the country.
Major General Mohamad Bagheri, about the combined solid fuel production center, said: Increasing the range and speed of missiles used in ground operations was one of the armed forces' needs and aim of manufacturing solid fuel.
Produced Solid Fuel will be used in different tactical surface-to-surface missiles, anti-tank, low altitude air defense missiles, among others.









Iran inaugurates two strategic Missiles and Solid Fuel production line


Tehran (IP) - Iran Defence Ministry on Saturday inaugurates the mass production line of advanced shoulder-launched missiles and centres for producing solid fuel for ground forces’ missiles.




iranpress.com

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## foxhoundbis

Iskander said:


> View attachment 714180


If indeed such radars can detect any stealth aircraft, they are very, very, very vulnerable because they are cumbersome.
The problem with such hardware, they are very vulnerable, because they are not mobile. During Desert Storm in January 1991, for the US coalition, the first critical objective was to destroy the Iraqi radar VHF station. The US sent commandos -there is not boasted by Western media -, helped by the fifth column among Iraqi leaders they destroyed Iraqi radar stations. Thus they could send their F-117 to bomb other Iraqi targets. No doubt that, in case of conflict with Iran, US green berets will be sent to destroy these critical targets.
I think US special forces are already training to destroy these iranian targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411769526579200

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411773733462016

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Philosopher

Quite a cost effective system that makes use of already existing MANPADS. Great for use against sub/transonic cruise missiles, UAVs and precision guided bombs. It is certainly a good addition to Iran's air defence layer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

I always wondered about these shoulder fired missiles launchers..IR detectors work the best when they are cooled..do these launchers actually have electrical cooling systems to cool the detector or are they using detectors that need no cooling..does anyone know..!!!


----------



## Iskander

foxhoundbis said:


> If indeed such radars can detect any stealth aircraft, they are very, very, very vulnerable because they are cumbersome.
> The problem with such hardware, they are very vulnerable, because they are not mobile. During Desert Storm in January 1991, for the US coalition, the first critical objective was to destroy the Iraqi radar VHF station. The US sent commandos -there is not boasted by Western media -, helped by the fifth column among Iraqi leaders they destroyed Iraqi radar stations. Thus they could send their F-117 to bomb other Iraqi targets. No doubt that, in case of conflict with Iran, US green berets will be sent to destroy these critical targets.
> I think US special forces are already training to destroy these iranian targets.


The main purpose of this type of radars is to provide valuable early warnings against low flying targets especially cruise missiles during the first opening hours of conflict and despite its vulnerabilities it can accomplish this task with some protection, afterwards its destruction is inevitable

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

Khibiny said:


> A while back I watched a youtube video, here is the link to it:
> is it possible that the photonic stuff in the youtube comment and the Quantum radars are related?



They seem to be talking about some physical entities that are spread in the air that would raise the RCS of any object that flies through them. Whilst this is certainly possible in theory, there are obvious practical issues, such the size of airspace you need to cover and how you will spread such a thing and keep it where you want it. So I would not give too much attention to these YouTube comments. They're based on fantastical desires rather than real projects. If there was such an available information OSINT wise, we would have known about it. Quantum radars on the other hand are real and coming in the not so distant future to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

This manpad based system will be excellent for the naval forces as well and serve as a good supplement and stop gap until oghab comes along. 
Couple this with gatling guns or zu-23s and a mesbah type radar and eo/ir and there is a kashtan like system for the navy right there.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

aryobarzan said:


> I always wondered about these shoulder fired missiles launchers..IR detectors work the best when they are cooled..do these launchers actually have electrical cooling systems to cool the detector or are they using detectors that need no cooling..does anyone know..!!!


Most of them use cooled ir detectors,theres usually a replaceable component called the battery coolant unit [BCU] on the grip stock which is triggered as part of the activation process.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359927249395470337

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411769526579200
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411773733462016



It's a thoughtful idea for protection of small areas for against CMs, PGMS and more importantly, drones

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411769526579200
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358411773733462016




We might be seeing these in Al-Burkamal soon enough.

Iran needs a plan to provide adequate protection for the base in the Syria-Iraq border. You can't drive a 3rd Khordad through Iraq into Syria but you can deploy a civilian truck like the pictures here. A simple tarp would suffice in transportation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363040362491764736

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ali_Baba

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363040362491764736



Iran has impressive home grown capabilities as far as ground based radar systems, and SAM systems go. About 100x better than Pakistan's right now(no real home grown radar in use anywhere of any value - other than a tiny ground survellance radar ).....

Even Indian's has mastered this space and have significant systems that are home grown, and Egypt has announced some systems recently aswel..

This systems are progressive and iterative in their development and take time to mature, so the fact that Pakistan essentially has nothing now is shocking. 

Why is Pakistan so far behind in this radar development?!? ie it is not even in contention right now..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ich

Stryker1982 said:


> We might be seeing these in Al-Burkamal soon enough.
> 
> Iran needs a plan to provide adequate protection for the base in the Syria-Iraq border. You can't drive a 3rd Khordad through Iraq into Syria but you can deploy a civilian truck like the pictures here. A simple tarp would suffice in transportation.



Iran needs a runway there, so they can transport Khordad with C130 to Al-Burkamal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Iran needs a runway there, so they can transport Khordad with C130 to Al-Burkamal.


3rd of Khordad have a purpose and be assured its not protecting a base from saturated suicide drone and cruise missile attack

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Ali_Baba said:


> Iran has impressive home grown capabilities as far as ground based radar systems, and SAM systems go. About 100x better than Pakistan's right now(no real home grown radar in use anywhere of any value - other than a tiny ground survellance radar ).....
> 
> Even Indian's has mastered this space and have significant systems that are home grown, and Egypt has announced some systems recently aswel..
> 
> This systems are progressive and iterative in their development and take time to mature, so the fact that Pakistan essentially has nothing now is shocking.
> 
> Why is Pakistan so far behind in this radar development?!? ie it is not even in contention right now..



Because Pakistan main enemy is India and any major war would likely turn hot (nuclear). Plus with Pakistan’s close relationship with China they can get access to many radars if needed.

If Iran had a patron (Russia or China) that would supply Iran anytime they needed something then Iran would have no incentive to spend costly time consuming efforts to build its own defense products.

Iran’s domestic industry is a by product of no one selling it anything. Don’t trust Egyptian or Indian products they all use foreign parts to make their product and thus are sanctionable by the host country if the need arises.


Ich said:


> Iran needs a runway there, so they can transport Khordad with C130 to Al-Burkamal.



Doesn’t matter, when Iran transported 3rd Khordad to T4 it was destroyed after being unloaded and even an Iranian 747 was damaged by shrapnel in the process.

The key is deterrence which Iran lacks. Israel doesn’t have military assets outside of Israel that Iran can attack for deterrence.

Attacking Israeli soil is not the same thing as it represents a few levels higher on escalation ladder because you are basically saying Syrian soil = Iranian soil. Which even Iran will agree is not true. So true deterrence would be attacking a HVT Israeli target on foreign soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Doesn’t matter, when Iran transported 3rd Khordad to T4 it was destroyed after being unloaded and even an Iranian 747 was damaged by shrapnel in the process.



Yup, they need something with a lower footprint, in many ways asymmetric, simple to use, low cost, and suitable for saturation attacks rather than HVTs that a 3rd Khordad would target.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sha ah

They should taken it apart, transported it clandestinely in various pieces and then put it back together in an underground facility. Realistically they would actually have to do that in a large enough quantity to reach a critical mass. Otherwise it's pointless.

Maybe if they transport the system to Hmeimim airbase ? That base for example is well defended by the S-400 and they have shot down dozens of drones and projectiles launched at them throughout the years. That would be IF the Russians would be willing to cooperate in that regard, which is doubtful. 

Actually if the Syrians were smart, they would lure the Israeli's into a trap by feeding them false into. Counter intelligence is extremely important in a setting like Syria. However I don't see the Syrians being ambitious enough for something like that. That's the difference between the Houthi's and Syrians. The Houthi's are bold and ambitious enough to try and when you keep trying you eventually succeed.

Anyways, right now I doubt if the Syrians can even pay for decent systems. Like I've said before, if jets fly through Lebanese airspace before reaching Syria, then why not have spotters on the ground engage them with manpads while they fly low ? It would cost peanuts to do that and atleast show some kind of resistance and you never know, they might be successful one time if they keep launching from multiple points at a target.



TheImmortal said:


> Because Pakistan main enemy is India and any major war would likely turn hot (nuclear). Plus with Pakistan’s close relationship with China they can get access to many radars if needed.
> 
> If Iran had a patron (Russia or China) that would supply Iran anytime they needed something then Iran would have no incentive to spend costly time consuming efforts to build its own defense products.
> 
> Iran’s domestic industry is a by product of no one selling it anything. Don’t trust Egyptian or Indian products they all use foreign parts to make their product and thus are sanctionable by the host country if the need arises.
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter, when Iran transported 3rd Khordad to T4 it was destroyed after being unloaded and even an Iranian 747 was damaged by shrapnel in the process.
> 
> The key is deterrence which Iran lacks. Israel doesn’t have military assets outside of Israel that Iran can attack for deterrence.
> 
> Attacking Israeli soil is not the same thing as it represents a few levels higher on escalation ladder because you are basically saying Syrian soil = Iranian soil. Which even Iran will agree is not true. So true deterrence would be attacking a HVT Israeli target on foreign soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

I have a curious question - Do Iranians in general(or a good %) have any religious closeness/affinity/connection with Zaydi Shia Islam that Houthis practice? Both are Shia, but i am curous to know if there are inter-religious links/travel/seminars/education/conferences etc between Iranian Shia and Yemeni Shia? thanks!


----------



## Surenas

925boy said:


> I have a curious question - Do Iranians in general(or a good %) have any religious closeness/affinity/connection with Zaydi Shia Islam that Houthis practice? Both are Shia, but i am curous to know if there are inter-religious links/travel/seminars/education/conferences etc between Iranian Shia and Yemeni Shia? thanks!



This article might help:









Yemen's Zaidis: A Window for Iranian Influence


The receptiveness that many Yemeni Shiite leaders have shown toward Iran's foreign policy and religious practice give Tehran a ready means to expand its reach in Yemen.




www.washingtoninstitute.org





''According to the aforementioned Zaidi cleric Morteza Mohatwari, Iran's government and clerical institutions -- including those affiliated with leading Shiite clerics Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and Javad Shahristani in Qom -- provide religious training and educational tools to Yemenis in both countries. During a trip to Iran last month, Mohatwari asked for financial and educational support from the University of Religions and Denominations, an organization created thirteen years ago under Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's supervision to train non-Twelver Shiites and Twelvers who want to study other branches of Islam. A few weeks prior, Iran had invited Mohatwari and seventy other Yemeni Zaidi leaders to visit the shrine of Nasr al-Haq, a ninth-century Zaidi Imam, in northern Iran. Khamenei had ordered the shrine's renovation to reinforce the ties between Yemen and Iran, according to remarks made in 2014 by Sattar Alizadeh, head of the Endowment and Charity Organization of Mazandaran province. When Mohatwari visited the shrine last October, he said, "Having relations with Iran's Supreme Leader is an honor for Yemen...Now we know him more than Nasr al-Haq."

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Novelties in the Iranian anti-aircraft force: an “unparalleled” radar and a “autonomous mobility” HQ 


The Iranian military has unveiled the unique radar system, unmatched in the world, and an autonomous mobility headquarters.

Named Bahman, it was presented at a ceremony attended by Iranian Army Anti-Air Force Commander Ali Reza Sabahi Fard.

The latter spoke of "new achievements in the organization of research and the struggle for self-sufficiency in the field of anti-aircraft weapons".
“One of the achievements that has been unveiled today is the Bahman radar system. It is unique and unprecedented in the world, ”he said.

Among the characteristics of this radar system "is that it operates at idle speed, as well as its ability to detect all planes and flying objects flying at very low altitudes, such as drones and very tiny flying objects," he said. He specifies.
He continued, “We can use this system functionally from today. "


Mr. Sabahi Farid also reported on the entry into action of an autonomous mobility operations headquarters, which can be used in all military confrontations, as well as during natural disasters, such as floods and earthquakes. of land, because "he can carry out his tasks independently".

He pointed out that these achievements are manufactured for the first time by the Iranian anti-aircraft army.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iranian Defense Industry Unveils New Series of Indigenous MANPADS 


As part of a new initiative by the defense industries of the IIR to increase mobility and create a short-range defense umbrella to counter enemy cruise missiles, a new mobile defense system unmanned was developed in the country.

In recent weeks, the production lines for the new series of portable air defense systems (MANPADS) have been inaugurated in Iran.

It was at the end of the imposed Iran-Iraq war and the beginning of the program to further develop the country's defense capabilities that the question of the design and manufacture of new portable air defense systems (MANPADS) was also raised. raised.

Finally, in the 80s of the Persian calendar, the first generation Iranian MANPADS called “Misagh” were built and presented to the whole world. Some foreign sources have claimed that these missiles were in fact developed based on the Chinese model QW-1. To date, three models of this missile have been developed

The 1.5 meter long "Misagh1" missile has a minimum range of 500 meters and a maximum range of 5,000 meters. It has the ability to hit targets on the 4000 meter flight ceiling.


This missile has a speed of 600 meters per second and weighs about 11 kilograms, of which 1.42 kilograms is the weight of its warhead, and the mass of the missile with a launcher to carry is about 17 kilograms.

Considering the characteristics of the launcher, the storage life of this missile is long, it has simple launch instruction and high rate of fire, and it can be used in temperatures ranging from minus 40 to over 60 degrees.

Its automatic guidance system allows you to operate in a "fire-and-forget" mode, allowing the user to quickly exit the launch position and reduce the risk of enemy damage.

In the years that followed, the "Misagh 2" missile entered service as an improved version of the "Misagh 1", and one of the important points that was taken into account was the increased sensitivity of the sensor. infrared of this missile to face cruise missiles.

These missiles generally have weak infrared radiation and can be hidden from view of many detection systems.


The range and combat height in the "Misagh 2" missile remained the same, but its speed increased from 600 meters per second to 850 meters per second.

In appearance, the "Misagh 3" missile hardly differs from previous models of this missile and is almost in the same category in terms of flight characteristics, but the use of new technology makes the " Misagh 3 ”much more fatal against low flying targets, especially cruise missiles.

This missile uses new fuses which greatly increase the possibility of detonating and hitting the target.

This is a laser fuse which operates as follows: once the missile is launched in the direction of the target to be reached, a source of laser radiation inside the missile is triggered and spreads a light beam in a ray of 360 degrees. As it nears its objective, it reflects the laser light that hits the target, before activating the missile's warhead and causing the explosion.


Mobile platform for Iranian MANPADS

The production line of portable air defense systems (MANPADS) which, according to General Baqeri, have a range of about 5 kilometers was inaugurated in recent days, in the presence of the Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the armed forces.

There is no specific name for this missile, but the published image of it shows the same upgrade or model of the "Misagh 3" series missile.

In the images linked to this unveiling ceremony, there is an image of a mobile system, which appears to be a new medium for MANPADS.

In this design, which is also used overseas, a number of MANPADS are installed on a platform with targeting systems and the human factor is removed from the missile transport process. Thus, more missiles are carried on a platform and can be fired more quickly at different targets.

In today's world, these models have been developed in countries like Russia and France on a stationary basis on speedboats or personnel carriers.


With this simple, but important and practical measure, the volume of portable missiles will increase and in turn the required manpower will be reduced, ultimately reducing financial costs and loss of life.

At the same time, thanks to the mobility of this defense system, a high-speed mobile air defense layer will be added to the country's low-altitude defense systems, and the level of reliability in order to face threats. , especially in the category of cruise missiles will increase.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## vizier

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Iranian Defense Industry Unveils New Series of Indigenous MANPADS
> 
> 
> As part of a new initiative by the defense industries of the IIR to increase mobility and create a short-range defense umbrella to counter enemy cruise missiles, a new mobile defense system unmanned was developed in the country.
> 
> In recent weeks, the production lines for the new series of portable air defense systems (MANPADS) have been inaugurated in Iran.
> 
> It was at the end of the imposed Iran-Iraq war and the beginning of the program to further develop the country's defense capabilities that the question of the design and manufacture of new portable air defense systems (MANPADS) was also raised. raised.
> 
> Finally, in the 80s of the Persian calendar, the first generation Iranian MANPADS called “Misagh” were built and presented to the whole world. Some foreign sources have claimed that these missiles were in fact developed based on the Chinese model QW-1. To date, three models of this missile have been developed
> 
> The 1.5 meter long "Misagh1" missile has a minimum range of 500 meters and a maximum range of 5,000 meters. It has the ability to hit targets on the 4000 meter flight ceiling.
> 
> 
> This missile has a speed of 600 meters per second and weighs about 11 kilograms, of which 1.42 kilograms is the weight of its warhead, and the mass of the missile with a launcher to carry is about 17 kilograms.
> 
> Considering the characteristics of the launcher, the storage life of this missile is long, it has simple launch instruction and high rate of fire, and it can be used in temperatures ranging from minus 40 to over 60 degrees.
> 
> Its automatic guidance system allows you to operate in a "fire-and-forget" mode, allowing the user to quickly exit the launch position and reduce the risk of enemy damage.
> 
> In the years that followed, the "Misagh 2" missile entered service as an improved version of the "Misagh 1", and one of the important points that was taken into account was the increased sensitivity of the sensor. infrared of this missile to face cruise missiles.
> 
> These missiles generally have weak infrared radiation and can be hidden from view of many detection systems.
> 
> 
> The range and combat height in the "Misagh 2" missile remained the same, but its speed increased from 600 meters per second to 850 meters per second.
> 
> In appearance, the "Misagh 3" missile hardly differs from previous models of this missile and is almost in the same category in terms of flight characteristics, but the use of new technology makes the " Misagh 3 ”much more fatal against low flying targets, especially cruise missiles.
> 
> This missile uses new fuses which greatly increase the possibility of detonating and hitting the target.
> 
> This is a laser fuse which operates as follows: once the missile is launched in the direction of the target to be reached, a source of laser radiation inside the missile is triggered and spreads a light beam in a ray of 360 degrees. As it nears its objective, it reflects the laser light that hits the target, before activating the missile's warhead and causing the explosion.
> 
> 
> Mobile platform for Iranian MANPADS
> 
> The production line of portable air defense systems (MANPADS) which, according to General Baqeri, have a range of about 5 kilometers was inaugurated in recent days, in the presence of the Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the armed forces.
> 
> There is no specific name for this missile, but the published image of it shows the same upgrade or model of the "Misagh 3" series missile.
> 
> In the images linked to this unveiling ceremony, there is an image of a mobile system, which appears to be a new medium for MANPADS.
> 
> In this design, which is also used overseas, a number of MANPADS are installed on a platform with targeting systems and the human factor is removed from the missile transport process. Thus, more missiles are carried on a platform and can be fired more quickly at different targets.
> 
> In today's world, these models have been developed in countries like Russia and France on a stationary basis on speedboats or personnel carriers.
> 
> 
> With this simple, but important and practical measure, the volume of portable missiles will increase and in turn the required manpower will be reduced, ultimately reducing financial costs and loss of life.
> 
> At the same time, thanks to the mobility of this defense system, a high-speed mobile air defense layer will be added to the country's low-altitude defense systems, and the level of reliability in order to face threats. , especially in the category of cruise missiles will increase.



I also think that manpads have a future especially being low cost last tier defense against cruise missiles.
Cruise missiles may have a low ir signature. Modern manpad seekers are multiband ir and can counter them. I think however a laser guidance can be added to manpads as well. This way even if the target has very low infrared signature like a gps glide bomb(sdbs have 100+km ranges) it can be locked on.

Additionally instead of a radar a Lidar can be used for point defense which can be small about 3km radius-altitude. Stealthy cruise missiles, glide bombs, smaller dumb bombs, mini drone swarms can be detected by Lidar. Even if the radar is powerful it can be jammed, detection range reduces and can be located-targeted from very long ranges but jamming the lidar would be much more difficult and cant be made from long ranges like em jamming.

This example uses for example a prism to get data using refraction of light.









10 Technical Advantages - Baraja







www.baraja.com





For example a single rotating laser can get direction and a prism in front of it also rotating with the laser can provide the altitude data using refraction of light.


For slower targets like gravity bombs, glide bombs, drone swarms I think this can be useful as well.

metal storm grenade launcher mode around 5:10. Ofcourse the "grenade" here would need to have control surfaces at its back like a missile and on its nose a laser seeker. You only need to point the laser to incoming bomb and fire the weapon.











laser guided grenade. It can be difficult to hit a fast moving target with it but we are talking about hitting dumb bombs, gliders and slow moving drone swarms. It has a rocket engine giving it about 2km range





Faster targets like supersonic-hypersonic cruise missiles, rocket bombs can be handled by faster sams and radar systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 725246


Heres a very good debunking of those claims...

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371895207399198726

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371896969354969090Seriously tho...manpads sent from iran intended for the saa,or perhaps more likely its allied and/or auxiliary forces,were instead diverted to the TURKS!?......yeah!,right!,f@ck off!!.
💩"Experts"💩,my ar$ehole,what in the f@ck are these idiots smoking? 
I couldnt help but notice the stinky stink of our old friend,supposed "journalist and military expert" 💩 babak taghvaee💩,who is listed as one of the social media sources in this "report",whats the bet hes the one whos behind these idiotic claims?,it would certainly fit his previous mo.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Heres a very good debunking of those claims...
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371895207399198726
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371896969354969090Seriously tho...manpads sent from iran intended for the saa,or perhaps more likely its allied and/or auxiliary forces,were instead diverted to the TURKS!?......yeah!,right!,f@ck off!!.
> 💩"Experts"💩,my ar$ehole,what in the f@ck are these idiots smoking?
> I couldnt help but notice the stinky stink of our old friend,supposed "journalist and military expert" 💩 babak taghvaee💩,who is listed as one of the social media sources in this "report",whats the bet hes the one whos behind these idiotic claims?,it would certainly fit his previous mo.



Iranian arms flow across the world it’s a black market. If an international arms dealer requests from Iran 100 manpads why wouldn’t Iran fulfill it? Where the manpads end up isn’t their problem as long as assurances are made that it won’t be used to Iran’s detriment (acts of terror/ against Iranian interests).

People act like Iran needs to keep track of every weapon down to the last bullet it makes.

But an Iranian manpad being found is cause of concern, but Turkish weapons or Russian or Chinese are not? UN is a hypocrisy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

Those MANPADS could have easily been captured by the GNA from the LNA. Yes it does seem unlikely for Turkey to buy from Iran since Turkey produces its own MANPADS, however recent sanctions (CAATSA) have been preventing Turkey from accessing spare parts for their UAVs, F-16s and much more.

Also during wars weapons always get spread around. Iranian TOW ATGM copies (Toofan) have ended up in the hands of every player in Syria for example, including Turkish proxies, YPG, Al Qaeda militants, Syrian army, etc.

Also keep in mind Oryx is a heavily pro Turkish pro Azerbaijan source and nothing in his tweet debunks anything really. To be honest it seems like an emotional outburst based on assumptions more than anything else.



Sineva said:


> Heres a very good debunking of those claims...
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371895207399198726
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371896969354969090Seriously tho...manpads sent from iran intended for the saa,or perhaps more likely its allied and/or auxiliary forces,were instead diverted to the TURKS!?......yeah!,right!,f@ck off!!.
> 💩"Experts"💩,my ar$ehole,what in the f@ck are these idiots smoking?
> I couldnt help but notice the stinky stink of our old friend,supposed "journalist and military expert" 💩 babak taghvaee💩,who is listed as one of the social media sources in this "report",whats the bet hes the one whos behind these idiotic claims?,it would certainly fit his previous mo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

There were statements from General Esmaili a few years back regarding Iran achieving 3000 air defense nodes through out the country by 1400 solar hejira. Considering the covid setbacks, how far along do you suppose the national air defense grid has come in this endeavour?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EvilWesteners

WudangMaster said:


> There were statements from General Esmaili a few years back regarding Iran achieving 3000 air defense nodes through out the country by 1400 solar hejira. Considering the covid setbacks, how far along do you suppose the national air defense grid has come in this endeavour?



Iran does not need a lot. It just needs enough to make the enemy consider the high cost of intervention and the cascade affect of their actions.

So far, U.S. got some - yes "some" deterrence from Sullemani Assassination reaction, BUT not enough to be a worthwhile deterrence.

They feel they got rid of Iran's #2 and as soon as Khamanei is gone, they feel they are in a driving seat that would topple Iran.

Iran needs to start planning (if it hasn't already) and PROMOTING --- T O D A Y ---- for :

Islamic Republic of Iran 2.0

If don't have any ideas on how to do that, then they are really ****ed.

Iran's air defense is good enough. They just need MORE in quantities.

Iran also DOES NOT NEED the best fighter jets. I have said this before, all they need is AIRBORNE AIR DEFENCE platform, i,e, a fighter jet that can carry 8 long range air to air missiles that can hit fighter jets and cruise missiles and UAV/UCAVs from long distance.

A modified F-14 with good enough turbojet engines would do (even AL-21F), and a long range radar such as Irbis-S that has 25kw power with solid state power amplifiers. They can had a FLIR with liquid nitrogen for cooling. These are not high tech and something Iran can do.

For the Americans and their genocidal allies and supporters and warmongers ... these are significant enough (adding to Iran's ballistic missiles) to make the whole idea of war/battle with Iran almost unworthy and too costly.

Iran should not let perfection be the enemy of "good enough". Iran does not need range, for its OWN DEFENCE. It has 50+years of airborne tanker experience, and airborne refueling.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1374747992901758977

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zectech

*Air defense force at forefront of defending country: cmdr.*





TEHRAN, Mar. 28 (MNA) – Iran's Commander of Army Air Defense Force Brigadier General Alireza Sabahifard has said that the air defense force is at the forefront of defending the country and a symbol of the nation's might.

The Commander of Army Air Defense Force Brigadier General Alireza Sabahifard made the remarks on Sunday while visiting the Fordow Airbase in Qom Province.

During the visit, he congratulated the personnel of Fordow Air Defense Base on the occasion of the new Iranian year (Nowruz) and called for intensifying efforts on the part of all sections of the society to fulfill the slogan of this year as it is put by the Leader ‘the year of production, support and removal of obstacles.’

Expressing his satisfaction with the preparedness of this Fordow Air Defense Base, Sabahifard pointed out, "Maintaining the defense power and monitoring the enemy and issuing timely warnings and dealing with any move of the enemy has created a deterrent power by the country's air defense."

The Commander of the Army Air Defense Force warned the enemies not to test the combat readiness of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adding, "The Air Defense Force is at the forefront of defending the country and serves as a symbol of the nation's might in achieving the goals and ideals of the Islamic Revolution."

In line with the guidelines of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sabahifard called for strengthening the defense power of the country's armed forces, saying, "Defense power is one of the pillars of national power, our defense power supports our national security; Without security, all the values of the country will be in trouble."









Air defense force at forefront of defending country: cmdr.


TEHRAN, Mar. 28 (MNA) – Iran's Commander of Army Air Defense Force Brigadier General Alireza Sabahifard has said that the air defense force is at the forefront of defending the country and a symbol of the nation's might.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

A couple of interesting pics from 2019




This one gives you a good sense of just how compact,and cramped,the operators stations are in the 3rd of khordad sam system.




This is an interesting one.Does anyone know what the device fitted on to the end of the barrel of this soldiers rifle is?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Sineva said:


> A couple of interesting pics from 2019
> View attachment 731294
> 
> This one gives you a good sense of just how compact,and cramped,the operators stations are in the 3rd of khordad sam system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is an interesting one.Does anyone know what the device fitted on to the end of the barrel of this soldiers rifle is?


I believe that device contains a net that is fired out at drones like quad copters to capture and down them.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1380189069943144448

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1380189069943144448


Yeaaaaaaa...this makes sense,Iran is already pro at Short range AD.


----------



## yavar

آپارات - سرویس اشتراک ویدیو







www.aparat.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

925boy said:


> Yeaaaaaaa...this makes sense,Iran is already pro at Short range AD.


Until Iran can show its domestic version of TOR-M1 I would not call Iran a "pro". Currently all Iran can offer are Manpads. 23mm, 35mm and 100mm anti aircraft guns mated with fire control radars and passive thermal optics and short ranged low altitude Ya Zahra/Herz-9 with a max range of 12kms. Why would Pakistan want to buy Iranian short range systems when they can buy more advanced Chinese systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

yavar said:


> آپارات - سرویس اشتراک ویدیو
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aparat.com


Where was he martyred? My guess would be Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Where was he martyred? My guess would be Syria.


Yes Syria, T-4 air base

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Where was he martyred? My guess would be Syria.


Farvardeen, 1397, T4, Syria.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Until Iran can show its domestic version of TOR-M1 I would not call Iran a "pro". Currently all Iran can offer are Manpads. 23mm, 35mm and 100mm anti aircraft guns mated with fire control radars and passive thermal optics and short ranged low altitude Ya Zahra/Herz-9 with a max range of 12kms. Why would Pakistan want to buy Iranian short range systems when they can buy more advanced Chinese systems.


If its only range you consider then Ya Zahra/Herz 9 have nothing short of Tor M1
But yes iran need to show a more modern short range system. Current line up short of 50km range are mot that interesting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Until Iran can show its domestic version of TOR-M1 I would not call Iran a "pro".


it be unveil very soon,













سامانه پدافند موشکی ارتفاع پست «عقاب» عملیاتی می‌شود


تهران- ایرنا- جانشین فرمانده قرارگاه پدافند هوایی خاتم الانبیاء (ص) با بیان اینکه خلاء راداری در کشور وجود ندارد و در ساخت رادار جزو چند کشور برتر هستیم، گفت: سامانه پدافندی موشکی ارتفاع پست عقاب در دست تولید است.




www.irna.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 925boy

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Until Iran can show its domestic version of TOR-M1 I would not call Iran a "pro".


Can i ask a question? Are you talking about the Tor M whatevers and Pantsirs that couldnt take out lame binary Turkish Bayrakbat drones??? those drones aint worth THAT much tbh...also, Iran has already made medium and long range air defense systems...thats ALREADY proof Iran has conquered Short AD..no country that can make long er range AD equipments cant make short range AD..thats the easiest! Iran will FRY any aircraft that invade in the short range..thats a fact..there's a reason US is using high altitude aircraft when it strays into Iranian AD network..


yavar said:


> Yes Syria, T-4 air base


Irans debt to repay Israel keeps increasing...


Hack-Hook said:


> If its only range you consider then Ya Zahra/Herz 9 have nothing short of Tor M1
> But yes iran need to show a more modern short range system. Current line up short of 50km range are mot that interesting.


you people talk like ur not Iranians - Iran military doesnt care about new equipment, Iran military cares about EFFECTIVE equipment.


----------



## Hack-Hook

925boy said:


> Can i ask a question? Are you talking about the Tor M whatevers and Pantsirs that couldnt take out lame binary Turkish Bayrakbat drones??? those drones aint worth THAT much tbh...also, Iran has already made medium and long range air defense systems...thats ALREADY proof Iran has conquered Short AD..no country that can make long er range AD equipments cant make short range AD..thats the easiest! Iran will FRY any aircraft that invade in the short range..thats a fact..there's a reason US is using high altitude aircraft when it strays into Iranian AD network..
> 
> Irans debt to repay Israel keeps increasing...
> 
> you people talk like ur not Iranians - Iran military doesnt care about new equipment, Iran military cares about EFFECTIVE equipment.


ya-zahra / Herz9 is the only one Iran produced that can be considered short range and as far as I\m aware its a copy of crotale. if you are aware of anything else can you tell us ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

925boy said:


> Can i ask a question? Are you talking about the Tor M whatevers and Pantsirs that couldnt take out lame binary Turkish Bayrakbat drones??? those drones aint worth THAT much tbh...also, Iran has already made medium and long range air defense systems...thats ALREADY proof Iran has conquered Short AD..no country that can make long er range AD equipments cant make short range AD..thats the easiest! Iran will FRY any aircraft that invade in the short range..thats a fact..there's a reason US is using high altitude aircraft when it strays into Iranian AD network..


 Yes. I am specifically talking about the TOR-M1. Armenians only lost one Tor-M2MK during last years conflict and in Syria Russian, operated TOR-M2s have been quite successful in stopping drone attacks on their Air base in Tartus. Also in Syria Turkey lost quite a few of their Bayrakbat UCAVS once the treat was recognized and better Short range air defense systems (TOR-M2?) were deployed in southern Idlib. Iran has been successful in short range systems like MANPADS and Herz-9/Ya Zahra systems, but the advantage with TOR systems is with its cold Vertical launch system. Not only is it more compact allowing 8 missiles to be launch ready from one platform but the engagement time is greatly reduced because the launcher does not need to travers towards the target before being fired.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> ya-zahra / Herz9 is the only one Iran produced that can be considered short range and as far as I\m aware its a copy of crotale. if you are aware of anything else can you tell us ?


 I am disappointed that the Navy did not use them on their ships but maybe they are not compact enough to fit on their Vosper/Mouj class Frigates?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I am disappointed that the Navy did not use them on their ships but maybe they are not compact enough to fit on their Vosper/Mouj class Frigates?


to be frank a raad is more compact than something based on Crotale
Yazahra





Ra'ad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> to be frank a raad is more compact than something based on Crotale
> Yazahra
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ra'ad


Only advantage with Ya Zahra is that it is canister launched wich protects the missile from sea salt.


----------



## 925boy

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Yes. I am specifically talking about the TOR-M1. Armenians only lost one Tor-M2MK during last years conflict and in Syria Russian, operated TOR-M2s have been quite successful in stopping drone attacks on their Air base in Tartus. Also in Syria Turkey lost quite a few of their Bayrakbat UCaVS once the treat was recognized and better Short range air defense systems (TOR-M2?) were deployed in southern Idlib. Iran has been successful in short range systems like MANPADS and Herz-9/Ya Zahra systems, but the advantage with TOR systems is with its cold Vertical launch system. Not only is it more compact allowing 8 missiles to be launch ready from one platform but the engagement time is greatly reduced because the launcher does not need to travers towards the target before being fired.


Ok, point duly noted. Good Iran has some Tor M1s at least..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> to be frank a raad is more compact than something based on Crotale
> Yazahra
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ra'ad



Perhaps a 6 cell version of Mersad-16 would be a better option?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

There is the improved rapier....There are 3 versions of Ya Zahra


1- Herz-9
2 - Ya Zahra
3 - Name ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Yes. I am specifically talking about the TOR-M1. Armenians only lost one Tor-M2MK during last years conflict and in Syria Russian, operated TOR-M2s have been quite successful in stopping drone attacks on their Air base in Tartus. Also in Syria Turkey lost quite a few of their Bayrakbat UCAVS once the treat was recognized and better Short range air defense systems (TOR-M2?) were deployed in southern Idlib. Iran has been successful in short range systems like MANPADS and Herz-9/Ya Zahra systems, but the advantage with TOR systems is with its cold Vertical launch system. Not only is it more compact allowing 8 missiles to be launch ready from one platform but the engagement time is greatly reduced because the launcher does not need to travers towards the target before being fired.



It’s also great for shooting down civilian airliners apparently.

TOR-M1 is a joke. One suicide drone and it’s crew is barbecued alive.

This is the inside of a Iranian TOR-M1







1980’s technology

This is TOR-M2DT







And cold launch makes zero difference for mission capability. That is like saying S-300 is better because cold launch than Bavar-373 which is hot launch. Absurd argument.

And Russia TOR-M1 air defense systems fire 2 missile per target for better interception, so engages 4 targets and the crew has to reload and are entirely vulnerable. See Israeli suicide drone strikes on Pantsir and Tor-M1 when reloading.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> It’s also great for shooting down civilian airliners apparently.
> 
> TOR-M1 is a joke. One suicide drone and it’s crew is barbecued alive.
> 
> This is the inside of a Iranian TOR-M1
> 
> View attachment 733030
> 
> 
> 
> 1980’s technology
> 
> This is TOR-M2DT
> View attachment 733029
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And cold launch makes zero difference for mission capability. That is like saying S-300 is better because cold launch than Bavar-373 which is hot launch. Absurd argument.
> 
> And Russia TOR-M1 air defense systems fire 2 missile per target for better interception, so engages 4 targets and the crew has to reload and are entirely vulnerable. See Israeli suicide drone strikes on Pantsir and Tor-M1 when reloading.




Should we be surprised that Iran's TOR-M1 is out dated compared to Russian TOR-M2DT?
Do you think that if and when Iran shows the fire control system for its domestic TOR system it will look identical to the TOR-M1?

So you wanna pick on the fact that TOR-M1 is cold launched and ignore everything else I said?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Perhaps a 6 cell version of Mersad-16 would be a better option?
> View attachment 732979


Mersad-16 or Kamin-2 is a full blown system if you put it on a mowdge class system then you must somehow put all these on the ship




that means at least 2 truck of equipment one the missiles (each erector launcher can have up to 6 missile and you need at least one) and one truck for ADS-M2 
if you manage to integrate ADS-M2 with current ship systems you can replace the current two coffin type Standard missile launcher with 6 of these and each Shalamcheh-2 missile can engage target up to 45km away . to be honest I say its good export product , for ourselves we must work on 3rd-khordad , 15-Khordad and Bavar-373

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> Mersad-16 or Kamin-2 is a full blown system if you put it on a mowdge class system then you must somehow put all these on the ship
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that means at least 2 truck of equipment one the missiles (each erector launcher can have up to 6 missile and you need at least one) and one truck for ADS-M2
> if you manage to integrate ADS-M2 with current ship systems you can replace the current two coffin type Standard missile launcher with 6 of these and each Shalamcheh-2 missile can engage target up to 45km away . to be honest I say its good export product , for ourselves we must work on 3rd-khordad , 15-Khordad and Bavar-373



I am sure that the fire control system onboard mouj that can guide the Standard SM-1s/Merhab can also handle the Mersad-16. so the only thing would be the launcher fitted where those terrible coffin launchers are currently located with the ability to traverse at least 180 degrees. honestly the only reason I think Mersad-16 would make sense over 3rd Khordad is that it is in a sealed canaster launcher and it is smaller than both the 3rd-khordad and 15-khordad systems. Heck even Mersad-16 erector launcher might very well be too large for Iran's current fleet of frigates.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> It’s also great for shooting down civilian airliners apparently.
> 
> TOR-M1 is a joke. One suicide drone and it’s crew is barbecued alive.
> 
> This is the inside of a Iranian TOR-M1
> 
> View attachment 733030
> 
> 
> 
> 1980’s technology
> 
> This is TOR-M2DT
> View attachment 733029
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And cold launch makes zero difference for mission capability. That is like saying S-300 is better because cold launch than Bavar-373 which is hot launch. Absurd argument.
> 
> And Russia TOR-M1 air defense systems fire 2 missile per target for better interception, so engages 4 targets and the crew has to reload and are entirely vulnerable. See Israeli suicide drone strikes on Pantsir and Tor-M1 when reloading.


well ,thats only aesthetic , you can't say the second one is certainly more capable just because of the LCD instead of Tube monitors .
an Iranian Tor-M1




Russian Tor-M1





you can see they are some small difference


Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I am sure that the fire control system onboard mouj that can guide the Standard SM-1s/Merhab can also handle the Mersad-16. so the only thing would be the launcher fitted where those terrible coffin launchers are currently located with the ability to traverse at least 180 degrees. honestly the only reason I think Mersad-16 would make sense over 3rd Khordad is that it is in a sealed canaster launcher and it is smaller than both the 3rd-khordad and 15-khordad systems. Heck even Mersad-16 erector launcher might very well be too large for Iran's current fleet of frigates.


well , the Mersad-16 don't use Sayyad missiles , if it was the case then yes but it use Shalamcheh-2 . its wlikw what iran did in Fakour , we get a MIM-23 and mixed it with technology from AIM-54 and get a missile which is neither MIM-23 nor AIM-54 . shalamcheh-2 is also a MIM-23 in this case Shalamche missile mixed with technology from Standard Missile . if we want to use mersad-16 on Mowdge we must replace all the radars that control Mehrab and then put new Radars that can talk with Mersad-16 there , I don't think it worth doing on current ships maybe if somebody decide to do that in future ships but if you want to do it why not stright go to something that use more capable Taer and Sayyad missiles ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> well ,thats only aesthetic , you can't say the second one is certainly more capable just because of the LCD instead of Tube monitors .
> an Iranian Tor-M1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian Tor-M1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you can see they are some small difference
> 
> well , the Mersad-16 don't use Sayyad missiles , if it was the case then yes but it use Shalamcheh-2 . its wlikw what iran did in Fakour , we get a MIM-23 and mixed it with technology from AIM-54 and get a missile which is neither MIM-23 nor AIM-54 . shalamcheh-2 is also a MIM-23 in this case Shalamche missile mixed with technology from Standard Missile . if we want to use mersad-16 on Mowdge we must replace all the radars that control Mehrab and then put new Radars that can talk with Mersad-16 there , I don't think it worth doing on current ships maybe if somebody decide to do that in future ships but if you want to do it why not stright go to something that use more capable Taer and Sayyad missiles ?



Taer and Sayyad would be physically too large in my opinion otherwise they are superior to Mersad-16.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Taer and Sayyad would be physically too large in my opinion otherwise they are superior to Mersad-16.


not exactly Taer is probably 5.5m long with wingspan of less than 1m with a weight of around 700kg an standard missile depend of variant is 5-8m long and wingspan of 1-1.5m with a weight of around 500-700kg


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Hack-Hook said:


> not exactly Taer is probably 5.5m long with wingspan of less than 1m with a weight of around 700kg an standard missile depend of variant is 5-8m long and wingspan of 1-1.5m with a weight of around 500-700kg



Ok thanks for the info. The problem I see with Taer and Raad missile is that they are exposed to the elements but apparently the IRGCN does not seem too concerned with that since they put a truck based Raad on their new Shahid Roudaki forward operating base!


----------



## DoubleYouSee

TheImmortal said:


> It’s also great for shooting down civilian airliners apparently.
> 
> TOR-M1 is a joke. One suicide drone and it’s crew is barbecued alive.
> 
> This is the inside of a Iranian TOR-M1
> 
> View attachment 733030
> 
> 
> 
> 1980’s technology
> 
> This is TOR-M2DT
> View attachment 733029
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And cold launch makes zero difference for mission capability. That is like saying S-300 is better because cold launch than Bavar-373 which is hot launch. Absurd argument.
> 
> And Russia TOR-M1 air defense systems fire 2 missile per target for better interception, so engages 4 targets and the crew has to reload and are entirely vulnerable. See Israeli suicide drone strikes on Pantsir and Tor-M1 when reloading.


how about pantsir!....i used to think taht tor-m1 is more better than pantsir.....and what point is in oghab air defence system.......it seems to be a clone of pantsir.......isn't it better to copy tor system than pantsir!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Ok thanks for the info. The problem I see with Taer and Raad missile is that they are exposed to the elements but apparently the IRGCN does not seem too concerned with that since they put a truck based Raad on their new Shahid Roudaki forward operating base!


they can be housed inside the canister just look at 15-khordad or Bavar-373 . they use Sayyad-2 and Sayyad-3 and probably Sayyad-4
about Shahid Roodaki , I believe that ship is not complete yet and what IRGC envision for it is completely different and in 1-2 year we will see what it would look like . my guess is that Raad won't be on truck by the time


DoubleYouSee said:


> how about pantsir!....i used to think taht tor-m1 is more better than pantsir.....and what point is in oghab air defence system.......it seems to be a clone of pantsir.......isn't it better to copy tor system than pantsir!


not clone of pantsir , Oghab was supposed to be Tor based at first generation and then second generation will have a cannon mounted on top but by the delays ( it was supposed to come 1 year ago ) my guess is they decided to skip the first generation completely.

but if you ask me a system based on pantsir is not suitable for the task . the missiles are expensive , bulky and their range is too damn short for future threats . I wished they built something according to Iron-Dome
it could engage target up to 70km away and the price of each missiles was about 40000$ just compare it with Tor

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mr Iran Eye said:


> There is the improved rapier....There are 3 versions of Ya Zahra
> 
> 
> 1- Herz-9
> 2 - Ya Zahra
> 3 - Name ?
> View attachment 733018
> View attachment 733019
> F



Rapier 





Herz-9; Self propelled Version of Iranian copy of FM-80( Chinese copy of French Crotale)



Ya Zahra; Towed version of Iranian copy of Chinese FM-80

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It is not just a simple copy but an improved and current system..... By the way, I know my subject.

I put in pictures the 3 versions because there are 3 versions of this air defense system











We must not forget Pirooz

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It is not just a simple copy but an improved and current system..... By the way, I know my subject.
> 
> I put in pictures the 3 versions because there are 3 versions of this air defense system
> 
> View attachment 733591
> View attachment 733592
> View attachment 733593
> 
> We must not forget Pirooz
> 
> View attachment 733594


piruz is using Manpads , its good for ambushing helicopters but not much more certainly its not useful against PGM's and suicide UAV's and incoming cruise missiles and other type of smart ammunitions

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It is not just a simple copy but an improved and current system..... By the way, I know my subject.
> 
> I put in pictures the 3 versions because there are 3 versions of this air defense system



My apologies if I offended you. So there is two truck mounted versions, One with a cebine for the Missile operators and one with just the missile launcher . The later has a separate command post vehicle probably like the ones used with the Ya Zahra towed version. Are both the Truck based systems called Herz-9?



Mr Iran Eye said:


> View attachment 733591
> View attachment 733592
> View attachment 733593
> 
> We must not forget Pirooz
> 
> View attachment 733594



I hope the are wise enough to put these on old armoured personnel carriers like BTR-60s or bmp-1s/Boragh and not on vulnerable soft skin vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VEVAK

That's good progress and I hope IRGC Navy puts increasing importance on larger +50meter vessels 

Overall got to say the IRGC Navy has done a good job in terms of increasing their capabilities and the rate of growth has been beyond satisfactory

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

VEVAK said:


> View attachment 733690
> 
> 
> View attachment 733689
> 
> 
> 
> That's good progress and I hope IRGC Navy puts increasing importance on larger +50meter vessels
> 
> Overall got to say the IRGC Navy has done a good job in terms of increasing their capabilities and the rate of growth has been beyond satisfactory


Please repost this in the Navy section. Thank you!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Hack-Hook said:


> piruz is using Manpads , its good for ambushing helicopters but not much more certainly its not useful against PGM's and suicide UAV's and incoming cruise missiles and other type of smart ammunitions



It can be good for drones and even missiles in the last seconds. It depends on the radar coordinates. They are not shouldered manpads. It's just one more option across the nation's integrated system. We haven't seen the final version so let's wait and see

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> My apologies if I offended you. So there is two truck mounted versions, One with a cebine for the Missile operators and one with just the missile launcher . The later has a separate command post vehicle probably like the ones used with the Ya Zahra towed version. Are both the Truck based systems called Herz-9?
> 
> 
> 
> I hope the are wise enough to put these on old armoured personnel carriers like BTR-60s or bmp-1s/Boragh and not on vulnerable soft skin vehicles.



Tactical soft skin vehicles with these types of ammunitions have their uses. Not in mechanized warfare but certainly in many battlefields.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It is not just a simple copy but an improved and current system..... By the way, I know my subject.
> 
> I put in pictures the 3 versions because there are 3 versions of this air defense system
> 
> View attachment 733591
> View attachment 733592
> View attachment 733593
> 
> We must not forget Pirooz
> 
> View attachment 733594


Ya-Zahra the towed version it self has 3 different versions as well , though only the body of the towed thing varies while the launcher part is same for all 3 versions


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

farooqbhai007 said:


> Ya-Zahra the towed version it self has 3 different versions as well , though only the body of the towed thing varies while the launcher part is same for all 3 versions



No !! There is a small difference in technology


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It can be good for drones and even missiles in the last seconds. It depends on the radar coordinates. They are not shouldered manpads. It's just one more option across the nation's integrated system. We haven't seen the final version so let's wait and see


today drones at least fly 1-2 km above flight ceiling of mithaq


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Stryker1982 said:


> Tactical soft skin vehicles with these types of ammunitions have their uses. Not in mechanized warfare but certainly in many battlefields.


Those soft skinned vehicles work fine with Just a simple ATGM launcher like we have seen deployed in Iraq and Syria against Daesh armour and VBIEDs.


----------



## Sina-1

Majid and zolfaghar anti cruise missile systems as can be seen below. Furthermore, antI BM system Damavand has been unveiled as well. Awaiting pictures.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383644810020413446

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383649491526438915
!!??

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> Majid and zolfaghar anti cruise missile systems as can be seen below. Furthermore, antI BM system Damavand has been unveiled as well. Awaiting pictures.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383644810020413446
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383649491526438915
> !!??
> View attachment 735147


Well Majid has potential as point defence but I have doubt zoalfaqar can be a successful defence against cruise missiles. I


----------



## Stryker1982

Sina-1 said:


> Majid and zolfaghar anti cruise missile systems as can be seen below. Furthermore, antI BM system Damavand has been unveiled as well. Awaiting pictures.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383644810020413446
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383649491526438915
> !!??
> View attachment 735147



Tactical SHOARD, useful for conventional local air-defense but more importantly....for paramilitary

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sina-1 said:


> Majid and zolfaghar anti cruise missile systems as can be seen below. Furthermore, antI BM system Damavand has been unveiled as well. Awaiting pictures.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383644810020413446
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383649491526438915
> !!??
> View attachment 735147


Damavand is Iranian designation for S300!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Shams313

mohsen said:


> Damavand is Iranian designation for S300!


PICS....Please

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sina-1

mohsen said:


> Damavand is Iranian designation for S300!


Yes I just saw the confirmation on Twitter. Weak of them to announce it as if it is a domestic system!


----------



## Hack-Hook

since when S-300 can be considered anti ballistic missile system

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383671898270101504

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hack-Hook said:


> since when S-300 can be considered anti ballistic missile system


On the contrary,iran hase used s-300 against ballistic missile.......search it on youtube.....i remmember it was the first test of s-300 in iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

mohsen said:


> Damavand is Iranian designation for S300!


I'm disappointed now, I was really expecting to see the new changes to Bavar and was expecting Damavand to be Bavar's ABM additions discussed some months ago here.


----------



## Hack-Hook

DoubleYouSee said:


> On the contrary,iran hase used s-300 against ballistic missile.......search it on youtube.....i remmember it was the first test of s-300 in iran.


I may be wrong but I think that was Bavar Test not S-300


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> I may be wrong but I think that was Bavar Test not S-300


It was a year or two before Bavar was unveiled and Farzad Esmaili was still in charge of the Air Defense Forces. It was a series of tests of various systems with a final test being s-300 taking out a ballistic missile launched from another location in the country. It was the first appearance of the system in Iranian livery if I'm not mistaken.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 925boy

DoubleYouSee said:


> On the contrary,iran hase used s-300 against ballistic missile.......search it on youtube.....i remmember it was the first test of s-300 in iran.


S300 is supposed to be able to shoot down some types or speeds of BMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Another thing to add to that, I was always a bit cynical about the true extent of S-300 ABM capabilities and suspect that the test used the least capable of Iran's ballistic missiles and during conditions optimized for S-300 detection. It does go without saying that this how a lot of tests are conducted but I think that this might have been especially the case for S-300 abm test. I always wondered if the newest missiles IRGCASF produces can defeat S-300 or even Bavar future ABM. 
In typing this, it makes me wonder if IRGCASF has ever done a serious wargame against the Air Defense Forces in seeing if the various systems and tactics of either branch can defeat one another.


----------



## TheImmortal

S-300 can shoot down SCUD like missiles. Against Iskander like missiles it will likely fail due to lacking the energy to keep up with a missile that can change paths during terminal phase. It is not a dedicated ABM system like S-300VM aka Antey-2500 (which Russia tried to sell to Iran)

S-400/S-500 would be better choices against more modern missiles and the latter is being tested against hypersonic missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Iranian S-300 is an improved version of the PMU-2. We can say that it is an S-300 PMU-3. It is clear that Iran is working on it to improve it so it is certain that its performance is improved.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> Against Iskander like missiles it will likely fail due to lacking


Which "COMMON" air defense system can shoot down Iskander? You just seem to have mentioned an outlier, which doesnt prove a real point.


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> Which "COMMON" air defense system can shoot down Iskander? You just seem to have mentioned an outlier, which doesnt prove a real point.



S-400/S-500 can engage iskander.

And Iskander is not an outlier by any means. Currently advanced missiles are taking two different approaches

1) High terminal re entry speed (ex Sejill) Mach 9+

2) Quasi ballistic trajectory (Iskander and Fateh)

In scenario 1, the interceptor missile needs to have penalty to adjust a few times to the warhead avoidance system

In scenario 2, the interceptor needs to be able to engage sub atmospheric and some high altitude ADs are not designed for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383671898270101504




Laser guided sams can be used by itself against smaller low flying drones which have low heat signatures. Also they would be effective against cruise missiles if its E/O thermal imaging system can detect cruise missiles from sufficient distance.

If qued by another radar vehicle they can engage cruise missiles more effectively. Getting initial target data from a radar they can also engage targets like glide bombs which dont have engine-very low ir signature. Radar vehicle/ sam system would not need to track each and every target and guide missiles against them by delegating such vehicles for specific targets like low flying drones or cms reducing their burden.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Iranian S-300 is an improved version of the PMU-2. We can say that it is an S-300 PMU-3. It is clear that Iran is working on it to improve it so it is certain that its performance is improved.


Yes Iranian version was produced after second development of PMU2 or protracted development of PMU2 if vesion when Russians decided to make PMU 2 ,PMU3(pmu3 was later renamed to S400 for marketing purpose)and future S500 and S350 to share as much as it could technology and make them more compatibile,also Iranian version include some ,on Iran request,custom futures so Nato codename is SA-20C.
PMU2 at first was development of PMU1,than latter after PMU3 was released and renamed to s400,Russians decided to re-develop PMU2 with new technology,that became available with S400....so now If you look S-350,S400 and S-500 and compare it with Iranian PMU2 you will see it use same command posts,relays,network...in case of s400 almost everything,except few elements....Russians did right thing with this,now S400 can be added right in to S-300 PMU2 network without any extra work,it is what actually they did in Syria,they use S-300 with S-400 and they claim it is posible adding s-400 to S-300 network as multiplier ,which basicly mean you can buy S400 and mix with s300 verticaly and horizontaly in network,and benefit of S-400 perfomanse in whole network...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

vizier said:


> Laser guided sams can be used by itself against smaller low flying drones which have low heat signatures. Also they would be effective against cruise missiles if its E/O thermal imaging system can detect cruise missiles from sufficient distance.
> 
> If qued by another radar vehicle they can engage cruise missiles more effectively. Getting initial target data from a radar they can also engage targets like glide bombs which dont have engine-very low ir signature. Radar vehicle/ sam system would not need to track each and every target and guide missiles against them by delegating such vehicles for specific targets like low flying drones or cms reducing their burden.


I think there is a passive planar array radar that is truck mounted that might accompany the system. It's mounted onto a pickup just like the rest of the system and should easily integrate with it. I think it was actually shown as a third truck in the parade today but I have to go back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

It looks like this systems is intended to have a loadout of 4 missiles,rather than just the 2 that we see here.
Its actually not a bad looking system,you`ve got what looks to be a rotating optronic scanner and 4 missiles,with possibly either optronic or imaging infra-red seekers.Its also likely to be able to be plugged into a separate radar for longer range search as well,like the small light vehicle mounted anti drone radar that was unveiled a few months back.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

Sineva said:


> It looks like this systems is intended to have a loadout of 4 missiles,rather than just the 2 that we see here.
> Its actually not a bad looking system,you`ve got what looks to be a rotating optronic scanner and 4 missiles,with possibly either optronic or imaging infra-red seekers.Its also likely to be able to be plugged into a separate radar for longer range search as well,like the small light vehicle mounted anti drone radar that was unveiled a few months back.


I think the radar we were both talking about is in the picture you posted just behind the main vehicle. Also, I think the other truck carrying misagh might also be integrated into this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383701919223324674

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva

WudangMaster said:


> I think the radar we were both talking about is in the picture you posted just behind the main vehicle. Also, I think the other truck carrying misagh might also be integrated into this system.


You`re right,it is.Well spotted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hack-Hook said:


> I may be wrong but I think that was Bavar Test not S-300


both have tested against ballistic missile......i remember that the commander of the air defence system said to the press reporters that even russia doesn't define this type of mission for s-300(he meant against ballistic missile)........

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yavar

DoubleYouSee said:


> both have tested against ballistic missile......i remember that the commander of the air defence system said to the press reporters that even russia doesn't define this type of mission for s-300(he meant against ballistic missile)........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383701919223324674



This is not a new system more like refurbished. I have seen it 10+ years at military parades!

4 manpad Set up with a human gunner. Usually there is foliage or camo around the nest and vehicle.

EDIT: Here is proof

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Fire 2 missiles at the same time, impressive

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Heres an interesting one,we can see that theres been a new section added to the bottom of the onboard generator mounted behind the cab,it could be for increased storage space I suppose.
However,the most obvious difference from the previous 15th of khordad sams is the shortened length of the missile canisters,as these should extend all the way to the generator.It doesnt make any sense to shorten the missile,so one possibility is that these are the [empty] cut down canisters that we saw during the testing of the system,that have been reused for the parade.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Heres an interesting one,we can see that theres been a new section added to the bottom of the onboard generator mounted behind the cab,it could be for increased storage space I suppose.
> However,the most obvious difference from the previous 15th of khordad sams is the shortened length of the missile canisters,as these should extend all the way to the generator.It doesnt make any sense to shorten the missile,so one possibility is that these are the [empty] cut down canisters that we saw during the testing of the system,that have been reused for the parade.


this is *new version* of 15 of khordad its* medium range version* less then *120km long range version* its the big brother for *Mersad-16 short range* system which stands at 40-50 km this 15 of khordad version probably has a range of *50 - 95 kms* probably way faster then *Sayyad-2C at 75 km max* range too

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> this is *new version* of 15 of khordad its* medium range version* less then *120km long range version* its the big brother for *Mersad-16 short range* system which stands at 40-50 km this 15 of khordad version probably has a range of *50 - 95 kms* probably way faster then *Sayyad-2C at 75 km max* range too


Is that what it says on the placard?


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> Is that what it says on the placard?


yes it say 15th of khordad *"medium range"* indicating that its a new version.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Is that what it says on the placard?


no the placard only say 15th of khordad middle range air-defense system.
I wonder if they secretly miniaturized Sayyad or Taer missiles?


skyshadow said:


> yes it say 15th of khordas *"medium range"* indicating that its a new version.


15 of khordad always was middle range

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> yes it say 15th of khordas *"medium range"* indicating that its a new version.


So we did get to see a surprise unveiling of some new sam system(s) after all.  
Judging by its cutdown canister length,this new missiles probably pretty close in size to the original rim66.Hopefully we`ll get a look at it at some point.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*15th of khordad long range no gap and its a lot bigger *













*15th of khordad* *"medium range" just look at the size of containers*








*its the same size as Talash system




*


Hack-Hook said:


> no the placard only say 15th of khordad middle range air-defense system.
> I wonder if they secretly miniaturized Sayyad or Taer missiles?
> 
> 15 of khordad always was middle range


just look at the size, Iran never said its medium range they always said "15th of khordad long range air defense system" 


Sineva said:


> So we did get to see a surprise unveiling of some new sam system(s) after all.
> Judging by its cutdown canister length,this new missiles probably pretty close in size to the original rim66.Hopefully we`ll get a look at it at some point.


great eyes

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WudangMaster

I think it is more likely that they are simply reusing the testing canisters where the sayyad 3 stuck out substantially. There was discussion last year where it seems all testing SAM systems stick out of the canisters a bit whereas the field version are totally sealed. This was also the case with the Mersad & Talash systems. So this is the either testing canister or there might be two different canister sizes to accommodate Sayyads 2 & 3 respectively, though it would be more efficient to just have full size canisters that can house either. 
On a related note, Talash does use Sayyads 2 to 4 and probably what ever very high altitude missile for Bavar ABM. Talash is both its own sam system but also the testing platform for most everything that ended up in Khordad 3, Khordad 15, Kamin 2, & Bavar 373. I think Talash also operates the mobile S-200s as well, though not totally sure about that.


----------



## 925boy

TheImmortal said:


> S-400/S-500 can engage iskander.


S400 is very advanced and only India, Turkey and China( apart from Russia) have it, most countries have S300, so for a country like Iran to be expected to have or perform at S400 level currently is unrealistic IMO. Those countries except Russia also dont have too many of those S400 systems (No country has surpluses of S400s).
So my point still stands that S400 system , which is the xample you provided, isnt a COMMON AD system as i argued earlier.



> And Iskander is not an outlier by any means. Currently advanced missiles are taking two different approaches
> 
> 1) High terminal re entry speed (ex Sejill) Mach 9+
> 
> 2) Quasi ballistic trajectory (Iskander and Fateh)


But here again, you mention 3 rare, and highly advanced systems, from 2 countries only - Iskander, Sejjil and Fateh are from Russia and IRan ONLY, and since Russia wont use them on Iran, there is no other threat to Iran then of this type thats close and realistic. smh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

925boy said:


> S400 is very advanced and only India, Turkey and China( apart from Russia) have it



Advancement has nothing to do with why S-400 is in the hands of few. The reason is most of the world is aligned with the USA and thus purchase PAC-3 and THAAD for their air defense needs especially NATO and Persian gulf Arabs that relies on unified western architecture. Hence why it was a geopolitical commotion when Turkey (a NATO member) wanted to purchase an eastern system instead of US system.



925boy said:


> But here again, you mention 3 rare, and highly advanced systems, from 2 countries only - Iskander, Sejjil and Fateh are from Russia and IRan ONLY, and since Russia wont use them on Iran, there is no other threat to Iran then of this type thats close and realistic. smh.



Yes and Israeli Jericho and Saudi Arabia DF-21 represent threats to Iran ABM shield at its current state. Other countries in the region are working on solid fuel missiles (Turkey).

What is considered advanced today may be common place tomorrow. After all MALE drones like predator were considered advanced in 90’s and 00’s, but now even Houthis have drones and Turkey makes MALE drones.

So if you wait till your enemy fields a weapon that can by pass your current defenses than you are going to be exposing yourself and your country to weakness. Air defense technology isn’t something that you can throw into r&d and have it ready next year, Bavar took a decade to bring to fruition.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

could there be a* " medium range Bavar-373 ? " 🤔 🧐 a mini Bavar if you will. *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> could there be a* " medium range Bavar-373 ? " 🤔 🧐 a mini Bavar if you will. *


15th of Khordad would probably be it, both in range and in terms of compactness. Sayyads 2, 3, & 4 were all supposed to be Bavar and the unveiling of the 15th Khordad a few months before Bavar was a surprise. Considering that Bavar is also going to fill an ABM role more than anything, 15th of Khordad actually is the next tier of domestic system and S-300, Bavar, & 15th Khordad having a great deal of overlap in terms of coverage. Also, General Hajizadeh did call 3rd of Khordad a mini S-300 though this was long before the 15th was around.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Shams313 said:


> PICS....Please





skyshadow said:


> *15th of khordad long range no gap and its a lot bigger *
> 
> 
> View attachment 735631
> 
> 
> View attachment 735632
> 
> 
> 
> *15th of khordad* *"medium range" just look at the size of containers*
> 
> View attachment 735633
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *its the same size as Talash system
> 
> View attachment 735635
> *
> 
> just look at the size, Iran never said its medium range they always said "15th of khordad long range air defense system"
> 
> great eyes



Hold on...... the 15th of Khordad and Talash are not the same system?


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Hold on...... the 15th of Khordad and Talash are not the same system?



Talash came long before
15 Khordad . It is designed to fire the Sayyad-2 missile, while 15 fires Sayyad-3

15th of Khordad can be considered “Talash-2” in many ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Stryker1982 said:


> Hold on...... the 15th of Khordad and Talash are not the same system?


no, 15th of khordad is more advance but less mobile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Stryker1982 said:


> Hold on...... the 15th of Khordad and Talash are not the same system?



No, the radar and its configuration is a little different

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Talash came long before
> 15 Khordad . It is designed to fire the Sayyad-2 missile, while 15 fires Sayyad-3
> 
> 15th of Khordad can be considered “Talash-2” in many ways.





skyshadow said:


> no, 15th of khordad is more advance but less mobile



I see, It confused me because they look very similar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> Hold on...... the 15th of Khordad and Talash are not the same system?


They use both Sayyads 2 & 3 for sure and Talash might possibly use 4 and the future 5 because it is it's own system and testing platform for missiles that end up in other systems. I have seen pics of Talash with HAWK radars along some planar array radars along with mechanical dishes so I'm not sure what a complete Talash system even looks like. I think it also operates the mobile S-200s and at one time Sayyad 2 and the mobile S-200 were together in Talash and probably still are.


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> I see, It confused me because they look very similar.



They are similar.

Talash and Raad were one of the first *modern *Iranian missile systems that weren’t a refurbished hawk/S-200/etc.

Raad’s next gen upgrade became 3vome Khordad

Talash next gen upgrade became 15th Khordad.

Though one could also argue 15th Khordad is the cheaper more cost conscious cousin to 3vome. But it is based on the Talash foundation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

We should never forget the greatly improved S-200. I believe that Iran still has surprises in store for us on the subject. When you know a little about Iran's announcement process, you always have to expect surprises. In 2017, they showed us this different missile for the S-200

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> no, 15th of khordad is more advance but less mobile


Quite the contrary, 15th Khordad in one of the most compact & mobile systems out there for the engagement envelope. I believe there is just one all around planar array mounted to the command post vehicle for both search and engagement with two missile types. Very fine work by any metric.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> They use both Sayyads 2 & 3 for sure and Talash might possibly use 4 and the future 5 because it is it's own system and testing platform for missiles that end undead up in other systems. I have seen pics of Talash with HAWK radars along some planar array radars along with mechanical dishes so I'm not sure what a complete Talash system even looks like. I think it also operates the mobile S-200s and at one time Sayyad 2 and the mobile S-200 were together in Talash and probably still are.



I don’t think Talash gets built anymore.

It is more than 7 years old. Not a whole reason to build Talash when 15th Khordad exists as well Kamin-2 for smaller objects in the medium air defense range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> I don’t think Talash gets built anymore.
> 
> It is more than 7 years old. Not a whole reason to build Talash when 15th Khordad exists as well Kamin-2 for smaller objects in the medium air defense range.


 I'm not sure there was ever a production line for the eyetem (other than the Sayyad missiles) and it was more of an amalgram of equipment made mobile and as modern as possible such with the S-200 missiles. I think what is seen in war games is remnants of some of Iran's older systems made mobile and probably serving in wargames and training crews for the other systems until they phase out over time. I believe at one point it was a testing platform too and so much of it evolved into the other systems. 
15thon the other hand is a terrific result that's well worth a production line.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1383701919223324674





TheImmortal said:


> This is not a new system more like refurbished. I have seen it 10+ years at military parades!
> 
> 4 manpad Set up with a human gunner. Usually there is foliage or camo around the nest and vehicle.
> 
> EDIT: Here is proof
> 
> View attachment 735354



I knew it. Tal the Zionist baboon showed footage of the old system


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384020579804618753

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> I knew it. Tal the Zionist baboon showed footage of the old system
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384020579804618753


Yes,I found that rather humorous as well.  
Just some laziness in his online image searches or possibly just a silly little [deliberate] slip up,who knows?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Talash is mainly an upgrade for Iran's S-200 sites to e.g. allow for (more economical) mid-range engangements.


----------



## yavar

TheImmortal said:


> Raad’s next gen upgrade became 3vome Khordad


wrong

Raad is support vehicle to 3rd Kharadar, not upgrade, Third-Khordad with two Raad vehicle can launch 9 missile or with 3 Raad vehicle can launch 12 missile two missile for each target ( meaniang 6 target )

Third-Khordad can connect to ** Read vehicle wirelessly and launch missiles
or operator in Raad vehicle can put in target details manually or receive data from main radar bases and operator after confirmation launch missile toward target

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> wrong
> 
> Raad is support vehicle to 3rd Kharadar, not upgrade, Third-Khordad with two Raad vehicle can launch 9 missile or with 3 Raad vehicle can launch 12 missile two missile for each target ( meaniang 6 target )
> 
> Third-Khordad can connect to ** Read vehicle wirelessly and launch missiles
> or operator in Raad vehicle can put in target details manually or receive data from main radar bases and operator after confirmation launch missile toward target


in your opinion, are Iranian Tor/Pantsir equivalents ready and compareable to russian ones?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> in your opinion, are Iranian Tor/Pantsir equivalents ready and compareable to russian ones?


Yes

Oghab = TOR-1

Pantsir =

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Messerschmitt said:


> Talash is mainly an upgrade for Iran's S-200 sites to e.g. allow for (more economical) mid-range engangements.


Most important was fully mobilising the missiles and getting them away from that massive radar they were attached to. They were also made to engage mid range targets to the astonishment of Russians when an S-200 shot down a karrar drone in a war game many years back, though I only read this, never seen footage of it. Afterwards, Sayyad 2 was introduced and first made to work with the Talash radar/fire control and then adapted to the other radar systems that would eventually go to 3rd, 15th Khordad, Bavar, etc.


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> I knew it. Tal the Zionist baboon showed footage of the old system
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384020579804618753


great find


----------



## Sineva

Heres another couple of pics from the recent parade









Could someone translate this?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

Sineva said:


> Heres another couple of pics from the recent parade
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could someone translate this?


Sayyad-3 and Sayyad-4 missiles.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Muhammed45 said:


> Sayyad-3 and Sayyad-4 missiles.



I hope Iran can produce an air launched version of Sayyad-4. It would make a good AWACS killer!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> I hope Iran can produce an air launched version of Sayyad-4. It would make a good AWACS killer!


It already is in its current form when launched from Bavar.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

WudangMaster said:


> It already is in its current form when launched from Bavar.



I don't think 200km is not a long enough range to threaten AWACS. However if fired from high altitude and near supersonic speed then the range will at least be doubled. It should be able to mate the Sayyad-4 to F-4Es.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> It should be able to mate the Sayyad-4 to F-4Es.


Can the F-4 radar accommodate the Sayyad 4? 
I can see a potential for Iran to uplink a sayyad 4 mounted on an F-4 via the National Air Defense Grid, but without the radars and fire control systems also being airborne, it seems pointless. 
Another potential thing to do is convert a large plane to an airborne Bavar awacs with Sayyad 4s mounted to the wings hard points and launched as air to air missiles. How feasible that is, I am not sure, especially for the onboard power needed for the radars in addition to the mounting of the planar arrays, etc. Also, such a platform will always be easier to knock down than a ground based highly mobile system. There was discussions here last here on the merits of awacs for Iran vs more ground based systems for the same costs.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

WudangMaster said:


> Can the F-4 radar accommodate the Sayyad 4?
> I can see a potential for Iran to uplink a sayyad 4 mounted on an F-4 via the National Air Defense Grid, but without the radars and fire control systems also being airborne, it seems pointless.
> Another potential thing to do is convert a large plane to an airborne Bavar awacs with Sayyad 4s mounted to the wings hard points and launched as air to air missiles. How feasible that is, I am not sure, especially for the onboard power needed for the radars in addition to the mounting of the planar arrays, etc. Also, such a platform will always be easier to knock down than a ground based highly mobile system. There was discussions here last here on the merits of awacs for Iran vs more ground based systems for the same costs.


 
The scenario I envision would be that enemy AWACS is detected by ground based long range early warning radar. F-4E takes off with two Sayyad-4 missiles slung under the outer wing pilons (like C-802/Noor AShM). The F-4 climbs to high altitude and fires the Sayyad-4s at an angle at the location of the AWACS given by Ground control. The missiles being fired at around Mach 1 combined with the lower air density of the higher altitudes will increase the range of the Sayyad missiles far beyond the 200km range of the SAM variant. The missile will fly to the airspace designated by GC in passive mode and activate its radar once close enough to the position of the AWACS, lock on and guide its self to the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The scenario I envision would be that enemy AWACS is detected by ground based long range early warning radar. F-4E takes off with two Sayyad-4 missiles slung under the outer wing pilons (like C-802/Noor AShM). The F-4 climbs to high altitude and fires the Sayyad-4s at an angle at the location of the AWACS given by Ground control. The missiles being fired at around Mach 1 combined with the lower air density of the higher altitudes will increase the range of the Sayyad missiles far beyond the 200km range of the SAM variant. The missile will fly to the airspace designated by GC in passive mode and activate its radar once close enough to the position of the AWACS, lock on and guide its self to the target.


I guess it depends on the seeker head of the Sayyad 4 and if it can scan at those ranges. It would need a sufficiently powerful x band radar to guide itself to the target. Either the F-4 or the ground based fire control radar would have to have a reliable connection to the missile. I suppose a similar scenario could be employed like that which brought down the rq4. In that case, a Ghadir radar guided a sayyad 2 from a 3rd Khordad to the rq4 with the 3rd Khordad radar not active. So long as there is a good uplink to an F-4, something similar could be done maybe...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

WudangMaster said:


> I guess it depends on the seeker head of the Sayyad 4 and if it can scan at those ranges. It would need a sufficiently powerful x band radar to guide itself to the target. Either the F-4 or the ground based fire control radar would have to have a reliable connection to the missile. I suppose a similar scenario could be employed like that which brought down the rq4. In that case, a Ghadir radar guided a sayyad 2 from a 3rd Khordad to the rq4 with the 3rd Khordad radar not active. So long as there is a good uplink to an F-4, something similar could be done maybe...



Yes. I was also thinking along the lines of the RQ-4 engagement. AWACS would be much easier to lock on to by the Sayyad-4 than the Low Observable RQ-4 was for the Sayyad-2 missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The missile will fly to the airspace designated by GC in passive mode and activate its radar once close enough to the position of the AWACS, lock on and guide its self to the target.



GC first needs to illuminate the target without the target knowing and have a good accurate area where the target is. Then S-4 flies to that area and engages in top attack kill pattern. When its SARH illuminates the area below it, the AWACS needs to be in that area or else S-4 runs out of energy and misses the kill.

It’s not like GC can say “it’s somewhere in this area go find it”. Doesn’t work that way.

I Dont see what benefit S-4 would have over F-14 carrying a Fakour-90 which has similar range and high speed and similar kill pattern. It’s not like AWACS are exactly nimble fast evading aircraft.

So I don’t see the benefits of S-4 being attached to an F-4. F-14 can move faster and achieve the kill faster with a F-90 A2A.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> GC first needs to illuminate the target without the target knowing and have a good accurate area where the target is. Then S-4 flies to that area and engages in top attack kill pattern. When its SARH illuminates the area below it, the AWACS needs to be in that area or else S-4 runs out of energy and misses the kill.
> 
> It’s not like GC can say “it’s somewhere in this area go find it”. Doesn’t work that way.
> 
> I Dont see what benefit S-4 would have over F-14 carrying a Fakour-90 which has similar range and high speed and similar kill pattern. It’s not like AWACS are exactly nimble fast evading aircraft.
> 
> So I don’t see the benefits of S-4 being attached to an F-4. F-14 can move faster and achieve the kill faster with a F-90 A2A.



The advantage of the Sayyad-4 over the Fakour-90 is that a sayyad-4 has a maximum range of 200KM when fired from the ground while the Fakour-90 has a maximum range of 160km fired from high altitude(through thinner air) and launched from an F-14 going supersonic. Now if you take that Sayyad-4 and launch it under the same condition as the Fakour-90, you will get a range well in access to the 200km max range. The USAF is not dumb they know that Iran has F-14s with long range AAMs so they will do their best to keep their AWACS as far back from the Fakour-90s range as they can so It becomes useful to have a missile that can reach them at well over 200km.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

credits to Patarames

So a Sosna-like AD system with probably 8 tubes


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384935735971782658
*Photoshopped (8 tube concept)*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> credits to Patarames
> 
> So a Sosna-like AD system with probably 8 tubes
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384935735971782658
> *Photoshopped (8 tube concept)*



The fact that they put them on off-road tactical vehicles like this makes me know where these will be heading.

For protection of sensitive sites, id imagine these would likely be static defenses and close-by to the site. Unless I'm mistaken, the odds that you are an operator of one of these and you'd encounter a cruise missile at short range nearby is low.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> The fact that they put them on off-road tactical vehicles like this makes me know where these will be heading.
> 
> For protection of sensitive sites, id imagine these would likely be static defenses and close-by to the site. Unless I'm mistaken, the odds that you are an operator of one of these and you'd encounter a cruise missile at short range nearby is low.



They would also very likely be used along with Hael and others to protect the higher tier sam systems as well and this platform can very easily be adapted for navy too.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

Sineva said:


> Heres an interesting one,we can see that theres been a new section added to the bottom of the onboard generator mounted behind the cab,it could be for increased storage space I suppose.
> However,the most obvious difference from the previous 15th of khordad sams is the shortened length of the missile canisters,as these should extend all the way to the generator.It doesnt make any sense to shorten the missile,so one possibility is that these are the [empty] cut down canisters that we saw during the testing of the system,that have been reused for the parade.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528318084141059

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528326112022529

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528318084141059
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528326112022529



Needs Bavar 373 on that Island would cover entire UAE and Qatar and key parts of Saudi Arabia

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 736927


What does the banner in the lower image say? I keep trying to zoom in but the letters are very blurry.


----------



## skyshadow

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 736927


could it be that they built a missile smaller then Sayyad-2C but with same range and same speed ?


----------



## Ich

skyshadow said:


> could it be that they built a missile smaller then Sayyad-2C but with same range and same speed ?



This would mean new sort of solid fuel. And this also would mean more range and/or greater warheads with ballistic missiles. I didnt find a news about.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528318084141059
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528326112022529


The good thing about this island is that it is a major distraction and must be the first target for the enemy. Leaving the mainland to do its proper defensive retaliation. You can’t skip the island and go straight for mainland Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow

Ich said:


> This would mean new sort of solid fuel. And this also would mean more range and/or greater warheads with ballistic missiles. I didnt find a news about.


they could use better and lighter materials for the body like carbon fiber, i have heard some news of couple of new fuel factories actually Gen.Bagheri have unveiled soiled fuel production factory for air defense missiles in 2021 and said this will helps us to build better missiles with longer range and faster sooo who knows im going to say it is better then Sayyad-2C as they already have *Mersad-16* for short range up to 40-50 Kms

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1386279811199291394

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528318084141059
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363528326112022529



Just one Sevom Khordad and a Hawk battery seems pretty light for such a strategic Island?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vizier

Draco.IMF said:


> credits to Patarames
> 
> So a Sosna-like AD system with probably 8 tubes
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384935735971782658
> *Photoshopped (8 tube concept)*




Search radar vehicle and these thermal-tracker shorad vehicles would work against cruise missiles for point defense. But it would be difficult for the thermal-imager to track a gliding small diameter bomb or a dumb bomb with similar or larger size with no engine at night. For these types of threats radar tracking might be necessary on the shorad vehicles in addition to the separate search radar vehicle queing those systems. Something similar to Hq-7 but with laser guided missiles the vehicle would leave the guidance to the missile itself just tracking and laser-pointing at the target instead of vehicle based clos type of guidance. Even another vehicle can shoot the missile and the other vehicle that finished its missiles might be only tracking-laser pointing at the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

vizier said:


> Search radar vehicle and these thermal-tracker shorad vehicles would work against cruise missiles for point defense. But it would be difficult for the thermal-imager to track a gliding small diameter bomb or a dumb bomb with similar or larger size with no engine at night. For these types of threats radar tracking might be necessary on the shorad vehicles in addition to the separate search radar vehicle queing those systems. Something similar to Hq-7 but with laser guided missiles the vehicle would leave the guidance to the missile itself just tracking and laser-pointing at the target instead of vehicle based clos type of guidance. Even another vehicle can shoot the missile and the other vehicle that finished its missiles might be only tracking-laser pointing at the target.
> 
> View attachment 738372



Iran already has unlicensed HQ-7 systems

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

https://imgur.com/YxW9RmL

Raad optronic guidance system

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Iskander

*Secretive Army Suicide Drone Smashed Mock Air Defenses During Advanced War Games*








Secretive Army Suicide Drone Smashed Mock Air Defenses In High-Tech Exercise


A network of other manned and unmanned platforms helped find the targets for the classified loitering munitions to engage.




www.thedrive.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sina-1

8! Just wow!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395659088323874817Qods radar!

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395662091877457922

Reactions: Like Like:
14 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395663902982168578

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> 8! Just wow!
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395659088323874817Qods radar!
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395662091877457922


whats the range . its supposed to be a short range system or middle range one ,It was far more interesting if it carried for example 24 missile not only 8 if it's a middle range one but if any of those containers carry a missile equal to Taer then its a very positive move
if its short range system with the mission of engaging cruise missiles then it can easily be saturated in swarm attack by enemy, my guess is that we seriously need to miniaturize our systems

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ 9th Dey SAM

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
11 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Sineva

We can see the new radar,thats paired with the 3rd khordad








It looks like its based on the belorussian vostok.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## TheImmortal

Is it just a 3rd Khordad with 8 launchers or is the missile used a different missile?


----------



## NaCon

TheImmortal said:


> Is it just a 3rd Khordad with 8 launchers or is the missile used a different missile?


Smaller missile. This system will have the same role as the Iron Dome

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xbat

NaCon said:


> Smaller missile this system will have the same role as the Iron Dome


HOW DO YOU KNOW ? it is just a sam system and there is no sign to hunt incoming rockets!


----------



## Hack-Hook

NaCon said:


> Smaller missile this system will have the same role as the Iron Dome


too large missiles and too little missiles for that role

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## NaCon

Hack-Hook said:


> too large missiles and too little missiles for that role


The Tamir interceptor missile is 3m in length and has a 70 km range that will be upgraded to 250 in the near future. If you compare the canister size on ghis system to the missile size on the 3rd of khordad you will see that they are much smaller.


----------



## Sina-1

xbat said:


> HOW DO YOU KNOW ? it is just a sam system and there is no sign to hunt incoming rockets!


Rockets are actually very simple to intercept. The trajectory can be approximated with ease and thus intercepting is not difficult.

having said that. Iran doesn’t need a system to intercept rockets. This system is designed for interception of cruise missiles, uavs and smart bombs primarily.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## NaCon

Sina-1 said:


> Rockets are actually very simple to intercept. The trajectory can be approximated with ease and thus intercepting is not difficult.
> 
> having said that. Iran doesn’t need a system to intercept rockets. This system is designed for interception of cruise missiles, uavs and smart bombs primarily.


One of the main roles of the Iron Dome is to intercept drones and cruise missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Very nice.
Iran has been somewhat short on SHORAD , point defence systems, instead relying on AAA guns which is also great. Good to see a variant that can take on that role.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

With the two variants of missiles, paired with the newer radars at battery and battalion level, 3rd Khordad/9th Dey system coupled with AAA can begin to address some SHORAD short coming. 
Can this system be adapted for vertical launch for the Navy? 
How does this compare to TOR M-1 in terms of range and performance?
Though it is not an iron dome clone, the fact that it can intercept free falling bombs tells me that it can overlap to that system in terms of performance and act very much in the same way, making it useful for certain allies in the region. 
On a side not, do you suppose this new missile was also tested on the Talash first, before being deployed to 3rd Khordad?
What is the size and performance difference between this missile and that of the Kamin 2 system? Radar wise, this system does seem more compact than Kamin 2 as the 3rd Khordad TELAR seems to control everything and the VHF radar being an optional addition.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395743702778355713

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395743720423690241

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Another nice surprise from Iran, which continues to improve and strengthen. When we calculate all the defense systems of Iran and each system is built in several numbers, we can see the power of Iran. And are you talking about saturation?

Iran is in the club of the 4 greatest power in air defense system |

1- Russia
2- USA
3- China
4- Iran

Iran is still hiding from us other defense systems that have not yet been revealed. The gigantic air defense power of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Mr Iran Eye said:


> Another nice surprise from Iran, which continues to improve and strengthen. When we calculate all the defense systems of Iran and each system is built in several numbers, we can see the power of Iran. And are you talking about saturation?
> 
> Iran is in the club of the 4 greatest power in air defense system |
> 
> 1- Russia
> 2- USA
> 3- China
> 4- Iran
> 
> Iran is still hiding from us other defense systems that have not yet been revealed. The gigantic air defense power of Iran.



But is still low against MRBM/IRBM/ICBM. Just a reminder.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 745783
> View attachment 745784



can we assume that the Iraninan Pantsir version will have similarities to this one?
Mabye 6 smaller canisters (instead of 4) per side, with smaller missiles of course

missing @yavar our brother, his opinions to this system i would read with much interest


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Ich said:


> But is still low against MRBM/IRBM/ICBM. Just a reminder.



Absolutely not !


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395796002284658698

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

So now 3rd Khordad is Syria ready, protected by 9th Day against Delilah

Reactions: Like Like:
15 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395815360327262217

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

PeeD said:


> So now 3rd Khordad is Syria ready, protected by 9th Day against Delilah


Do you suppose that the Sayyad 2 will still be used in smaller numbers in a 3rd Khordad battery or will they concentrate on the Taers and 9th Dey missiles? I can imagine a few of the sayyad 2s could provide some better coverage in dealing with certain targets. 
What higher tier radars are the Syrian units attached to?
I just re read the post and realized that you said Syria ready, as opposed to already in Syria. I think it might be some more time because there have to be export versions of this system available.


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> So now 3rd Khordad is Syria ready, protected by 9th Day against Delilah



Still have to get them there and make sure they aren’t destroyed overnight.


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> So now 3rd Khordad is Syria ready, protected by 9th Day against Delilah



The system now needs a highly reliable CIWS to go with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

arashkamangir said:


> The system now needs a highly reliable CIWS to go with it.


I think Hael would be a good choice as it operates on the same chassis and seems to be a credible mobile AAA. Could Hael be the culmination of the various prototype AAA systems shown over the years such as Mesbah 1, etc?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

WudangMaster said:


> Do you suppose that the Sayyad 2 will still be used in smaller numbers in a 3rd Khordad battery or will they concentrate on the Taers and 9th Dey missiles?



Sayyad-2 option is for special cases, Taer series is the main weapon.



arashkamangir said:


> The system now needs a highly reliable CIWS to go with it.



9th Day is basically a missile CIWS



TheImmortal said:


> Still have to get them there and make sure they aren’t destroyed overnight.



Drive or fly them in and put them immediately active. But I'm just talking, no need to do that atm.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Drive or fly them in and put them immediately active. But I'm just talking, no need to do that atm.



They flew in at least one Iranian AD to T4, got destroyed after being unloaded and an Iranian transport aircraft got reportedly hit with shrapnel.

Driving is the most dangerous option as it’s sitting on the flatbed of a massive truck and is easy prey for a knock then kill attack. Plus drivi thru Iraq and Syria everyone will be taking video of it and posting on social media, not that Israel needs OSINT to track Iranian weapon shipments.

Even if you unloaded two by air and immed turned them on (not practical as they need to be in special areas) Israel would just drop 20-30 CMs and the system would be overwhelmed.

Again the lack of a Iranian air defense systems is a testament to how easy it is to track incoming Iranian military flights on OSINT let a spy organization like Mossad


----------



## PeeD

@TheImmortal 

There is false impression how much the Israelis know and what they are able to attack and when.

Syrian Pantsir and Buk already intercept a good portion of Israeli Delilah CM attacks.
9th Day in a whole battalion means 96 ready to fire missiles with 32 simultaneous interceptions.

Smuggle them in slowly and activate them once all elements are there.
Syrian Pantsir + 1-2 9th Day battalions would make Delilah attacks against Damascus nearly impossible. Rampage being the only solution and only available in limited numbers due to size and cost.

But Iran won't start such a expensive game as long as it supplies what it wants with minor interruptions.
Israeli strikes are not massive enough or hitting important assets, hence let them continue and wait for Syrians to handle it on their own.

The system elements are so small that they can easily masked as shipping containers. Maybe with huge 9th Day stocks in future and Syrians failing to create AD umbrella around Damascus, we will see such a scenario, but not now.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1395993709355933699

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SOHEIL

LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

SOHEIL said:


> LOL
> 
> View attachment 746233

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 746296

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

I can see the BUK reference as the original systems (Tabas and others) were built on a similar to a BUK chassis.

I don’t see how anyone can confuse a 3rd Khordad with a LR all in one system like S-300.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AmirPatriot

TheImmortal said:


> I can see the BUK reference as the original systems (Tabas and others) were built on a similar to a BUK chassis.
> 
> I don’t see how anyone can confuse a 3rd Khordad with a LR all in one system like S-300.



1. S-300 is the only Russian air defence system Iran has ever imported
2. All Iranian weapons are copies of Russian weapons in some way
3. Ipso ergo 3rd Khordad = S-300

Makes perfect sense, see?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

so yeah, I read that this radar is much more capable than the belarusian counterpart and that the era of "stealth" is pretty over with it.....

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> They flew in at least one Iranian AD to T4, got destroyed after being unloaded and an Iranian transport aircraft got reportedly hit with shrapnel.
> 
> Driving is the most dangerous option as it’s sitting on the flatbed of a massive truck and is easy prey for a knock then kill attack. Plus drivi thru Iraq and Syria everyone will be taking video of it and posting on social media, not that Israel needs OSINT to track Iranian weapon shipments.
> 
> Even if you unloaded two by air and immed turned them on (not practical as they need to be in special areas) Israel would just drop 20-30 CMs and the system would be overwhelmed.
> 
> Again the lack of a Iranian air defense systems is a testament to how easy it is to track incoming Iranian military flights on OSINT let a spy organization like Mossad


Put it on a flatbed. Covered by a tarp or a shipping container.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Israel makes baseless claims and some people here eat it up. When Israel struck Syrian Pantsir Missile launchers they showed the footage as evidence. where is the evidence that they actually hit a lone IRGC Tor-M1 in Syria?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Israel makes baseless claims and some people here eat it up. When Israel struck Syrian Pantsir Missile launchers they showed the footage as evidence. where is the evidence that they actually hit a lone IRGC Tor-M1 in Syria?



it Wasn’t a TOR-M1


----------



## Ich

TheImmortal said:


> it Wasn’t a TOR-M1



You mean IRGC did not send TOR-M1 to Syria? Instead IRGC has Pantsir in Syria? Doesnt it sound crazy?


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> it Wasn’t a TOR-M1


The story I have heard was that it was a IRGC TOR-M1. What did you hear it was?


----------



## zectech

4 areas of development needed

defense against BMs, HGVs, and other hypersonic weapons - a solution = something like an s500
defense against swarms of drones and missiles -a solution is layered defense including systems with very high number of smaller missiles, better ciws and radars
defense against stealth drones and stealth missiles - a solution is improved radars and missiles; systems to knock out threats with heat signatures for targeting stealth missiles
defense against missiles/drones using EW - a solution is better ECM -radars and ADS missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> so yeah, I read that this radar is much more capable than the belarusian counterpart and that the era of "stealth" is pretty over with it.....


I'd suggest you take the words of that Twitter user with an asteroid sized grain of salt. Most of his claims are pure fabrications.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The story I have heard was that it was a IRGC TOR-M1. What did you hear it was?



A 3rd Khordad, Tobas, BUK derivative, etc.

A TOR-M1 doesn’t make sense. It’s an old system with very short range and Iran has limited amounts of them.


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

TheImmortal said:


> A 3rd Khordad, Tobas, BUK derivative, etc.
> 
> A TOR-M1 doesn’t make sense. It’s an old system with very short range and Iran has limited amounts of them.



Ok thanks. It is still not been confirmed independently from Israeli account.


----------



## Iskander

*Some Iranian made EW systems
























*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF

AmirPatriot said:


> I'd suggest you take the words of that Twitter user with an asteroid sized grain of salt. Most of his claims are pure fabrications.


I do, dont worry, but maybe he has some informations...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Iskander



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Messerschmitt

^ Ground-based Kamand CIWS (Azarakhsh SAM + Fath-630 autocannon)

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## AmirPatriot

Draco.IMF said:


> I do, dont worry, but maybe he has some informations...



To give you an example, he once said Ain Al-Asad was protected by Aegis ashore. Once pressed to prove his ludicrous claim with evidence he consistently failed to do so. 

I think he also claimed that the F-14A was called "A" because it was a downgraded version for Iran. Despite the F-14A being by far the most numerous version of the F-14 in USN service.

And so on, and so on.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1396696209444806658

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397235991878983684

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## foxhoundbis

Ich said:


> But is still low against MRBM/IRBM/ICBM. Just a reminder.


At this stage, whatever the means, *nothing can stop an ICBM* wherever it is, whatever it is. Even North Korea ICBM can reach any target in the USA.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Ich

foxhoundbis said:


> At this stage, whatever the means, *nothing can stop an ICBM* wherever it is, whatever it is. Even North Korea ICBM can reach any target in the USA.



...except you have a Laser what can bring more than 1 MW energy on a point smaller than 1 cm² at a distance of 500+ km. But also with the best AD missile systems you have a chance to destroy the warhead of the incoming RV of an ICBM.


----------



## mohsen

Helicopter, and...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raghfarm007

Wargames video:






آپارات - سرویس اشتراک ویدیو







www.aparat.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Some more pictures from the Sky Shield 1400 electronic warfare drills.

Reactions: Like Like:
15 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397605878531039233

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Muhammed45

@PeeD dear sir
Janes claims in its recent report that the missile of 9th-dey lacks the radio frequency-transparent nose cones. Is it true? 
What is your idea about the seeker of this new missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Muhammed45 said:


> @PeeD dear sir
> Janes claims in its recent report that the missile of 9th-dey lacks the radio frequency-transparent nose cones. Is it true?
> What is your idea about the seeker of this new missile?



Yes, its command guided and uses side arrays for radar proximity fuse. No need for a radome.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Muhammed45 said:


> What is your idea about the seeker of this new missile?


So this missile has no seeker since it is only guided from ground stations maybe even guided from AWACS looking assets?


----------



## AmirPatriot

Slightly annoys me that the 9th Dey missile doesn't have folding fins. Would allow for more densely packed launchers.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PeeD

AmirPatriot said:


> Slightly annoys me that the 9th Dey missile doesn't have folding fins. Would allow for more densely packed launchers.



That may come for a VLS system. Its already compact but would get more compact, approaching the 16 missiles of Tor-M2.
Its currently empty nose can be use for thruster pivot system, which is needed for a VLS SR-SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> That may come for a VLS system. Its already compact but would get more compact, approaching the 16 missiles of Tor-M2.
> Its currently empty nose can be use for thruster pivot system, which is needed for a VLS SR-SAM.


Are you also thinking cold launch like Tor as well? I'm far from an expert in this field but my instincts tell me that a cold launch should be a less accident prone system. The fault tree design should easier avoid possible disaster outcome. Although it seems to be an overall more complex system to master...


AmirPatriot said:


> Slightly annoys me that the 9th Dey missile doesn't have folding fins. Would allow for more densely packed launchers.


It seems like this is very IRGC-ish to incrementally design and release new products. The test and fielding of their weapons is part of the product design process it seems. So basically for next generation it becomes more optimised and efficient, following field validation and evaluation etc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Sina-1 said:


> Are you also thinking cold launch like Tor as well? I'm far from an expert in this field but my instincts tell me that a cold launch should be a less accident prone system. The fault tree design should easier avoid possible disaster outcome. Although it seems to be an overall more complex system to master...



Yes this time cold launch is a must have, the central arrangement would make hot gas deflection to large in size.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

SalarHaqq said:


>


Heres a close-up pic of the antenna that the helo is carrying




Anyone know what this is used for/what system its a part of?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

Sineva said:


> Heres a close-up pic of the antenna that the helo is carrying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know what this is used for/what system its a part of?



VHF communication jammer

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1398676255004889096

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1398676399498616833

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## foxhoundbis

Muhammed45 said:


> @PeeD dear sir
> Janes claims in its recent report that the missile of 9th-day lacks the radio frequency-transparent nose cones. Is it true?
> What is your idea about the seeker of this new missile?


@Muhammed45 
I used to read and follow Janes in the far past, and I used to believe that they were among the best because it was Western specialists. However, after the Internet, I realized they are a bunch of crocs. As with most of the western press, Janes is a piece of s...not more, not less. Iran is becoming a real regional power, and in the next decades, it will be undoubtedly a technological power too. Nowadays, the US can no longer attack Iran without undergoing a terrible humiliation that could blow the western system. Imagine now the panic that prevails in the regional neighborhood -including Israel-. Thus, the role of the so-called "media" like Janes is to debunk as long as it is possible Iran's hardware, and Iran's know-how, as they did during the cold war. Indeed in those days, I used to hear for example that soviet submarines lagged behind the US' one because they were for example too much noisy, easily detectable.
The western media in the 2020s are no longer media, but propaganda's tool.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

foxhoundbis said:


> @Muhammed45
> I used to read and follow Janes in the far past, and I used to believe that they were among the best because it was Western specialists. However, after the Internet, I realized they are a bunch of crocs. As with most of the western press, Janes is a piece of s...not more, not less. Iran is becoming a real regional power, and in the next decades, it will be undoubtedly a technological power too. Nowadays, the US can no longer attack Iran without undergoing a terrible humiliation that could blow the western system. Imagine now the panic that prevails in the regional neighborhood -including Israel-. Thus, the role of the so-called "media" like Janes is to debunk as long as it is possible Iran's hardware, and Iran's know-how, as they did during the cold war. Indeed in those days, I used to hear for example that soviet submarines lagged behind the US' one because they were for example too much noisy, easily detectable.
> The western media in the 2020s are no longer media, but propaganda's tool.



Janes actually used to be a decent OSINT analysis site that required a subscription. But they switched some time ago to allowing commentary articles that expressed “opinion”. Quality has since gone down as I don’t see the old type of analysis done anymore. It’s mostly someone’s interpretation of an AP news article now.

But the rise of Twitter OSINT has made sites like Jane obsolete for the most part.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EvilWesteners

foxhoundbis said:


> @Muhammed45
> I used to read and follow Janes in the far past, and I used to believe that they were among the best because it was Western specialists. However, after the Internet, I realized they are a bunch of crocs. As with most of the western press, Janes is a piece of s...not more, not less. Iran is becoming a real regional power, and in the next decades, it will be undoubtedly a technological power too. Nowadays, the US can no longer attack Iran without undergoing a terrible humiliation that could blow the western system. Imagine now the panic that prevails in the regional neighborhood -including Israel-. Thus, the role of the so-called "media" like Janes is to debunk as long as it is possible Iran's hardware, and Iran's know-how, as they did during the cold war. Indeed in those days, I used to hear for example that soviet submarines lagged behind the US' one because they were for example too much noisy, easily detectable.
> The western media in the 2020s are no longer media, but propaganda's tool.




My friend Foxhoundbis,

As far back as early 1990s, when British MOD use to pay for all the Jane's books (the big heavy massive books that are published annually, mostly written or edited by Brits), WE USE TO SIT AROUND and read them during lunch break .... FOR A LAUGH, since they were so often erroneous but we were not allowed to correct them.

I am not sure if they deliberately FALSE INFORMATION, or may be intentional MISINFORMATION for an intelligence agenda, or what? 

But, they are so full of errors, you can only laugh.

I use to read them for about 10 years, but that was a long time ago. No more interest in COMIC BOOKS.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## foxhoundbis

EvilWesteners said:


> I am not sure if they deliberately FALSE INFORMATION, or may be intentional MISINFORMATION for an intelligence agenda, or what?
> But, they are so full of errors, you can only laugh.
> 
> I use to read them for about 10 years, but that was a long time ago. No more interest in COMIC BOOKS.



It seems we do have the same experience about western media, like Janes. The best way to realize what Janes -or any other western media- when they talked about Syria. Suddenly their mask fell. 
- Bachar Assad is the "awful dictator", that slaughters his people.
- Ghadaffi is an "awful dictator" too.
- Palestinians, or Lebanese when they try to resist or defend themselves, they are all "terrorist groups"
- Russian, Chinese armies lagged behind the west
- FC-31 is a copycat of F-35, J-20 is a copycat of F-22, J-10 is a copycat of Israeli Lavy 
- Russian submarines are all copycat of western hardware
- The "awful, and crazy dictator " of North Korea that threatens world peace
etc...
Let's back to Iran, and what @Muhammed45 said.
At this stage, no one can really answer your question, what is the real state of Iranian EW. The fact that Iranian air defense downed few US state-of-the-art drones does prove a real capacity. Moreover, last year when Iran striked back at the murder of Gen Soleymanieh, without any US reaction, does prove that the US fears Iran.
Immediately after the Iranian attacks, the US sent several dozens of F-35, F-22, EA-18 Growler, F-15C etc...However Iranian detected them immediately, and Iranian air defense could down too many US aircraft. Trump ordered to cancel the reprisals.

If Iranians downed several F-22, with F-35, F-15, it would be a terrible humiliation for the US, even though US Air Force, US Navy would succeed by destroying some Iranian targets. If US losses were too heavy, I think the US won't hesitate one moment to threaten Iran with nuclear weapons, US leaders are too cowardly to do this. If the conflict reaches this dangerous step, and it will be, Iranians won't have thousands of choices, they will threaten the US with nuclear weapons too.
But if this step is reached, it does prove that the US cannot afford a war with Iran-as was the case in Korea 1950, Vietnam war, and Egypt in 1973-, thus their system will immediately collapse. Such a heavy price that the US cannot afford it.
Anyway, this situation proves that Iranian air defense and Iranian electronic warfare seem to be very effective, at least to deter the US to do what they want.
Do not forget that if US leaders decided to give up the F-35, and to dismantle the F-22 fleet at the end of this decade because of what's happened above the middle east skies, in Syria, and above the Persian gulf's skies.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

foxhoundbis said:


> Do not forget that if US leaders decided to give up the F-35, and to dismantle the F-22 fleet at the end of this decade

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*It seems like IRGC is going to unveil a super high altitude air defense system that can hit low orbit satellites ( ballistic missiles ) too that means ( +400 km ) in altitude interception * *🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷





*

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
2


----------



## NaCon

skyshadow said:


> *It seems like IRGC is going to unveil a super high altitude air defense system that can hit low orbit satellites ( ballistic missiles ) too that means ( +400 km ) in altitude interception * *🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷
> 
> 
> View attachment 750369
> *

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

NaCon said:


> View attachment 750374



That’s a 3rd Khordad like system.



skyshadow said:


> *It seems like IRGC is going to unveil a super high altitude air defense system that can hit low orbit satellites ( ballistic missiles ) too that means ( +400 km ) in altitude interception * *🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷
> 
> 
> View attachment 750369
> *




It’s likely that one long range air defense system system we seen on posters with a single dark missile. What’s it called Al Hoda? I forgot the name. It’s poster has been seen in arms exhibitions before.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> *It seems like IRGC is going to unveil a super high altitude air defense system that can hit low orbit satellites ( ballistic missiles ) too that means ( +400 km ) in altitude interception * *🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷
> 
> 
> View attachment 750369
> *



Usually such critical systems are not shown. I mean its a key system to break the U.S airpower kill-chain, by targeting the support aircrafts.
A main task of the IRGC-ASF to lessen the pressure on IRIAF and IRIADF.
Wonder where that info comes from.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## arashkamangir

PeeD said:


> Usually such critical systems are not shown. I mean its a key system to break the U.S airpower kill-chain, by targeting the support aircrafts.
> A main task of the IRGC-ASF to lessen the pressure on IRIAF and IRIADF.
> Wonder where that info comes from.



Yeah, @skyshadow where is the source?

As @TheImmortal mentioned, I am also betting on Sadid 630 missile (part of Al Hoda system?) as the candidate. We havent heard anything from this system since the posters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

arashkamangir said:


> Yeah, @skyshadow where is the source?
> 
> As @TheImmortal mentioned, I am also betting on Sadid 630 missile (part of Al Hoda system?) as the candidate. We havent heard anything from this system since the posters.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274256993910435840

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274256995688648705

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274256997924384771

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## arashkamangir

yavar said:


>



Its nutz.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

NaCon said:


> View attachment 750374


damn , that is a air defense site , big missiles are deployed launchers are underground


TheImmortal said:


> That’s a 3rd Khordad like system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s likely that one long range air defense system system we seen on posters with a single dark missile. What’s it called Al Hoda? I forgot the name. It’s poster has been seen in arms exhibitions before.


Alam Al Hoda is for bombers at long ranges this one has a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense roll in mind


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Usually such critical systems are not shown. I mean its a key system to break the U.S airpower kill-chain, by targeting the support aircrafts.
> A main task of the IRGC-ASF to lessen the pressure on IRIAF and IRIADF.
> Wonder where that info comes from.


if they unveil it as anti ballistic missile defense then no one will suspect until told otherwise , IRGC hasn't unveiled an air defense system for almost 6 years now its only logical for them to be working on something big much bigger then 3th of khordad. when IRGC unveil prototype for sevome khordad they were already working on Alam Al Hoda and a big missile called Sadid 630
























arashkamangir said:


> Yeah, @skyshadow where is the source?
> 
> As @TheImmortal mentioned, I am also betting on Sadid 630 missile (part of Al Hoda system?) as the candidate. We havent heard anything from this system since the posters.


could be, they also had Fateh family of ballistic missile in mind for that roll too


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1400516231879290884

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> Alam Al Hoda is for bombers at long ranges this one has a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense roll in mind



You don’t build a long range missile to intercept a bomber. An S-200 can do that job just fine.

Sadid-630 is a BM converted to ABM with the main goal of endoatmospheric interception since if it is based on somewhat on F-110 and Taer-2 then it cannot leave the atmosphere to engage a target.


----------



## Stryker1982

I remember a poll earlier on the Iranian military section a few months back that asked when an anti-sat killer would be introduced, I picked after >2025, but seems like Iran is closer than expected.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> You don’t build a long range missile to intercept a bomber. An S-200 can do that job just fine.
> 
> Sadid-630 is a BM converted to ABM with the main goal of endoatmospheric interception since if it is based on somewhat on F-110 and Taer-2 then it cannot leave the atmosphere to engage a target.


agreed but we have too little information to work with here, 200 km for a bomber or a AWACS is not long range 400-600 km has much more aria denial for them.


Stryker1982 said:


> I remember a poll earlier on the Iranian military section a few months back that asked when an anti-sat killer would be introduced, I picked after >2025, but seems like Iran is closer than expected.


in recent space documentary they add IRGC to the list after India, IRGC said now we don't just hit there drone we hit there satellite too

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## agarrao a las kalandrakas

skyshadow said:


> agreed but we have too little information to work with here, 200 km for a bomber or a AWACS is not long range 400-600 km has much more aria denial for them.



Exactly. 200-250 km range (s200) is NOT enough for striking AWACS, tankers... They would far away than 200 kms.

it would be innovative to develop a MRBM (aprox. 600-800 km range) with real time data link (with VHF and other BIG BIG over the horizon radars, Iran has very good ones) and ARH (even IR homing) to chase in the last phase.

In case of war, you detect (with your powerful over the horizon radars, VHF etc) AWACS, tankers, etc. Far away (let's say 600 km). You shoot 2-3 Extreme Long Range SAM missiles at one target. They fly in a ballistic path at extreme high speed (>mach 10), a tanker or AWACS will not travel very far in 2-3 mins. The real time data link would allow some little corrections (but maybe this point would not be required if the missile radome is able to detect some big bird 50 kms away).
Once missile has arrived to big bird flying zone, it can change path from ballistic to gliding and chasing (even this point is not strictly necessary, AIM-54 performed striking from top position and diving at extreme speed) .

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

agarrao a las kalandrakas said:


> Exactly. 200-250 km range (s200) is NOT enough for striking AWACS, tankers... They would far away than 200 kms.
> 
> it would be innovative to develop a MRBM (aprox. 600-800 km range) with real time data link (with VHF and other BIG BIG over the horizon radars, Iran has very good ones) and ARH (even IR homing) to chase in the last phase.
> 
> In case of war, you detect (with your powerful over the horizon radars, VHF etc) AWACS, tankers, etc. Far away (let's say 600 km). You shoot 2-3 Extreme Long Range SAM missiles at one target. They fly in a ballistic path at extreme high speed (>mach 10), a tanker or AWACS will not travel very far in 2-3 mins. The real time data link would allow some little corrections (but maybe this point would not be required if the missile radome is able to detect some big bird 50 kms away).
> Once missile has arrived to big bird flying zone, it can change path from ballistic to gliding and chasing (even this point is not strictly necessary, AIM-54 performed striking from top position and diving at extreme speed) .


agreed , that's why we see Russia moving actually in this direction


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1402529383257198592

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## thesaint

“Joshan” missile system to become operational this year: Cmdr


TEHRAN, Jun. 26 (MNA) – Stating that Army’s Air Defense Force is equipped with emerging sciences such as ‘laser’ and ‘quantum’, the Deputy Commander of the force said that ‘Joshan’ missile system will be put into operation by year end.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> “Joshan” missile system to become operational this year: Cmdr
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Jun. 26 (MNA) – Stating that Army’s Air Defense Force is equipped with emerging sciences such as ‘laser’ and ‘quantum’, the Deputy Commander of the force said that ‘Joshan’ missile system will be put into operation by year end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.mehrnews.com



Is that a picture of the system or random stock photo?


----------



## Saleh99

thesaint said:


> “Joshan” missile system to become operational this year: Cmdr
> 
> 
> TEHRAN, Jun. 26 (MNA) – Stating that Army’s Air Defense Force is equipped with emerging sciences such as ‘laser’ and ‘quantum’, the Deputy Commander of the force said that ‘Joshan’ missile system will be put into operation by year end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.mehrnews.com


We’re waiting for the Pantsir and Tor like ADs, then a new AD and name emerges out of nowhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Saleh99 said:


> We’re waiting for the Pantsir and Tor like ADs, then a new AD and name emerges out of nowhere.



This is army I believe.

Pantsir and Tor will belong to IRGC and Iranian Air defense branch.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## husseinibnali

TheImmortal said:


> This is army I believe.
> 
> Pantsir and Tor will belong to IRGC and Iranian Air defense branch.


The Separ(Pantsir) and the Ohhab(Tor) systems were both announced by army air defense and not by IRGC.

Joshan system was announced by army air defense too, so IRGC have nothing to do with those projects for now

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> Is that a picture of the system or random stock photo?


I'll bet anything it is a stock photo, given the track record of the media in reporting military thing accurately.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NaCon

TheImmortal said:


> Is that a picture of the system or random stock photo?


Its a photo of THAAD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The S-500 in action, the speed of the missile is incredible. Notice at 20 seconds, there is a strange energy optical effect

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The S-500 in action, the speed of the missile is incredible. Notice at 20 seconds, there is a strange energy optical effect


great speed indeed, that is not *energy optical effect they just blurred the footage so that no on can see missile it self or it's shape and its engine *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

Syria shot 7 of 8 Israeli missiles, Russian military says


MOSCOW (AP) — Syria's air defense forces shot down seven out of eight missiles launched...




www.sfgate.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

WudangMaster said:


>


Pretty clear where the investment is going, the facilities of the IRI-AD is far ahead of the ground forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran builds its static close in weapon system usually used as the main workhorse of the iranian navy the concept of land fortifications armed like navy destroyers is a concept iran is working with for a while now specially on the border such weapon fortifications can deal with both land aswell as air targets
pictures below

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

the historical example of fortifications with similar purpose but iran will simply create steel plattforms on special overlook locations rather than such huge contrete steel towers and we can see iranian borderguards having a shortcut but it unfortunally cost blood and we have martyrs to show for coming to short and not having heavier firepower on the borders and it cant be fixed by constantly deploying the army so i hope we can soon see the borderguards having some constant firepower behind them


----------



## Amin Bactria

this is what iran uses compared and its just not working well specially now that we have talebs moving in the east who arent really the most dependable neighbors


----------



## Stryker1982

Philosopher said:


> Certainly not. These missiles come at the target *from above*, by the time the target even knows what is happening, it will be too late for them.
> 
> Missile diving down at target:
> 
> 
> View attachment 675852
> 
> 
> Watch video below from 2:30


Sometimes I look back on the forum when I am thinking about Iranian systems, and curious about learning and I can't help but mention how truly a potent system IRGC-AF have created here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Very important photo


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429127658202349568

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arashkamangir

D


Stryker1982 said:


> Very important photo
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429127658202349568



Doubt it.


----------



## Stryker1982

arashkamangir said:


> D
> 
> 
> Doubt it.


Doubt what?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Doubt what?
> View attachment 771888
> 
> 
> View attachment 771889
> 
> 
> View attachment 771890



The location to build such a thing looks super suspicious. Looks like an abandoned parking lot, not an r&d facility


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> The location to build such a thing looks super suspicious. Looks like an abandoned parking lot, not an r&d facility



It doesn't have to be the location where they make it. All I know is that it looks very very similar in proportions and it is there. Could be an intentional leak.

We also don't have fancy Boeing like facilities from space, and all of our facilities are very deceptive. On the inside their is sensitive work but on the outside it looks like something else.

Just something to consider.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> We also don't have fancy Boeing like facilities from space, and all of our facilities are very deceptive. On the inside their is sensitive work but on the outside it looks like something else.



Iran’s r&d facilities are very advanced in production of missiles and sub components and radars.

They can require sterile environments using highly precise instruments. You wouldn’t assemble a high level radar outside in the elements. Makes no sense

And deception isn’t a big thing when it comes to these things. Israel and US won’t be fooled by such tactics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Iran’s r&d facilities are very advanced in production of missiles and sub components and radars.
> 
> They can require sterile environments using highly precise instruments. You wouldn’t assemble a high level radar outside in the elements. Makes no sense
> 
> And deception isn’t a big thing when it comes to these things. Israel and US won’t be fooled by such tactics.


Except for how they were fooled by the Marivan nuclear test site that looked like a run down village in the early 2000s, in some instances they aren't, and in some they are.

Besides the speculation, the image is consistent with the Alm Al Hoda radar, and I don't see a reason why not yet.


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Except for how they were fooled by the Marivan nuclear test site that looked like a run down village in the early 2000s, in some instances they aren't, and in some they are.
> 
> Besides the speculation, the image is consistent with the Alm Al Hoda radar, and I don't see a reason why not yet.



Theres two types of intelligence, “media” intelligence leaks and actual Nation level intelligence that might never be declassified because it would allow the enemy to look for ways you found that out.

As for this picture, it does look like a trailer of some sort, but Al Hoda production was years ago. Remember the year of the photo of the poster and there was a prototype already built by that time the poster was shown.

Assad built his nuclear reactor in the middle of no where in Deir Ez Zor province which is a historically super conservative Sunni province. Israel still found it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

It'd be really nice if we could get some sort of update on BAVAR-373...... I'm straight up lost on where and what stage stage this ADS is in. 

Is it still being tested or have they moved to limited production? 

At-least Iran is building a bunch of Third-of-Khordads lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dariush the Great

TheImmortal said:


> Assad built his nuclear reactor in the middle of no where in Deir Ez Zor province which is a historically super conservative Sunni province. Israel still found it.


That's because the Syrian scientist decided to flirt away in some hotel with his laptop in his room unattended. Israel is very lucky that it is facing low IQ Middle Easterners.


----------



## WudangMaster

Blue In Green said:


> It'd be really nice if we could get some sort of update on BAVAR-373...... I'm straight up lost on where and what stage stage this ADS is in.
> 
> Is it still being tested or have they moved to limited production?
> 
> At-least Iran is building a bunch of Third-of-Khordads lol.


I think Bavar is being revised to focus almost exclusively on very high altitude and long range threats, letting 15th & 3rd Khordad focus on the lower envelopes. There is an extra telar and probably a Sayyad 5 missile to accompany the final version of the system. 
Also evilwesterners said that some of the engineers working on Bavar are living in Germany now and so the system probably needs to have some parts totally revised because of the secrets given away in exchange for getting a visa by some of those people. It is disconcerting to say the least that the system was not even completed in its final form before traitors from within start giving away it secrets...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> I think Bavar is being revised to focus almost exclusively on very high altitude and long range threats, letting 15th & 3rd Khordad focus on the lower envelopes. There is an extra telar and probably a Sayyad 5 missile to accompany the final version of the system.
> Also evilwesterners said that some of the engineers working on Bavar are living in Germany now and so the system probably needs to have some parts totally revised because of the secrets given away in exchange for getting a visa by some of those people. It is disconcerting to say the least that the system was not even completed in its final form before traitors from within start giving away it secrets...



Systems don’t work that way.

Yes, engineers can give clues about capability of system or potential bottlenecks. But the system will be highly lethal regardless. If an enemy getting info about a system would make it obsolete then Russia would never sell S-400 to a NATO country (Turkey).

The implications of those engineers and similar events are overblown in my opinion.

There are plenty of Iranians that worked on F-22 and F-35, doesn’t mean anyone of them could travel to Iran and destroy the viability of those planes or recreate them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> Systems don’t work that way.
> 
> Yes, engineers can give clues about capability of system or potential bottlenecks. But the system will be highly lethal regardless. If an enemy getting info about a system would make it obsolete then Russia would never sell S-400 to a NATO country (Turkey).
> 
> The implications of those engineers and similar events are overblown in my opinion.
> 
> There are plenty of Iranians that worked on F-22 and F-35, doesn’t mean anyone of them could travel to Iran and destroy the viability of those planes or recreate them.


Logical.

But why so many traitors are there, specially they blown up their cover under Ruhani administration, they just show up from their holes...

Were they working under IRGC or defence ministry who looked over the project...


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429510514879737857

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429519151039750146

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Blue In Green said:


> It'd be really nice if we could get some sort of update on BAVAR-373...... I'm straight up lost on where and what stage stage this ADS is in.
> 
> Is it still being tested or have they moved to limited production?
> 
> At-least Iran is building a bunch of Third-of-Khordads lol.


Bavar-375 will be unveiled soon, more powerful then S-400

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429529254367318017

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> Logical.
> 
> But why so many traitors are there, specially they blown up their cover under Ruhani administration, they just show up from their holes...
> 
> Were they working under IRGC or defence ministry who looked over the project...



On a project as complex as Bavar you will have thousands if not tens of thousands of workers/engineers/technicians working on the project.

Someone’s job could literally be developing screws that hold the launch cantrainers in place, does that worker know anything about the software code? No what about the missiles themselves? Again No.

Complex and secretive projects are usually compartmentalized and access to key information and technologies are strictly monitored. That is why Iranians working on F-35 have been arrested before leaving the country because in at least one case, the defense company firewall noticed a person downloading engine blueprints and it caused the intelligence agency to begin tracking that person. He was arrested at the airport.

So again it comes down to who fled the country and what did they exactly know and what area of the project did they work on?


Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429510514879737857
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429519151039750146



Confirms what I long suspected. That gen 1 Bavar was produced in extremely limited numbers and used as a trial run to work out kinks and bottlenecks.

I wonder how many battalions they actually built of Gen 1 Bavar?

Also remember Gen 1 Bavar was started almost 12-13 years ago thus the technologies by the time of mass production were already beginning to be aging, same thing plagued the F-22. Thus Gen 2 Bavar will naturally be more advanced with a stronger EW/ECW capability and better overall improvements in radar tech and information sharing network.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Amin Bactria

its said that iran might use a gel propellant for the next generations of missiles so the missile can both fly high altitudes stop its propulsion and start again when needed to for example make drastic changes in the fly path and other things
here is a military concentrated channel talking about the issue we also have iranian military channels for a while talking about the use of it after it having been successfully tested on the ground but also iran works on quantum radar the technology was multiple times successfully tested in iran on several objects even birds can be detected with it and its specially useful for protection against small objects like for example in reactor sites or similar high value points of interest against all kind of small projectiles or drones or stealth targets of any sort

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammed45

Amin Bactria said:


> View attachment 772355
> 
> its said that iran might use a gel propellant for the next generations of missiles so the missile can both fly high altitudes stop its propulsion and start again when needed to for example make drastic changes in the fly path and other things
> here is a military concentrated channel talking about the issue we also have iranian military channels for a while talking about the use of it after it having been successfully tested on the ground but also iran works on quantum radar the technology was multiple times successfully tested in iran on several objects even birds can be detected with it and its specially useful for protection against small objects like for example in reactor sites or similar high value points of interest against all kind of small projectiles or drones


Something like THAAD?


----------



## Amin Bactria

demostration of known images put into an algoritm for referance its from nato testing it seems




small micro satellites could allow iran to create a complete setup as china also has successfully tested quantum entanglement between earth and orbital space
quantum pair entanglement is future technology for radar technology it wont be real radar anymore maybe qadar who knows
the article to the product which is irans quantum radar





Error 404 :: نورنیوز


اخبار روز ایران و خاورمیانه در نورنیوز




www.nournews.ir






Muhammed45 said:


> Something like THAAD?


watch it its in farsi btw iran did develop several typed of motors for the future to have capabilities to produce several dozen if needed even more missiles for intercontinental range if needed over 15k range the reason iran doesnt show it all off is because it doesnt want to give away its capabilities because irans enemies try to sabotage everything iran does

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Amin Bactria said:


> its said that iran might use a gel propellant for the next generations of missiles so the missile can both fly high altitudes stop its propulsion and start again when needed to for example make drastic changes in the fly path and other things


Very interesting. Gel propellant would allow that. If this propellent can be produced in large quantities it could open alot of opportunities and ideas for innovation.


----------



## Amin Bactria

Stryker1982 said:


> Very interesting. Gel propellant would allow that. If this propellent can be produced in large quantities it could open alot of opportunities and ideas for innovation.


iran probably will move towards mass production anyway as it does with most projects who are successful and part of the leaders order and for sure missiles are a priority set by the leader aswell as drones and this propellant can help for both technologies with drones being able to have boosters creating immense speeds pretty much replacing the karrar drone with something even faster capable to pinpoint intercept using quantum technology on top


Stryker1982 said:


> Very interesting. Gel propellant would allow that. If this propellent can be produced in large quantities it could open alot of opportunities and ideas for innovation.


the smarter missiles get the more the drones and missiles will mix up and i believe karrar is one example of the hybrid already
its popular believe that quantum entanglement radars have to look like haarp or have to be kind of huge to work for wide ranges and also consume alot of energy but the opposite is true they can become smaller than even modern radars and on top they can have miniature responders in space to double the successrate all done faster than the speed of light this technology for radars is obviously the only step to counter successfully stealth technology both on ground aswell as in air combat use it should actually checkmate the entire concept of stealth technology
when it comes to the propellant of the missiles irans concept of missile farms will work better with a gel propellant anyway they are non explosive and can be planted for a decade without any care in these capsules and lauched when needed also the good thing is they can be placed near the sea against sea targets and they can be placed on the borders against air targets without a need of mobile launcher planted into the ground they are the most defensive stealth weapon possible not would they be so stealthy that they pose no obvious threat they also cant be calculated right because they can be everywhere












here the west put the positive and negatives of this system together and basically showed what iran did during the time of the exposure of this system but its not really even the same there are several concepts of these kind of systems horizontal and vertical placed for example work completely different

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

there was a time over the last decades when the revolutionary guard took like the weirdest parts of lands and would basically do the weirdest things in these lands and people always wondered what are they doing anyway the ideas went all the way from iranian area 51 talk to it all being preparation for iran rud and other ideas turns out they did dig alot of tunnel and weaponized iranian territory itself against hostiles all over the place specially the mountains and desert regions which were usually the most problematic regions are today pretty much working in irans favor


----------



## Amin Bactria

it would obviously be useful to have these missile farms using gel propellant and also use ground to air ground to sea and ground to ground missiles in this way on top of mobile launchers silos camoflagued static launchers and other methods iran uses

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

For the upcoming Bavar 375, does anyone know what does 375 mean in abjad notation? I remember 373 has a religious meaning (I think Ya Rasulallah) and I assume 375 must also mean something in abjad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

WudangMaster said:


> For the upcoming Bavar 375, does anyone know what does 375 mean in abjad notation? I remember 373 has a religious meaning (I think Ya Rasulallah) and I assume 375 must also mean something in abjad.


its the year we are in i believe counting in a different method


WudangMaster said:


> For the upcoming Bavar 375, does anyone know what does 375 mean in abjad notation? I remember 373 has a religious meaning (I think Ya Rasulallah) and I assume 375 must also mean something in abjad.


i actually did read somewhere a comment about it saying something about time so i guess it is some way of counting i dont know but i actually when i did see it forgot where and i didnt cared as much about the number


WudangMaster said:


> For the upcoming Bavar 375, does anyone know what does 375 mean in abjad notation? I remember 373 has a religious meaning (I think Ya Rasulallah) and I assume 375 must also mean something in abjad.


i wanted to know what is new about it to tell the truth i was more interested about the propellant and the acceleration speed and other issues of that sort

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Amin Bactria said:


> i wanted to know what is new about it to tell the truth i was more interested about the propellant and the acceleration speed and other issues of that sort


We can certainly speculate here as to what it will look like. I personally think the two radars and Sayyad 4 will likely remain in place at battery level with the addition of a telar with pairs of Sayyad 5 for upper level threats. 
Given what is just been made known to us recently here about gel fuel and the fact that the newer missiles can be made from carbon fiber, the Sayyad 5 should have a potential to be very fast. 
As I type this, I wonder if Alam Al Hoda is a competitor to the new Bavar or will the Hoda radar supplement Bavar at battery or battalion level.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> We can certainly speculate here as to what it will look like. I personally think the two radars and Sayyad 4 will likely remain in place at battery level with the addition of a telar with pairs of Sayyad 5 for upper level threats.
> Given what is just been made known to us recently here about gel fuel and the fact that the newer missiles can be made from carbon fiber, the Sayyad 5 should have a potential to be very fast.
> As I type this, I wonder if Alam Al Hoda is a competitor to the new Bavar or will the Hoda radar supplement Bavar at battery or battalion level.



The gel is for liquid fuel missiles.

Iran’s air defense missiles are solid propellant.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> The gel is for liquid fuel missiles.
> 
> Iran’s air defense missiles are solid propellant.


You mean the gel will replace the liquid in pre existing liquid fuel missiles or is the gel for future designs that would have otherwise been using liquid fuel?


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> You mean the gel will replace the liquid in pre existing liquid fuel missiles or is the gel for future designs that would have otherwise been using liquid fuel?



existing and future. Most liquid missiles are not fueled due to fuel corroding the missile over time.

Iran has done some extension of shelf life where they can be fueled for some period of time before having to be unfueled. But this will make it MUCH easier for viability of liquid fuel missiles as well as for eventual longer ICBM range missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> existing and future. Most liquid missiles are not fueled due to fuel corroding the missile over time.
> 
> Iran has done some extension of shelf life where they can be fueled for some period of time before having to be unfueled. But this will make it MUCH easier for viability of liquid fuel missiles as well as for eventual longer ICBM range missiles.


those who say that the gel variant of propellant is only going to replace liquid fuel missiles are kind of mistaken as i have shown in the picture the gel motor is a hybrid between solid and gel and therefore it can not just do the job of a solid propelled missile the same way but even better in some cases as i mentioned it can turn off the engine and burn again in full speed to change drastic courses and because of its immense wide spectrum of uses it can be used for quite a large amount of anti aircraft anti ballistic and other similar weapons


WudangMaster said:


> You mean the gel will replace the liquid in pre existing liquid fuel missiles or is the gel for future designs that would have otherwise been using liquid fuel?


wrong it will work in a wide spectrum of uses as i said ground to ground aswell as ground to sea and ground to air missiles can be produced this way and also gel doesnt mean that its only propelled with this gel it also has a solid fuel part


TheImmortal said:


> existing and future. Most liquid missiles are not fueled due to fuel corroding the missile over time.
> 
> Iran has done some extension of shelf life where they can be fueled for some period of time before having to be unfueled. But this will make it MUCH easier for viability of liquid fuel missiles as well as for eventual longer ICBM range missiles.


no it will not completely replace liquid fuel because liquid fuels will also evolve and we will also get better and more effective liquid propellant the issue is really more that its a hybrid between solid and liquid and one that has much less chance to explode than those even by outside influence like for example airstrikes the fuel itself will not explode but maybe the warhead if its attached but its really a good fuel for field use because it can be bombed on the field and it wont explode so the fuel itself has some aspects which are superior to solid fuel variant while liquid fuel is best done underground as it is today in secure enviroments and i doubt that liquid fuel missiles will be gone since they are the cheapest


----------



## Amin Bactria

just so people understand i made it clear that these are two variants of missiles one shows a gas gel hybrid the other the solid gel hybrid for people to see that these are not complete gel propelled missiles but hybrids of both existing methods each with gel propellant




sry its liquid gel not gas gel i did a failure there

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>


S-400 export or russian version..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

New variant of Bavar SAM which will be as capable as S-400 or atleast more capable than the previous generation.



Draco.IMF said:


> S-400 export or russian version..


----------



## Amin Bactria

sha ah said:


> New variant of Bavar SAM which will be as capable as S-400 or atleast more capable than the previous generation.


it will be on par with s400 but also iran as suggested will have unique combination of technologies equipped on its next gen sams and to put it simple next gen bavar will be unlike any system on the planet it will be its own unique system just like s400 itself is unique specially the fact that it will be much smaller and less centralized than current sam systems which usually work close to eachother and it will be having better electronic warfare capabilities than the previous model offering better detection a2ad etc pp

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

and also not to forget -> S400 = S300 PMU-3

they just renamed it for marketing reasons, the "S400" may suggest a totally new generation, why its "only" an upgraded S300 PMU-2 (better radars....)

maybe its on pair with S-400, development startet ~35 years ago.
Back then we hadnt the technology like today

more interesting if its on pair with the export version or the version russia uses, I think I read the export version is downgraded around ~40-60%

I want to see finally the Iranian versions of TOR & PANTSIR

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

the eventual idea is as suggested by the military that the whole question of a2ad becomes less centralized and more autonomous and smarter


Draco.IMF said:


> and also not to forget -> S400 = S300 PMU-3
> 
> they just renamed it for marketing reasons, the "S400" may suggest a totally new generation, why its "only" an upgraded S300 PMU-2 (better radars....)
> 
> maybe its on pair with S-400, development startet ~35 years ago.
> Back then we hadnt the technology like today
> 
> more interesting if its on pair with the export version or the version russia uses, I think I read the export version is downgraded around ~40-60%
> 
> I want to see finally the Iranian version of TOR & PANTSIR


iran does not use one single system as replacement for pantsir it uses a whole variety of ciws systems including automated flak batteries to multibarrel manned positions and alot of different stuff its just really alot to mention it all but the effect of it all is basically a burning sky

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


>


maybe someone to translate the most important parts of this video? Many thanks in advance...


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> and also not to forget -> S400 = S300 PMU-3
> 
> they just renamed it for marketing reasons, the "S400" may suggest a totally new generation, why its "only" an upgraded S300 PMU-2 (better radars....)
> 
> maybe its on pair with S-400, development startet ~35 years ago.
> Back then we hadnt the technology like today
> 
> more interesting if its on pair with the export version or the version russia uses, I think I read the export version is downgraded around ~40-60%
> 
> I want to see finally the Iranian versions of TOR & PANTSIR


one single system basically for tor or pantsir role would work aswell and not be a big problem its basically short range missiles a radar and a good calibre multi barrel cannon or simply a gatling


Draco.IMF said:


> maybe someone to translate the most important parts of this video? Many thanks in advance...


sepah officer says we have alot of new stuff we rival russia america and co and we started with 0 XD
interesting is to hear that the airforce officer said that iran seeks to produce with a second nation for a third party nation planes which the third party might be syria iraq or any other of irans neighbors it might be venezuela cuba or even belarus while the second party is probably russia or china btw iam not going to translate the 15 minutes or how long it was for you i just saw it myself today and most of it isnt new info only a few things about it were new and most of the things i showed in this forum the last weeks about anti aircraft systems and concepts already either is incooperated or gets worked on in one way or another these are basically concepts which are talked about for a while inside iran some of them being basically already effectively in use

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> one single system basically for tor or pantsir role would work aswell and not be a big problem its basically short range missiles a radar and a good calibre multi barrel cannon or simply a gatling
> 
> sepah officer says we have alot of new stuff we rival russia america and co and we started with 0 XD
> interesting is to hear that the airforce officer said that iran seeks to produce with a second nation for a third party nation planes which the third party might be syria iraq or any other of irans neighbors it might be venezuela cuba or even belarus while the second party is probably russia or china btw iam not going to translate the 15 minutes or how long it was for you i just saw it myself today and most of it isnt new info only a few things about it were new and most of the things i showed in this forum the last weeks about anti aircraft systems and concepts already either is incooperated or gets worked on in one way or another these are basically concepts which are talked about for a while inside iran some of them being basically already effectively in use


thanks, very appreciated
no this video is only 2 min long, he should talk about the new Bavar AD system, the new liquid/gelly fuel and maybe more..


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> thanks, very appreciated
> no this video is only 2 min long, he should talk about the new Bavar AD system, the new liquid/gelly fuel and maybe more..



Liquid gel isn’t new. It’s been in research papers dating back a decade. Not sure what has caused it to come up again.

Liquid gel was likely developed in Sharoud. Supposedly the facility is massive underground.


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> maybe someone to translate the most important parts of this video? Many thanks in advance...


i already translated the part its not really different from what we talk here he counted all parts of the systems and he said all parts are today upgraded and new and we have even newer things ready and that irans air defenses are among the strongest forces and that iran started at 0 is pretty much what he said and also that some of the stages of production are more complex and therefore harder


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> and also not to forget -> S400 = S300 PMU-3
> 
> they just renamed it for marketing reasons, the "S400" may suggest a totally new generation, why its "only" an upgraded S300 PMU-2 (better radars....)
> 
> maybe its on pair with S-400, development startet ~35 years ago.
> Back then we hadnt the technology like today
> 
> more interesting if its on pair with the export version or the version russia uses, I think I read the export version is downgraded around ~40-60%
> 
> I want to see finally the Iranian versions of TOR & PANTSIR


iam actually not impressed with russian systems they are revolutionized technology iran does evolutionize alot of its technology therefore the likes of pantsir are basically products iran can produce in a matter of a 6 months if it wanted to badly it could easily do it in a time under a single year so that isnt really much of interest but technologies which will be a complete game changer are interesting


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> and also not to forget -> S400 = S300 PMU-3
> 
> they just renamed it for marketing reasons, the "S400" may suggest a totally new generation, why its "only" an upgraded S300 PMU-2 (better radars....)
> 
> maybe its on pair with S-400, development startet ~35 years ago.
> Back then we hadnt the technology like today
> 
> more interesting if its on pair with the export version or the version russia uses, I think I read the export version is downgraded around ~40-60%
> 
> I want to see finally the Iranian versions of TOR & PANTSIR


put 2 of these on a tank platform and 4 short range anti air missile launcher or so on top of it and you got something like a pantsir












yes the chassis is a toy one i just wanted to make the point that its just a combination of capabilities iran has and iran can easily do this



and yes of course creating the combination of the showed systems would certainly be revolutionary for irans arms forces but it wouldnt be challenging


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> but technologies which will be a complete game changer are interesting



in your opinion, which gamechanging technology iran is working on and will achive in the coming years sucessfully?
Hypersonic missiles, electronic warfare, nuclear propulsion, fighter jets, AI, photon radars....


----------



## Amin Bactria

quantum physics doesnt seem to be a strong side of the west it seems they dont have as much articles about the issue as i would expected but the area of quantum physics is where the evolution of iranian air defenses will take shape and to that the combination of other post modern technologies like plasma physics nano technology artificial swarm intelligence etc pp the combination of these technologies will be evolutionary


----------



## Hack-Hook

Amin Bactria said:


> it will be on par with s400 but also iran as suggested will have unique combination of technologies equipped on its next gen sams and to put it simple next gen bavar will be unlike any system on the planet it will be its own unique system just like s400 itself is unique specially the fact that it will be much smaller and less centralized than current sam systems which usually work close to eachother and it will be having better electronic warfare capabilities than the previous model offering better detection a2ad etc pp


well to be honest the only systems that share similarity with bavar -373 ar 15th khordad and 3rd of khordad and that's because they use same missiles


----------



## Shams313

expecting specs of new long-range Bavar.

Will, there be any newly designed Radar? Both fire control and illumination the previous one, and what for new missile velocity and range?

And also any possibility for a new volumetric search radar?


----------



## Amin Bactria

Hack-Hook said:


> well to be honest the only systems that share similarity with bavar -373 ar 15th khordad and 3rd of khordad and that's because they use same missiles


my point is that irans technologies become domestically researched and designed these days more than ever which means that there will be unique designs unique technology uses etc pp this fact will make the system for irans enemies less foreseeable than the current systems are already and in fact the next generation of system will pretty much scare the americans out of its range entirely the impossibilities this system presents for the usa not just in matters of retaining air superiority but also by having any element of suprise electronic warfare capabilities etc pp its all basically laughably becoming useless against the next gen anti air systems you cant hide anything and you cant do any electronic warfare or other nonsense these a2ad such systems create are incredibly solid and that is the point to begin with so if iran has its homegrown version of such systems and can produce it cheaper than russia or china than iran basically already will move to the top 3 in this field if not top 2 with its very own system completely designed and produced inside iran which was not a given for the last 2 centuries

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> in your opinion, which gamechanging technology iran is working on and will achive in the coming years sucessfully?
> Hypersonic missiles, electronic warfare, nuclear propulsion, fighter jets, AI, photon radars....


do you mean hypersonic glider missiles because iran has hypersonic missiles already you cant stop most of irans missiles to begin with they are simply not going to be detected by traditional radars the plasma they produce during flight gets spread all over the place creating a kind of radar jamming shower the concept of which is coming from the russians and today the their tsirkon missile is pretty much one of those new gen hypersonics which are a hybrid between a glider and a hypersonic cruise
electronic warfare iran is already moving into game changing areas
nuclear propulsion is a planned issue for the navy but its up to see what happens iran has no experience in producing these and therefore i cant say
fighter jets are getting produced and they will only get better over the years
iran is one of the few countries using artificial swarm intelligence in military testing and possibly in real warfare its a game changer already
quantum radar technology is already a reality inside iran so radars are already game changing


Draco.IMF said:


> in your opinion, which gamechanging technology iran is working on and will achive in the coming years sucessfully?
> Hypersonic missiles, electronic warfare, nuclear propulsion, fighter jets, AI, photon radars....


navy field are the iranian submarine drones which are interesting because iran tests supercavitation on several objects having mastered this technology so iran might in near future get submarine supercavitating high speed attack drones i dont consider nuclear propulsion by itself to be a gamechanger iran already proved it can move to all oceans at will having enough of a support fleet and working towards larger numbers so you will see alot of designs in future by iran which are working towards a top speed and top undetectability and top destruction approach like suggested supercavitating attack drones with huge charges being able to break most large ships being nearly undetected before they run the supercavitation motor on and basically crash under and into the target after having snuck up on it


----------



## TheImmortal

Amin Bactria said:


> quantum physics doesnt seem to be a strong side of the west it seems they dont have as much articles about the issue as i would expected but the area of quantum physics is where the evolution of iranian air defenses will take shape and to that the combination of other post modern technologies like plasma physics nano technology artificial swarm intelligence etc pp the combination of these technologies will be evolutionary



The US is much further along with quantum computers and systems than Iran. One needs to look at IBM, Google, FB and see their progress and then realize that private sector is usually 10-20 years BEHIND government sector in technology.

So US government (DARPA) is pretty far along

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

one could wonder how far Iran would be without the harshest sanctions
how far Iran would be if it had access to technologys like China and other countries, just unimaginable

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> one could wonder how far Iran would be without the harshest sanctions
> how far Iran would be if it had access to technologys like China and other countries, just unimaginable



Probably on same level as Turkey in Terms of ToT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Probably on same level as Turkey in Terms of ToT.


I agree. Which is NOT ideal. The sanctions have sharpened Iran. Frankly I fear the day they are lifted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1430548734685978630

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> The US is much further along with quantum computers and systems than Iran. One needs to look at IBM, Google, FB and see their progress and then realize that private sector is usually 10-20 years BEHIND government sector in technology.
> 
> So US government (DARPA) is pretty far along


still it claims to have better technology but the usa is on the decline and iran is on the rise so lets see for how long they can claim the throne as i always say
while one is brought up with luxury and care and is thrown bewildered into a dark pit another is raised from the same pit to a throne where a bejewelled crown is placed in his head because the world is carelessly handing out both pleasure and painful ruin and has no need of us and our doing

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

some people say iran needs basically close in systems like tor or pantsir and i had to laugh because they dont know how much iran can iron out any air target and turn the air into a burning melting nightmare so again here a few of very simple old school systems which are all over iran even in cities you find them pretty much in all parts of large cities but iran has these things everywhere let alone more modern systems






























- YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.




www.youtube.com




sorry for the iranians who find this to be old news i just wanted to point out the immense saturation of systems in iranian a2ad´s

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> Probably on same level as Turkey in Terms of ToT.


just my opinion but irans a2ad is more impenetrable than the american norad and not many countries can claim that and give the usa a hard job to prove the opposite even if turkey for example buyed s400 and had them all over the place it would still not be as impenetrable as iran is because its again a saturation issue of systems and russia itself has in the western part a very high saturation which brings them certainly to a point where they can also claim to be on top

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> one could wonder how far Iran would be without the harshest sanctions
> how far Iran would be if it had access to technologys like China and other countries, just unimaginable


america does geo politics but it couldnt do much against china in the past and neither could it do much against iran so these two ancient civilization states because they are the global precursors and i could widen the issue out but to put it simple all modern technologies are one way or another based on concepts produced by iranian polymaths and iran will again bring back golden ages of intellectual and technological advance while america and the west in general only bring technological dark ages and the most usual thing about them is that every advance comes with 10 steps backwards in our humanity


Draco.IMF said:


> one could wonder how far Iran would be without the harshest sanctions
> how far Iran would be if it had access to technologys like China and other countries, just unimaginable


you really can try to prove me wrong with my statements that the whole technologies used are based on things we iranians invented and what happened is basically all of that got taken and put to work but that doesnt mean that they did it good and that we cant do it better because surely we can be more sustainable in what we do to begin with something which might look simple and small something called sustainability in all matters even our weapons should work for a decade atleast without having to be touched air defense systems everything has to be sustainable from a-z it doesnt matter really
just to put it simple iranian civilization has a whole own concept of sustainability its a concept of rebirth yearly we have it celebrated in our festival called nowruz which is the persian new year but also the whole idea of simorgh many say the name annoys them has deep meaning for iranians it means the rebirth of the power and here i must remind iran was the top dog in the world when it comes to technologies being between west and east for many millenia and is used to be in that position and its feeling very uneasy outside that position

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Amin Bactria said:


> still it claims to have better technology but the usa is on the decline and iran is on the rise so lets see for how long they can claim the throne as i always say



US is not “on the decline” in any significant way unless being compared to China which is a completely different story. Iran is hardly “on the rise” given its 400B economy and other economic metrics.

They should never be compared as US is a superpower and Iran is a regional power. One has nearly 400M population another is barely 85M. Apples to oranges here. No point in comparing the two anymore than you would compare an airplane and a car.

Iran needs to focus on Iran and many of its problems are self inflicted and internal and can be fixed with reform and smart initiatives. Let’s see if Raisi government can be the one to deliver such change.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

TheImmortal said:


> US is not “on the decline” in any significant way unless being compared to China which is a completely different story. Iran is hardly “on the rise” given its 400B economy and other economic metrics.
> 
> They should never be compared as US is a superpower and Iran is a regional power. One has nearly 400M population another is barely 85M. Apples to oranges here. No point in comparing the two anymore than you would compare an airplane and a car.
> 
> Iran needs to focus on Iran and many of its problems are self inflicted and internal and can be fixed with reform and smart initiatives. Let’s see if Raisi government can be the one to deliver such change.


the usa can have 1 billion and still be on decline so please spare us your nonsense if you talk about apples and oranges tell me how your arithmetic exercise here is anything but that because to me it looks as if you dont even understand how you ignore the issues themselves by talking about sideline nonsense issues which are based on egocentric self perception btw this page here shows pretty much that atleast when it comes to air defense systems than iran is rising rapidly and soon heading to the top 3 position

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Draco.IMF said:


> S-400 export or russian version..


export version it will be more capable export version

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> US is not “on the decline” in any significant way unless being compared to China which is a completely different story. Iran is hardly “on the rise” given its 400B economy and other economic metrics.
> 
> They should never be compared as US is a superpower and Iran is a regional power. One has nearly 400M population another is barely 85M. Apples to oranges here. No point in comparing the two anymore than you would compare an airplane and a car.
> 
> Iran needs to focus on Iran and many of its problems are self inflicted and internal and can be fixed with reform and smart initiatives. Let’s see if Raisi government can be the one to deliver such change.


Your assessment of the US is again manifestly incorrect. Your error starts with 'One has nearly 400M population'. The US is deeply fragmented socially, politically, and economically. Ethnically too. As such the size of the population has little relevance.

One needs to go no further than the name: 'United States' and the national tagline 'The American Experiment', that are thrown around as a measure of strength, to grasp that the US had a 'built-in' fragmentation and, as such, is cobbled together under a system that is ostensibly failing.

The current state of the US, however, indicates not only decline but its trajectory is also a harbinger of future deep decline and collapse. Even the US with all it technological and dollar power cannot sustain this trajectory indefinitely. The rise of foreign adversaries and their challenge to the dollar which is the main fuel of US might accelerates this. I can come up with many more serious challenges the US is facing that other countries do not. The argument is no longer 'if' but 'when'.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> The argument is no longer 'if' but 'when'.



Yes, what a profound prediction...empires don’t last forever....in other news....sky is blue.

US Empire even if this is the moment where one can call the US peak power and prosperity, “collapse” could take a hundred or hundreds of years, especially given its economic status and holder of many of the worlds most valuable companies and technologies.

Furthermore, the population figure was to show that Iran shouldn’t be compared to US in terms of power projection and economic status. They are in different leagues. So I am not sure why people have this obsession to Compare the two countries.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

jauk said:


> Your assessment of the US is again manifestly incorrect. Your error starts with 'One has nearly 400M population'. The US is deeply fragmented socially, politically, and economically. Ethnically too. As such the size of the population has little relevance.
> 
> One needs to go no further than the name: 'United States' and the national tagline 'The American Experiment', that are thrown around as a measure of strength, to grasp that the US had a 'built-in' fragmentation and, as such, is cobbled together under a system that is ostensibly failing.
> 
> The current state of the US, however, indicates not only decline but its trajectory is also a harbinger of future deep decline and collapse. Even the US with all it technological and dollar power cannot sustain this trajectory indefinitely. The rise of foreign adversaries and their challenge to the dollar which is the main fuel of US might accelerates this. I can come up with many more serious challenges the US is facing that other countries do not. The argument is no longer 'if' but 'when'.


maybe explain to him how overpopulated india cant produce sanitation facilities XD


TheImmortal said:


> Yes, what a profound prediction...empires don’t last forever....in other news....sky is blue.
> 
> US Empire even if this is the moment where one can call the US peak power and prosperity, “collapse” could take a hundred or hundreds of years, especially given its economic status and holder of many of the worlds most valuable companies and technologies.
> 
> Furthermore, the population figure was to show that Iran shouldn’t be compared to US in terms of power projection and economic status. They are in different leagues. So I am not sure why people have this obsession to Compare the two countries.


you are just laughable with your childish misconception and no american empire collapses right as we speak but be it that way this is a thread on iranian air defenses get your american nonsense out of here you are irrelevant

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Amin Bactria said:


> get your american nonsense out of here you are irrelevant



I’m Persian, do more business in Iran and have family in IRGC. Been on this board much longer than you have. Have no idea who you are or care to know.

So continue your “analysis“ (if we can even call it that). No point in arguing with a child (or worse a delusional man).

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Angry Angry:
1


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Yes, what a profound prediction...empires don’t last forever....in other news....sky is blue.
> 
> US Empire even if this is the moment where one can call the US peak power and prosperity, “collapse” could take a hundred or hundreds of years, especially given its economic status and holder of many of the worlds most valuable companies and technologies.
> 
> Furthermore, the population figure was to show that Iran shouldn’t be compared to US in terms of power projection and economic status. They are in different leagues. So I am not sure why people have this obsession to Compare the two countries.


Of course one can dismiss predictions of demise in repose like you have ...or perhaps do better with counterexamples. Perhaps the 1960s come to mind where social political fractures such as the equal rights movement are examples. Although, the ERM was highjacked by the white liberal class and middle class hippies. And today we have BLM, which is yet another highjacking by the white liberal class while mistreatment of blacks is more than ever before. The ERM coupled with a failed Vietnam war still led to US survival and eventually thriving. Yes, one can use that counterexample but it still falls far short of today's realities.

Or one can dig deeper and submit the US civil war as a counterexample where a country still struggling to root out the last vestiges of colonialism was economically fractured and being meddled with by foreign powers like France and Britain. The US survived that too and its economy flowered albeit a deep wound was left which remains to this day. Yes, that gets one closer but still neglects tectonic shifts the US is experiencing today.

But why is today different? What are the new realities? What are those tectonic shifts? There are several:

1. Reduction of size and reach of the central government ('federal' government). With the reduction of tax revenue the US is behaving more like a confederacy than a federation. In an economic sense the federal government is looked at more and more as a cost center by states providing well defined services such as defense and monetary policy. The federal government abdicated it's role as a leader in economy, health, research, welfare and social justice long ago. The US is already behind in AI and even soon space due to this lack of central vision that for example China and Iran have.
2. The 'internet'/social media have come to be the poison of the masses. In the US far more than anywhere else. One can easily draw a direct line between the Jan 6th attack on government institutions and social media. The rapid spread of uncontrolled information has proven highly destructive. Jan 6th was sent underground not quelled or defeated. Note, the people are well armed like no place else. Stay tuned.
3. The dollar like never before is under concerted attack by nations in addition to that of cryptocurrency. The dollar is *the* fundamental lever of US power. Not technology or military power.

So no, the prediction of demise is not based on crackpotish predictions you simplistically alluded to

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> Of course one can dismiss predictions of demise in repose like you have ...or perhaps do better with counterexamples. Perhaps the 1960s come to mind where social political fractures such as the equal rights movement are examples. Although, the ERM was highjacked by the white liberal class and middle class hippies. And today we have BLM, which is yet another highjacking by the white liberal class while mistreatment of blacks is more than ever before. The ERM coupled with a failed Vietnam war still led to US survival and eventually thriving. Yes, one can use that counterexample but it still falls far short of today's realities.
> 
> Or one can dig deeper and submit the US civil war as a counterexample where a country still struggling to root out the last vestiges of colonialism was economically fractured and being meddled with by foreign powers like France and Britain. The US survived that too and its economy flowered albeit a deep wound was left which remains to this day. Yes, that gets one closer but still neglects tectonic shifts the US is experiencing today.
> 
> But why is today different? What are the new realities? What are those tectonic shifts? There are several:
> 
> 1. Reduction of size and reach of the central government ('federal' government). With the reduction of tax revenue the US is behaving more like a confederacy than a federation. In an economic sense the federal government is looked at more and more as a cost center by states providing well defined services such as defense and monetary policy. The federal government abdicated it's role as a leader in economy, health, research, welfare and social justice long ago. The US is already behind in AI and even soon space due to this lack of central vision that for example China and Iran have.
> 2. The 'internet'/social media have come to be the poison of the masses. In the US far more than anywhere else. One can easily draw a direct line between the Jan 6th attack on government institutions and social media. The rapid spread of uncontrolled information has proven highly destructive. Jan 6th was sent underground not quelled or defeated. Note, the people are well armed like no place else. Stay tuned.
> 3. The dollar like never before is under concerted attack by nations in addition to that of cryptocurrency. The dollar is *the* fundamental lever of US power. Not technology or military power.
> 
> So no, the prediction of demise is not based on crackpotish predictions you simplistically alluded to



US has gone thru Jim Crow, Segregation, Mafia at its peak, ERM, 2 World Wars, A Cold War, Vitenam, 9/11, 07 subprime mortgage crisis, and a global pandemic.

My point which apparently went over your head is that every empire has its death some tragic and some more mundane (end of British Empire....last I checked Britain is still a stable and wealthy industrialized nation). However, if you think that time is imminent be prepared to wait potentially several lifetimes till you see it.

Because when (not if) China takes#1 economic power spot from US. US as a reserve currency, economic juggernaut, and investment safe haven will continue. That means US can ride the coat tails of its glory days For decades to come.

Furthermore, in some bizarro world that the US empire just fizzles out completely and fast like a supernova then you should know the entire world including Iran would fuel the negative effects. Because you cannot simply remove a economic superpower to global growth in this interconnected global economy and expect the world to still function.

So these doom and gloom predications of US demise if true will not happen overnight or likely within the near future. Thus my original point still stands. Iran should focus on Iran and assume a world where US is a dominant power till at least 2100.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1430552355901255690

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

yavar said:


> export version it will be more capable export version


I remember you told us in laboratorium Iran has one which its on pair with russian S-400 including cold launch technology


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> I remember you told us in laboratorium Iran has one which its on pair with russian S-400 including cold launch technology


iran is moving towards capabilities to challenge the s500 so the next upgrade of the bavar will already be a great challenge to s400


Draco.IMF said:


> I remember you told us in laboratorium Iran has one which its on pair with russian S-400 including cold launch technology


starting acceleration and greater precision and range is what iran is working on as next step meaning the next gen bavar system will get upgraded not much later to the level of s500 in other areas it lacks behind and iran will lack behind for max 5 years until it challenges russia so its quite possible that iran has something challenging the s500 in capabilities and specially in quantity before 2025

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> I remember you told us in laboratorium Iran has one which its on pair with russian S-400 including cold launch technology


some people might underestimate the amount of profession in iran in this part of technologies considering that rocket science is among the top science fields of the modernist era and only a hand of nations actually did have the capabilities in a serious way i can say that iran is without a doubt today not just in the top 5 anymore it basically outmatches europe and america soon being in the top 3 list after that and here i have to mention iranian rocket motors are highest level of tech and mass produced in extreme large numbers the carbon composite and other materials some based on nano tech used on the body are also very high tech the radar technology and the advances there its all undoubtably rising so fast that it challenges the greatest powers on the planet and some of them are extremely uneasy with it
arash kamangir teaches us that even if iran would ever in future lose a battle its arrow can still win the war

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> iran is moving towards capabilities to challenge the s500



Iran lacks space observation (satellites), due all respect, but I think S-500 is maybe ~ 2 decades ahead of the most potent Bavar version Iran has


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> Iran lacks space observation (satellites), due all respect, but I think S-500 is maybe ~ 2-3 decades ahead of the most potent Bavar version Iran has


this is what irans enemies say about irans space motors technology these days

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> some people might underestimate the amount of profession in iran in this part of technologies considering that rocket science is among the top science fields of the modernist era and only a hand of nations actually did have the capabilities in a serious way i can say that iran is without a doubt today not just in the top 5 anymore it basically outmatches europe and america soon being in the top 3 list after that and here i have to mention iranian rocket motors are highest level of tech and mass produced in extreme large numbers the carbon composite and other materials some based on nano tech used on the body are also very high tech the radar technology and the advances there its all undoubtably rising so fast that it challenges the greatest powers on the planet and some of them are extremely uneasy with it
> arash kamangir teaches us that even if iran would ever in future lose a battle its arrow can still win the war



if Iran is in the top 5 in rocket science as you say we would see heavier payloads in orbit, right?

Maybe it was postponed due political reasons, but lets put firstly an satelliite into Orbit which weights more than a washmachine and later we can claim how far Iran is..

till now we saw a lot of failed launches and the last sucessfull one was from IRGC, a small satellite...


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> if Iran is in the top 5 in rocket science as you say we would see heavier payloads in orbit, right?
> 
> Maybe it was postponed due political reasons, but lets put firstly an satelliite into Orbit which weights more than a washmachine and later we can calim how far Iran is..


iran is developing high tech systems and you talk about loadout or payload which is absurd because iranian micro satellites will one day become nano satellite clusters that is how iran works and certainly iran wont try to make things larger when its smarter to make them smaller


----------



## Stryker1982

Amin Bactria said:


> this is what irans enemies say about irans space motors technology these days


Their has been tremendous progress for sure, but we are not quite there yet and I think his estimate is reasonable. We have alot of way to go on this. The Noor satellite was a good start, but our good friend @Draco.IMF is correct. The speed of progress is slow and weight is low. _*Although, I must say, I'd rather see smaller, lighter satellites but dozens of them in a large network. *_Considering Iran has advanced enemies, large and heavy satellites in small numbers will be a self-created mistake, and it would be better to operate a more resilient network of lighter and smaller satellites that can be launched quickly and replaced quickly. Let's get ahead of the problem. 

Iran needs to develop itself faster in space, much much faster and construct a space based network of small satellites, looking at the current focus of the Raisi administration, I was quite glad to see a heavy focus on the space sector. I look forward to these developments.



Draco.IMF said:


> if Iran is in the top 5 in rocket science as you say we would see heavier payloads in orbit, right?
> 
> Maybe it was postponed due political reasons, but lets put firstly an satelliite into Orbit which weights more than a washmachine and later we can claim how far Iran is..
> 
> till now we saw a lot of failed launches and the last sucessfull one was from IRGC, a small satellite...



I am optimistic we will see much more progress in this sector than ever before during this new Admin. They seem to understand the importance unlike the previous admin.
I hope you guys are excited to see unveilings of the Bavar-375 soon! Probably next week.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jauk

Stryker1982 said:


> Their has been tremendous progress for sure, but we are not quite there yet and I think his estimate is reasonable. We have alot of way to go on this. The Noor satellite was a good start, but our good friend @Draco.IMF is correct. The speed of progress is slow and weight is low. _*Although, I must say, I'd rather see smaller, lighter satellites but dozens of them in a large network. *_Considering Iran has advanced enemies, large and heavy satellites in small numbers will be a self-created mistake, and it would be better to operate a more resilient network of lighter and smaller satellites that can be launched quickly and replaced quickly. Let's get ahead of the problem.
> 
> Iran needs to develop itself faster in space, much much faster and construct a space based network of small satellites, looking at the current focus of the Raisi administration, I was quite glad to see a heavy focus on the space sector. I look forward to these developments.
> 
> 
> 
> I am optimistic we will see much more progress in this sector than ever before during this new Admin. They seem to understand the importance unlike the previous admin.
> I hope you guys are excited to see unveilings of the Bavar-375 soon! Probably next week.



"Let's get ahead of the problem.". Bingo. Leapfrogging is key. Privatization might speed up development as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*Russians are AAAAAAAngry* 😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬 *because you know God forbid we compare Bavar-375 to S-400 (( Israelis didn't react but sure Russians did )) read the article and you will see why i said what i said about Russia's reacting.*




https://svpressa.ru/war21/article/308115/?rss=1&utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashool

skyshadow said:


> *Russians are AAAAAAAngry* 😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬 *because you know God forbid we compare Bavar-375 to S-400 (( Israelis didn't react but sure Russians did )) read the article and you will see why i said what i said about Russia's reacting.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://svpressa.ru/war21/article/308115/?rss=1&utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop


the writer crying and even burning its show us our bavar 373 is something so powerful they want to show it like that

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

ashool said:


> the writer crying and even burning its show us our bavar 373 is something so powerful they want to show it like that


If I didnt know any better I`d have thought that it was written by an american,or a eurovassal,or an israeli,and interestingly enough the author even quotes a supposed "American military expert Bruce Byers*".*
Personally,I`m of the opinion that putins russia is virtually just as rotten and untrustworthy as imperial americana and its motley crew of vassals when it comes to iran.
Even at the very best of times,the russians were ALWAYS a day late and a ruble short....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

Sineva said:


> If I didnt know any better I`d have thought that it was written by an american,or a eurovassal,or an israeli,and interestingly enough the author even quotes a supposed "American military expert Bruce Byers*".*
> Personally,I`m of the opinion that putins russia is virtually just as rotten and untrustworthy as imperial americana and its motley crew of vassals when it comes to iran.
> Even at the very best of times,the russians were ALWAYS a day late and a ruble short....


Neither the west nor far east will ever be Iran's true friends and Iran needs to dominate its own region as it always has and keeps mosts eggs in its own basket.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Amin Bactria

WudangMaster said:


> Neither the west nor far east will ever be Iran's true friends and Iran needs to dominate its own region as it always has and keeps mosts eggs in its own basket.


china and italy are important for iran so iran will continue to try to wield some kind of influence towards them
when it comes to russia than i describe them usually as other side of the coin when the anglo saxon madness was one side of the coin the slavic madness was the other side and that still continues to this day
iran has much more hope in cooperating with south american and african christian people than it has with the orthodox christians because they still didnt change a thing maybe they need to be humiliated in a defeat once again in future to change their hybris who knows but i believe they will certainly without a doubt get involved in wars again and again in future and at some point it will hit them at home
iran does cooperate with russia as we speak but at the same time russia does only care about russia and iran cant cooperate in a serious way with those wielding such a mentality which is theirs
iran should put priority on neighbors and after that islamic countries and after that revolutionary countries and last but certainly not least the oppressed and global south these are irans partners

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> china and italy are important for iran so iran will continue to try to wield some kind of influence towards them
> when it comes to russia than i describe them usually as other side of the coin when the anglo saxon madness was one side of the coin the slavic madness was the other side and that still continues to this day
> iran has much more hope in cooperating with south american and african christian people than it has with the orthodox christians because they still didnt change a thing maybe they need to be humiliated in a defeat once again in future to change their hybris who knows but i believe they will certainly without a doubt get involved in wars again and again in future and at some point it will hit them at home
> iran does cooperate with russia as we speak but at the same time russia does only care about russia and iran cant cooperate in a serious way with those wielding such a mentality which is theirs
> iran should put priority on neighbors and after that islamic countries and after that revolutionary countries and last but certainly not least the oppressed and global south these are irans partners


russia is sadly in Zion hands

but we all have to thank them for f..ing up the S-300 deal back in 2007, otherwise Iran wouldnt be such an self sufficient AD power as it is today, so yeah, thanks russia 

China is also not raliable

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## ashool

Draco.IMF said:


> russia is sadly in Zion hands
> 
> but we all have to thank them for f..ing up the S-300 deal back in 2007, otherwise Iran wouldnt be such an self sufficient AD power as it is today, so yeah, thanks russia
> 
> China is also not raliable


no one we can not depend on only ourselves
THE SUPERME LEADER (WE CAN ) ITS GOLD WORDS FROM OUR GREAT ONE

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> russia is sadly in Zion hands
> 
> but we all have to thank them for f..ing up the S-300 deal back in 2007, otherwise Iran wouldnt be such an self sufficient AD power as it is today, so yeah, thanks russia
> 
> China is also not raliable


you are mistaken with china it is reliable for iran since the revolution china was reliable and this is really an issue which is not new china always is reliable as a trading partner and never as a military partner and iran doesnt expect more than trade with china to begin with
most of the technology transfer for iranian air defense systems are from china so again here are you mistaken with suggesting that russia was such a help by sending a system because they didnt really transfer know how ever


Draco.IMF said:


> russia is sadly in Zion hands
> 
> but we all have to thank them for f..ing up the S-300 deal back in 2007, otherwise Iran wouldnt be such an self sufficient AD power as it is today, so yeah, thanks russia
> 
> China is also not raliable


the ruskis besides the propaganda pompage are really not worth for much they dont cooperate with iran even closely as much as china does let me remind you iran gave the ruskis the rq 170 for reverse engineering and the ruskis did only complete their deal of the s300 more they didnt do and they sold the identification codes later on which was aimed to make the system useless in case of zionist or american attack so they betrayed iran badly and basically an enemy could make himself look like a civilian plane for this s300 which turned out worthless at that moment

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

ashool said:


> no one we can not depend on only ourselves
> THE SUPERME LEADER (WE CAN ) ITS GOLD WORDS FROM OUR GREAT ONE


i agree hazrat agha emam khamenei is like the only reasonable voice out there and todays world would be lacking any reason if this voice didnt exist that much to this issue and when it comes to the air defenses iran can only rely on itself its that easy and its really something iran can easily learn by looking a little bit at its history

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

skyshadow said:


> *Russians are AAAAAAAngry* 😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬 *because you know God forbid we compare Bavar-375 to S-400 (( Israelis didn't react but sure Russians did )) read the article and you will see why i said what i said about Russia's reacting.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://svpressa.ru/war21/article/308115/?rss=1&utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop


Russians are right, they have every right to be angry. Problem is, we don't give a shit about it. 

I hope they completely disappoint IRIAF with SU30s deal. That is when we should celebrate, since itd be the moment IRIAF will try to stand on its own feet.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> That is when we should celebrate, since itd be the moment IRIAF will try to stand on its own feet.



IRIAF cannot “stand“ on its own feet with a budget of a less than 500M USD. Cannot expect miracles to happen when proper funding isn’t given.

As for Bavar it remains to be seen when we will see serial production as Gen 1 doesn’t seem to have ever reached serial production (for whatever reason). So let’s see if Gen 2 gets there.

I compare Bavar 1 & 2 to Sejill 1 & 2. Sejill 1 never saw mass production and underwent modifications shortly after its unveiling with Sejil 2 being announced with 2 years of S-1 IIRC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

TheImmortal said:


> IRIAF cannot “stand“ on its own feet with a budget of a less than 500M USD. Cannot expect miracles to happen when proper funding isn’t given.
> 
> As for Bavar it remains to be seen when we will see serial production as Gen 1 doesn’t seem to have ever reached serial production (for whatever reason). So let’s see if Gen 2 gets there.
> 
> I compare Bavar 1 & 2 to Sejill 1 & 2. Sejill 1 never saw mass production and underwent modifications shortly after its unveiling with Sejil 2 being announced with 2 years of S-1 IIRC.


This lame logic of "we cannot" "its hard" "its impossible" "only white can do it" "we are screwed" annoys me the most. 

Without billions of billions of billions, we can't do anything. Its a lie and only bunch of justification of laziness. Where there is a will, there is a way.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Amin Bactria said:


> you are mistaken with china it is reliable for iran since the revolution china was reliable and this is really an issue which is not new china always is reliable as a trading partner and never as a military partner and iran doesnt expect more than trade with china to begin with
> most of the technology transfer for iranian air defense systems are from china so again here are you mistaken with suggesting that russia was such a help by sending a system because they didnt really transfer know how ever


well there was some problem over c802. by the way iranian airdefence influenced as much from usa design as it influenced from china or russia


Muhammed45 said:


> Russians are right, they have every right to be angry. Problem is, we don't give a shit about it.
> 
> I hope they completely disappoint IRIAF with SU30s deal. That is when we should celebrate, since itd be the moment IRIAF will try to stand on its own feet.


I don't get being angry there , when you compare your product you compare it with a good one not a shitty one , If I were russian I'd be angry if it was compared with patriot

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Muhammed45 said:


> This lame logic of "we cannot" "its hard" "its impossible" "only white can do it" "we are screwed" annoys me the most.
> 
> Without billions of billions of billions, we can't do anything. Its a lie and only bunch of justification of laziness. Where there is a will, there is a way.



Without the billions and billions available to sepah, their would not be this level of deterrence. Funding is important, planning is important

I agree with what you say, the IRAIF can come up with a comprehensive 10 year plan, but at the end of the day, they need a certain level of funding to achieve these plans.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> This lame logic of "we cannot" "its hard" "its impossible" "only white can do it" "we are screwed" annoys me the most.
> 
> Without billions of billions of billions, we can't do anything. Its a lie and only bunch of justification of laziness. Where there is a will, there is a way.



Infrastructure cost money. The infrastructure you need in place to mass produce manned fighters is formidable. This has already been discussed many times on this board by many members.

This is why Iran’s drone program is so advanced you don’t need the same infrastructure or rigorous R&D for a drone as you do for a manned fighter. It’s easy to experiment with different designs and combinations.

Again, the money allocated to Iran’s Air Force is enough to pay personnel, do repairs, do overhauls, pay for munitions, subsystems, drones, and low grade r&d into future systems.

To actually build a manned fighter jet program will require upfront investing in the billions (nobody is saying “billions of billions of billions “) since Iran has very little infrastructure in place for the production of a heavy/medium titanium based fighter jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

Amin Bactria said:


> iran gave the ruskis the rq 170 for reverse engineering


why they give them rq-170 if Iran got sh.t in return? not a clever move, if this story is true

if they wanted to take a look on the rq-170, iran should get the maximum return out of it (for example, transfer of technology for engines like AL-41,.....)

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> why they give them rq-170 if Iran got sh.t in return? not a clever move, if this story is true
> 
> if they wanted to take a look on the rq-170, iran should get the maximum return out of it (for example, transfer of technology for engines like AL-41,.....)


why are you talking even i dont expect you to understand irans considerations specially i dont understand you to care about our escatology and when you dont know why russia than why you talk and i give you even a hint exactly 1 millenia ago christians "reformed" or rather corrupted part of the religion called christianity islam says dont care or listen nor work with those corrupted ones russia isnt part of those corrupted therefore muslims in general kind of have to keep a relation open


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432602102442991617

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

the upgrades of the entire missile arsenal of iran is including new materials for the missile body which gives these missiles longer range more speed stealth and resistance against heat which basically includes high powered lasers which are nothing but fancy infrared lasers at best since the usa and zionists lack capabilities for serious post modern systems








Home-made Mersad-16 missile system tested successfully


TEHRAN, Aug. 31 (MNA) – On the eve of Army Air Defense Day, the Iranian Army successfully test-fired a new generation of the homegrown Mersad-16 missile system in the Dasht-e Kavir in the north-central province of Semnan.




en.mehrnews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

WudangMaster said:


>


sadly this is an old clip, not a video from the latest test


Amin Bactria said:


> why are you talking even i dont expect you to understand irans considerations specially i dont understand you to care about our escatology and when you dont know why russia than why you talk and i give you even a hint exactly 1 millenia ago christians "reformed" or rather corrupted part of the religion called christianity islam says dont care or listen nor work with those corrupted ones russia isnt part of those corrupted therefore muslims in general kind of have to keep a relation open


I dont understand your answer

I gave you a logical reason why I wouldnt share RQ-170 technology with russia without getting something similar in return, and you gave me some kind of aggresive response which has nothing to do with the topic...


----------



## SalarHaqq

Draco.IMF said:


> sadly this is an old clip, not a video from the latest test



They're wearing masks. Less than one and a half years old therefore. Have we seen it before (I don't remember)?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

SalarHaqq said:


> They're wearing masks. Less than one and a half to two years old therefore. Have we seen it before (I don't remember)?


Also, I have never seen publicised footage of a coordinated action between a local air defense unit and one of the main headquarters in taking down a target.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

SalarHaqq said:


> They're wearing masks. Less than one and a half to two years old therefore. Have we seen it before (I don't remember)?


at least 10 months? look at this clip






the latest mersad was tested today/few days? ago....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

What is the significance of the optimized version? It is related to software?

Edit: Looks like a different missile?


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> What is the significance of the optimized version? It is related to software?
> 
> Edit: Looks like a different missile?


The shalamcheh was replaced a while back and it seems mersad is exclusively using the miniature sayyad missiles seen a while back. At least the production of shalamcheh has probably come to an end while leftovers are still being used by the older hawk batteries.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Stryker1982 said:


> What is the significance of the optimized version? It is related to software?
> 
> Edit: Looks like a different missile?


we dont have any videos/pictures from the latest version
as of yet, only recycled pictures from the Mersad-16 test last year October are circulating


*More infos on the latest test:*

آقای خوش‌قلب معاون عملیات نپاجا اعلام کرده ویژگی تست امروز، واگذاری هدف از یک مرکز کنترل فرماندهی در فاصله چند
صد کیلومتری با ایجاد ارتباطات امن و رمزگذاری‌شده و اجرای آتش در یک محیط کاملا Passive بوده.

*"Mr. Khoshghalb, Napaja Deputy Chief of Operations, stated that the test feature today was the transfer of the target from a command control center a few hundred kilometers away by establishing secure and encrypted communications and firing in a completely passive environment."*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> we dont have any videos/pictures from the latest version
> as of yet, only recycled pictures from the Mersad-16 test last year October are circulating
> 
> 
> *More infos on the latest test:*
> 
> آقای خوش‌قلب معاون عملیات نپاجا اعلام کرده ویژگی تست امروز، واگذاری هدف از یک مرکز کنترل فرماندهی در فاصله چند
> صد کیلومتری با ایجاد ارتباطات امن و رمزگذاری‌شده و اجرای آتش در یک محیط کاملا Passive بوده.
> 
> *"Mr. Khoshghalb, Napaja Deputy Chief of Operations, stated that the test feature today was the transfer of the target from a command control center a few hundred kilometers away by establishing secure and encrypted communications and firing in a completely passive environment."*



Ah, so seems like optimized Mersad no longer needs to rely on it's own battalion level radar and can receive targeting information from other sources to avoid revealing it's position by activating it's own radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Draco.IMF said:


> "Mr. Khoshghalb, Napaja Deputy Chief of Operations, stated that the test feature today was the transfer of the target from a command control center a few hundred kilometers away by establishing secure and encrypted communications and firing in a completely passive environment."


That would explain the back and forth from the two places in the video. 



Stryker1982 said:


> Ah, so seems like optimized Mersad no longer needs to rely on it's own battalion level radar and can receive targeting information from other sources to avoid revealing it's position by activating it's own radar.


That is one of the benefits of the national air defense grid and also the method by which the rq4 was brought down; in theory any system connected to the national grid should be able to engage targets this way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*It's Air defense day babyyyyyyyyyy , Today we could see Bavar-375 or Bavar-373 simulator or an super long range Mersad-16 sam system the word on streets is that the new Mersad will have a range of up to 100 kms.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Integrated network is multi layered network,you have regional C command centers ,these networks act as hubs and every regional hub has multiple intergrated air defense networks IADS,,than under every IADS you have different mobile units,static radars,passive recivers..and what ever you deploy....air defense system has multiple aspects,..target detection,tracking/acquivision and than missile guidance. Search radars cover 360 degree to detect target,but these radars are not very precise ,so than engagement radar will join ,in sector mode and it will track target and provide precise data for missile guidance,,some air defence systems add also redundancy ,and almost all have multiple guidance and targeting methods ...From this,it is clear how much benefit integrated network provides,air defense unit at fire position,can obtain all data it need to fire missile without turning on search and engagement radars,than it can fire missile and guide it...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

sanel1412 said:


> Integrated network is multi layered network,you have regional C command centers ,these networks act as hubs and every regional hub has multiple intergrated air defense networks IADS,,than under every IADS you have different mobile units,static radars,passive recivers..and what ever you deploy....air defense system has multiple aspects,..target detection,tracking/acquivision and than missile guidance. Search radars cover 360 degree to detect target,but these radars are not very precise ,so than engagement radar will join ,in sector mode and it will track target and provide precise data for missile guidance,,some air defence systems add also redundancy ,and almost all have multiple guidance and targeting methods ...From this,it is clear how much benefit integrated network provides,air defense unit at fire position,can obtain all data it need to fire missile without turning on search and engagement radars,than it can fire missile and guide it...


yesterday Iran army air defense units said; for the first time we detected and destroyed a target hundreds of kilometres away using only passive mode


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432762878948487176

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

*New Radar - "Alborz"*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432936069801168898

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

Stryker1982 said:


> *New Radar - "Alborz"*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432936069801168898




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432944035744948224

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432944875570450434

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

arab_fighter said:


> *how many names and specs will they announce for the same 2D radar? very hard to take their claims seriously!*


As many as they like! Are we supposed to take you seriously when you call a 3D PESA radar "2D radar"?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432990805959094277

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432995404258361348

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

arab_fighter said:


> *the first time they unveiled this same crudely made prototype it was 2D and named Arash, now 3D & PESA with a new name after adding missing parts (to the SAME radar prototype)??
> not my problem that they forget details of their claims ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


have you considered the new radar have 3 time the size of the Arash

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432998767096123394

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433000010929647618

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

Arab farter is here to analyze something that he and his ancestor along with his next generations have to only dream about. Like the old saying goes two guys never get tired, the one who farts and the one who rants

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433017279265005568
Dezful is the name of the Iranian M-1 tour

Dezful Air_Defense missile system will have a range of 12 km and an altitude of 6 km with special task of countering cruise missiles. 
A distinctive feature of this system is the low reload time of the missile and it is provided to the army air defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

Draco.IMF said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433017279265005568
> Dezful is the name of the Iranian M-1 tour
> 
> Dezful Air_Defense missile system will have a range of 12 km and an altitude of 6 km with special task of countering cruise missiles.
> A distinctive feature of this system is the low reload time of the missile and it is provided to the army air defense.


Looks like a nice upgrade was done on Tor and given the fact that Russians refused to upgrade Iranian Tor M1 to M2 standards, IRIADF had to do the job on its own. Great

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

To ranians:

This "arab_fighter" is an Israeli..he confessed in other thread himself when caught by another member....He is too scared and ashamed to put up his own flags...keep that in mind who you are talking to.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

aryobarzan said:


> To ranians:
> 
> This "arab_fighter" is an Israeli..he confessed in other thread himself when caught by another member....He is too scared and ashamed to put up his own flags...keep that in mind who you are talk to.


Just put the jabroni garbage on ignore like I did when it started trolling about a page back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zectech

aryobarzan said:


> To ranians:
> 
> This "arab_fighter" is an Israeli..he confessed in other thread himself when caught by another member....He is too scared and ashamed to put up his own flags...keep that in mind who you are talk to.



Probably a miltiary op to get Iranians to reveal secrets by mocking their systems. This thing could be worse than your typical hasbara troll:






usa runs the same ops on Chinese to mock Chinese equipment and make idiots feel worthless unless they put secrets online on how exactly Chinese military equipment work.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

arab_fighter said:


> I was making fun of your accusations when I said I'm Israeli, you can't be this dense
> wherever I reply you follow me claiming I'm an israeli agent


I suggest you put up those star of David flags and Iranians will have honest interaction with you (as some Israeli members already do)...no reason to stay in the shadows.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Maula Jatt

arab_fighter said:


> *how I'm I the troll here? I ignored the insults and childish accusations while contributing to the topic!*


your name is Arab warrior 

your flag is of British virgin Island and Puerto Ricco 

quit playin bro...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

arab_fighter said:


> *the first time they unveiled this same crudely made prototype it was 2D and named Arash, now 3D & PESA with a new name after adding missing parts (to the SAME radar prototype)??
> not my problem that they forget details of their claims ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Arash was Gen 1
Alborz is Gen 2 upgrade

Iran usually unveils a prototype and then tests it for sometime and then sometimes before reaching a final (production type) it goes thru another upgrade based on engineers and r&d recommendations and arrive at Gen 2.

You see this happen in Sejill BM family it went from Ashura missile (prototype) directly to Sejill and within a short time Sejil 2.

You are also seeing it in Bavar family with Gen 2 coming shortly after unveiling of Gen 1 production prototype.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

zectech said:


> Probably a miltiary op to get Iranians to reveal secrets by mocking their systems. This thing could be worse than your typical hasbara troll:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> usa runs the same ops on Chinese to mock Chinese equipment and make idiots feel worthless unless they put secrets online on how exactly Chinese military equipment work.


At least the ccp has its own army that counter these hasbara insects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> sadly this is an old clip, not a video from the latest test
> 
> I dont understand your answer
> 
> I gave you a logical reason why I wouldnt share RQ-170 technology with russia without getting something similar in return, and you gave me some kind of aggresive response which has nothing to do with the topic...


you dont need to understand our considerations as i told you people conceptually you arent here in iran so just forget it


TheImmortal said:


> Arash was Gen 1
> Alborz is Gen 2 upgrade
> 
> Iran usually unveils a prototype and then tests it for sometime and then sometimes before reaching a final (production type) it goes thru another upgrade based on engineers and r&d recommendations and arrive at Gen 2.
> 
> You see this happen in Sejill BM family it went from Ashura missile (prototype) directly to Sejill and within a short time Sejil 2.
> 
> You are also seeing it in Bavar family with Gen 2 coming shortly after unveiling of Gen 1 production prototype.


the last decades of non revolutionary governance and of governance away from ahlulbayt designs should not be compared to what is going to happen in future

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

arab_fighter said:


> *the case of this radar is different because they just unveiled the same prototype unit on the same stand with a different name, didn't even build another one.*



the planar array set up between the two radars is significantly different. Not sure how you think it’s the same radar. But think what you want.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *this info is based on what?
> because if you speculate, yes in some cases generations of weapon systems were named differently (fateh-110 and anti-ship missiles as an example ) and in many others, they literally just unveil the same system with a different name as an achievement! goes without mentioning the fake systems and imported ones ...
> 
> the case of this radar is different because they just unveiled the same prototype unit on the same stand with a different name, didn't even build another one.*


go and pet some camels and dont talk about things you dont understand

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *they're literally the same, the first one didn't have all its parts mounted on. that all
> same dents/bends everything!
> 
> 1- camels are cute I would pet a camel if I had one
> 2- what made you think I don't understand ? let's assume that I don't, would you answer me if I asked you for details on the subject we are discussing here? *


just shut up you are irrelevant more so than your masters so who are you to talk to us you lowly camel worshippers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *they're literally the same, the first one didn't have all its parts mounted on. that all
> same dents/bends everything!
> 
> 1- camels are cute I would pet a camel if I had one
> 2- what made you think I don't understand ? let's assume that I don't, would you answer me if I asked you for details on the subject we are discussing here? *


lets assume you know exactly what you are talking about it would still not change the fact that you are nobody to talk to us and you are irrelevant more again than your masters who are utter jokes you lowly one should just shut your mouth forever


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *more insults, nice
> yet I'm the Israeli agent troll *


of course you are a zionist troll you are good for nothing but that as your "arab" society is degenerating into a zionist mouthpiece as we speak and just look at yourselves you laughable jokes are worthless to west asia and more so to islam and let me tell you it will be those who you tried to oppress who will smack you into your filthy faces after you talk in future again and again just get used to the slaps they will contiue to follow you and iam sure palestinians syrians and yemenites will slap a chair on your head and make you silent with force if you blabber in their direction in future


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *what does this have to do with radars and air defense?
> i feel like I'm being attacked by zombies with the same defense mechanism (calling everyone Israeli spy) and for no reason*


so its no reason now maybe explain to us the 1000s of reasons in the last 4 decade you gave us iranians to hate you be it from your support of terrorism saddam and all what is anti iranian the support of america and the zionists you are in no position to come to any iranian issues and open your mouth so keep away from us if you want to stay safe because you jokes from the gcc fall like a house of cards if we want you to and this is not a fake issue the force behind iran it is not fake but its all more than the truth its the reality at hand


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


> *what does this have to do with radars and air defense?
> i feel like I'm being attacked by zombies with the same defence mechanism (calling everyone Israeli spy) and for no reason*


fake was when mbs was threatening iran with war and claiming he could beat us and that wasnt just fake it was a joke


arab_fighter said:


> View attachment 774799


poor slaver is threatened maybe give the people you oppress the chance to talk freely if you want gratitude from iran or respect maybe stop enslaving and oppressing people you lowly creature
btw you coming here and claiming all iranian is fake and photoshopped tell me how does the photoshop fake issues hurt you so much all of the time when they arent real so please you troll are worthless you just came in here to obstruct and at the beginning page 1 you see trolls similar stupid like you and they all got shut up so will you


----------



## Amin Bactria

arab_fighter said:


>


so you want to tell me that you arent a jew?
we will wipe west asia clean of you zionist filth so take a look at how we will come closer and closer and how we will strangle you filthy jews and lackeys burn you and eradicate you

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

arab_fighter said:


> *the first time they unveiled this same crudely made prototype it was 2D and named Arash, now 3D & PESA with a new name after adding missing parts (to the SAME radar prototype)??
> not my problem that they forget details of their claims ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


At the end of the Video you have posted, the Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defense force stated that the next step will be to Upgrade the 2D Arash into a 3D Radar!!! Clearly the Alborz is the 3D upgrade version of the Arash project. Again in your video the commander stated that he thought the 3D version would be completed in "1398" which = 2019. They are publicizing this 3D Alborz 2 years after the estimated date of the project given in your video!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> At the end of the Video you have posted, the Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defense force stated that the next step will be to Upgrade the 2D Arash into a 3D Radar!!! Clearly the Alborz is the 3D upgrade version of the Arash project. Again in your video the commander stated that he thought the 3D version would be completed in "1398" which = 2019. They are publicizing this 3D Alborz 2 years after the the given date in your video!!!


this obstructionist fake opened his account to do what he didnt talk about arab affairs he comes directly to iranian issues and blabbers nonsense so ignore that retarded creature he is probably based in tel aviv and paid to obstruct


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

arab_fighter said:


> *how I'm I the troll here? I ignored the insults and childish accusations while contributing to the topic!*





arab_fighter said:


> *they're literally the same, the first one didn't have all its parts mounted on. that all
> same dents/bends everything!
> 
> 1- camels are cute I would pet a camel if I had one
> 2- what made you think I don't understand ? let's assume that I don't, would you answer me if I asked you for details on the subject we are discussing here? *



Did you even watch the video you yourself posted? If you did you clearly did NOT understand it!


arab_fighter said:


> I feel sorry for you guys, really !!


 You are a sorry excuse of a person!


Amin Bactria said:


> this obstructionist fake opened his account to do what he didnt talk about arab affairs he comes directly to iranian issues and blabbers nonsense so ignore that retarded creature he is probably based in tel aviv and paid to obstruct


I am just pointing out what an absolute moron this guy is!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Did you even watch the video you yourself posted? If you did you clearly did NOT understand it!





Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Did you even watch the video you yourself posted? If you did you clearly did NOT understand it!
> 
> You are a sorry excuse of a person!
> 
> I am just pointing out what an absolute moron this guy is!


he wants to tell me that zionists are different than him so why is he such a slaver trash why do the zionists beg so badly to be part of this fake "arab" nonsense anti islamic agenda and why are both the same beggers and laughable jokes towards the west


----------



## Amin Bactria

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Did you even watch the video you yourself posted? If you did you clearly did NOT understand it!
> 
> You are a sorry excuse of a person!
> 
> I am just pointing out what an absolute moron this guy is!


as everybody should have noticed iam quite revolutionary ideological which means for me that this insulting trashs attacks on yemen iraq syria palestine and any other place is for me like an attack against my own family its utter insolence and by allah we will see them in ruin for that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

arab_fighter said:


> *optical illusion *


Mental Illness.


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

Is a radar of this type more suited for small drones and targets or is this meant to be some sort of ballistic missile tracker?


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> Is a radar of this type more suited for small drones and targets or is this meant to be some sort of ballistic missile tracker?


I think something alam al hoda is meant for incoming ballistic whereas these concentrate in low rcs threats at lower altitudes, though I don't see why it couldn't help tracking an incoming missile once it enters the radar's optimal range. No sure though...


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Can you ban this useless troll please .... Thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

Stryker1982 said:


> Is a radar of this type more suited for small drones and targets or is this meant to be some sort of ballistic missile tracker?


its a 3d radar it is well suited to even track bird swarms and yes low altitude tracking is specially good with such radars its pretty much part of their job


----------



## Amin Bactria

consider the radar signature of some stealth objects is smaller than that of big birds for most radars but this radar can track the smaller bird let alone the plane or drone
its pretty much a must for iran to have a serious close in weapon system to have such advanced 3d radars because mortars and other small objects can turn out to be hard to track just as stealth objects are
also i must note this is army air defense this isnt sepah air defense because sepah is already on this level they are working on more advanced technology today as mentioned before several times and the fact that the army air defense is now at this level is just a great step you cant call it anything other but great because in the world there are a few countries with such a capable a2ad china america and russia claim to be those but iran will leave them in the dust soon enough its again a conceptual issue as so many things which are making iran great are conceptual in nature and one can also call it a matter of believe and besiedes the impossibilities iran turns to possible successfully without the conceptual islamic iranian will and believe we are no differnt to anyone else on the planet as rouhani did prove well enough to us


----------



## Amin Bactria

iran has to have the strongest military on the planet because it is velayat e faqih e eslami e irani and therefore it has all anti civilizational and anti religious forces against itself today until the last day so all iranians have to do really 2 things mostly believe in their iran because there is only one of it and believe in their god because there is also only one of it and believing in what they do they will always have success this is a promise given to all of us

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

arab_fighter said:


> *>@arab_fighter makes a normal comment
> >Iranian members cry and start larping IRGC propaganda
> I'm still not responding to your insults and attacks, but don't push it too far*


You entered the Iranian Air Defense section just to keep repeating that the radar that was unveiled today is supposedly fake, give no constructive input and act surprised that you are getting attacked by Iranian members? Most of the time I simply ignore trolls instead of falling for their games and doing them a favor but it is obvious that you entered this thread with the sole purporse of provoking and picking a fight.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

To Iranians:
As I mentioned this morning this "arab_fighter" is an Israeli....the only way that he will go away is if no one communicates with him....he is not Arab.. so if you look at his name as "arab" and attack arabs..he has won..bingo..the general aim of these accounts are to get Muslim people to insult against each other...

They have used these techniques for 100 of years to start wars between people..stay alert and play smart...do not fall into the trap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

WudangMaster said:


> I think something alam al hoda is meant for incoming ballistic whereas these concentrate in low rcs threats at lower altitudes, though I don't see why it couldn't help tracking an incoming missile once it enters the radar's optimal range. No sure though...


this radar is meant for tracking all kind of objects with an active radar and certainly there are also going to be passive radars and other sensors such as optical ones but a fully saturated air defense needs anyway all kind of sensors at some point in the future iran has to get particle sensors aswell but most probably it will be satellite based because that is what you can do to detect energy weapons use and that is what the other three on top have these days already


----------



## Amin Bactria

aryobarzan said:


> To Iranians:
> As I mentioned this morning this "arab_fighter" is an Israeli....the only way that he will go away is if no one communicates with him....he is not Arab.. so if you look at his name as "arab" and attack arabs..he has won..bingo..the general aim of these accounts are to get Muslim people to insult against each other...
> 
> They have used these techniques for 100 of years to start wars between people..stay alert and play smart...do not fall into the trap.


he can be an emirati or an bahraini or any other zionist it doesnt matter a zionist is a zionist so yes he is not a muslim and he is only after fitna as usual but he cant turn us against pakistan anymore and can only damage himself going forward so i ignore these irrelevant losers generally but they are insolent after all their crimes to still come up to us and talk nonsense and this insolent smile they have while they mock us has to be wiped out from their faces and when it comes to the shia sunni nonsensical secterianism they seek to create it doesnt work anymore we arent in the slightest interested at all and dont bite therefore to such traps
let the palestinians syrians iraqis yemenis libyans sudanese etc pp in future beat up the saudis emiratis and other traitors to islam because they deserve the most to do this because my enemy is still america and its corrupt usurpation project of zionism and i will not stop until america is done for and the oppression stops and until tranquility comes over the world and iam not alone this is what the islamic revolution will bring eventually


----------



## aryobarzan

Amin Bactria said:


> he can be an emirati or an bahraini or any other zionist it doesnt matter a zionist is a zionist so yes he is not a muslim and he is only after fitna as usual but he cant turn us against pakistan anymore and can only damage himself going forward so i ignore these irrelevant losers generally but they are insolent after all their crimes to still come up to us and talk nonsense and this insolence smile they have while they mock us has to be wiped out from their faces and when it comes to the shia sunni nonsensical secterianism they seek to create it doesnt work anymore we arent in the slightest interested at all and dont bite therefore to such traps


Yesterday a Greek user who is fluent in Arabic asked him questions in Arabic.. he was not able to communicate in Arabic and confessed himself that he is actually Israeli.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

aryobarzan said:


> Yesterday a Greek user who is fluent in Arabic asked him questions in Arabic.. he was not able to communicate in Arabic and confessed himself that he is actually Israeli.


we will wipe him off from west asia together with all his cursed kin so let him laugh these zionists will not laugh for long and in fact the resistance wont allow them to laugh neither will islam which we believe in


----------



## Draco.IMF

*Shame on all of you who fed this troll, 
you are all responsible this thread went down the toilet!





*

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

Draco.IMF said:


> *Shame on all of you who fed this troll,
> you are all responsible this thread went down the toilet!
> 
> View attachment 774853
> *


let him suffer because he does be sure of it they cry in the 1000s and they try to hold to what isnt theirs to begin with but these tears wont wash away any fires and fire they will have as they have set it all around them in their ruinous nature a pitiful nature one has to add

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amin Bactria

the zionist tell to eachother the truth that is why there are so many 1000s of crying zionist soldiers desperate and defeated but at the same time they come up as somebody else bluff and act as if they arent a failed project and look at how he desperately seeks to indoctrinate the idea that its all "proxy" and "secterian" and this is what zionists do they create this kind of conceptual retardedness with their propaganda and it was successful for a while until it obvioulsy turned into now which is a total failure for them being cornered and close infront of a mayor defeat

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Strange, as soon as this radar is shown this guy shows up.

How many do you think will show up when Bavar-375 is shown? They will be very mad  

Anyways, nice little addition to augment current systems with more band coverage

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

arab_fighter said:


> *so let me get this straight, you chose to believe that the same radar unit changed over few years from 2D to 3D and now it's a new generation of radars (in one unit) because an official with a history of lying on video said so?
> logic be damned right?*


 Wow I had non Idea that the command post for a 2D radar has to be different in shape and colour from a command post for a 3D radar. You must be like real smart or something!

It is beyond hilarious that the very same video that you posted from 3 years ago to make your case that this is a 2D radar stated that the next step of the project was to upgrade the same 2D radar into a 3D system and yet you claim that you "understand" what the video is stating! If you think that this Alborz radar looks identical to the Arash then your eyes are just as defective as your brain!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

just for a laugh a pakistani friend send me this right now its actually something to mock the zionists for a change its so laughable of course it "feels like the end times" for them but for iran it feels lke the beginning so again who are these clowns to come here and try to mock us it just pretty much fits so perfectly to their position right now being basically at the end of their time and they will have no borders to run to they will have to swim to cyprus and sink




look at this feeble whiny loser he is an idf soldier this is why they lose just look at them these jokes how did they ever think they can simply usurp the heart of islam and stay here as if nothing happened and as if they belonged here to begin with its a total joke they will not laugh about when it ends
the biggest message in this propaganda clip is that zionists lose and that india monkey people are going to be a perfect host for zionists to bite their teeth into

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

Amin Bactria said:


> just for a laugh a pakistani friend send me this right now its actually something to mock the zionists for a change its so laughable of course it "feels like the end times" for them but for iran it feels lke the beginning so again who are these clowns to come here and try to mock us it just pretty much fits so perfectly to their position right now being basically at the end of their time and they will have no borders to run to they will have to swim to cyprus and sink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> look at this feeble whiny loser he is an idf soldier this is why they lose just look at them these jokes how did they ever think they can simply usurp the heart of islam and stay here as if nothing happened and as if they belonged here to begin with its a total joke they will not laugh about when it ends
> the biggest message in this propaganda clip is that zionists lose and that india monkey people are going to be a perfect host for zionists to bite their teeth into


What bothers them alot appears to be their loss of a CIA/Mossad outpost. 

Their were black sites in the country, alot of intelligence gathering devices, and agents operating in this country. All of it appears to be gone now.

Another way it can be looked at is the US is able to free up resources and time by withdrawing from the area, these resources and efforts can be directed towards Iran or may move to the indo-pacific region for China.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

Stryker1982 said:


> What bothers them alot appears to be their loss of a CIA/Mossad outpost.
> 
> Their were black sites in the country, alot of intelligence gathering devices, and agents operating in this country. All of it appears to be gone now.
> 
> Another way it can be looked at is the US is able to free up resources and time by withdrawing from the area, these resources and efforts can be directed towards Iran or may move to the indo-pacific region for China.


the resistance is obviously stronger than the corrupt forces even in the fields they are strongest in and called themselves nr 1 they are getting beaten


Stryker1982 said:


> What bothers them alot appears to be their loss of a CIA/Mossad outpost.
> 
> Their were black sites in the country, alot of intelligence gathering devices, and agents operating in this country. All of it appears to be gone now.
> 
> Another way it can be looked at is the US is able to free up resources and time by withdrawing from the area, these resources and efforts can be directed towards Iran or may move to the indo-pacific region for China.


they could only for so long beat up islam until some of us learned how to beat them its just natural as ferdowsi said
while one is brought up in luxury and care and is bewildered thrown into a dark pit another is lifted from same pit to a throne where a bejewelled crown is placed on his head because the world gives out easily both pleasure and pain at the same time and has no need of us and our doings and just as that the islamic world which was thrown into a dark pit is rising rapidly to its just throne and those looking up to us are shocked about the sudden change and still dont understand it completely and yes they dont understand it because their attempts to tackle it are laughable

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Amin Bactria

iranian saturation of air defenses is as such that a cruise missile can today be intercepted with a few shots of close in weapon systems including the direct energy ones anti air artillery and such which reportedly means a low flying object expensive as american cruise cant today beat even the smallest of iranian air defense systems
the point was made clear








Iran air defenses can hit $900k cruise missiles at a cost of only $10: Cmdr.


A senior Iranian commander highlights achievements in the Army’s Air Defense Force, saying the country is among pioneers in the directed energy technology and is capable of targeting micro air vehicles (MAVs) that violate its airspace.




www.presstv.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

According to the @iranian_defensive_power Telegram channel, Iran will unveil following air-defense systems in the future:

"Arman" with a range of 400 km: Probably a later version of the Bavar-373
"Majid"
"Zobin"
"Navvab": Most likely a naval short-range anti-cruise missile system
"Dezful": Iranian Tor version, possible that it is the renamed Oghab
a directed-energy weapon system

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Messerschmitt said:


> According to the @iranian_defensive_power Telegram channel, Iran will unveil following air-defense systems in the future:
> 
> "Arman" with a range of 400 km: Probably a later version of the Bavar-373
> "Majid"
> "Zobin"
> "Navvab": Most likely a naval short-range anti-cruise missile system
> "Dezful": Iranian Tor version, possible that it is the renamed Oghab
> a directed-energy weapon system


not just 400 kms he said +400 kms

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amin Bactria

still iran needs quantum radars so yes the new hardware is nice and all but its far away from where we have to be and where we have to be is everywhere and nowhere at the same time as its irans doctrine so great 400km range but its not global range yet
iran should be able to set up radars everywhere specially in hostile enviroment without being tracked or detected so iran still needs quantum radars


----------



## Amin Bactria

these active radars are basically beacons they are giving out their presence so such radars are not fit to act undetected in hostile enviroment for sure and passive radars arent enough either
its a great modernization of the artesh guys who need it so its needed but at the same time this is just a step one among many
usually the army is lazy in a revolutionary sense and therefore they stood behind the first stage of the revolution way to much holding on to the modernist way of doing things depending on others and such and i hope they fix this because they start to fall behind even in areas they were better in


----------



## Amin Bactria

skyshadow said:


> not just 400 kms he said +400 kms


its 400 kms + depending on positioning but the general range was given around 400km which in some cases might even fall back to 380km
obviously when you put it on top of a mountain it will have great range 400+ km for for sure
an additional issue with radar waves is that you can overkill frequency broadbands and therefore lower the range of radars immensely
from what i understand thou this is a smart system capable to divert the issue mostly but still radar technology cant outrun this issue completely

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

Amin Bactria said:


> its 400 kms + depending on positioning but the general range was given around 400km which in some cases might even fall back to 380km
> obviously when you put it on top of a mountain it will have great range 400+ km for for sure
> an additional issue with radar waves is that you can overkill frequency broadbands and therefore lower the range of radars immensely
> from what i understand thou this is a smart system capable to divert the issue mostly but still radar technology cant outrun this issue completely


agreed, but remember no one in there right mind should believe that Iran or any other country in that matter will give us the real range of the missile or there system you want to hit the enemy off guard not to tell them when to release there weapons ( outside the 400 km range of your system ).







*Majid and Dezful* ( word on street is that Iranian version of Tor M-2 will use coil spring instead of gas to eject the missile which in turn will make it cheaper and less complex for mass production )


*









*

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

skyshadow said:


> agreed, but remember no one in there right mind should believe that Iran or any other country in that matter will give us the real range of the missile or there system you want to hit the enemy off guard not to tell then when to release there weapons ( outside the 400 km range of you system ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Majid and Dezful* ( word on street is that Iranian version of Tor M-2 will use coil spring instead of gas to eject the missile which in turn will make it cheaper and less complex for mass production )
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 775354
> 
> 
> View attachment 775355
> *



Man, I cant wait too see Dezful, cmon Raisi, do something!

If we compare it to russian TorM2, it has lesser range (TorM2 -> 16km vs 12km)
But again, maybe they are not telling us the real numbers
Would be great if Dezful would be comparable to TorM2

Words are out that Dezful can also engage armored ground targets and can shoot during movement.
The system is fully digital, equipped with very powerful optics and is able to operate in passive mode.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Stryker1982

Draco.IMF said:


> Man, I cant wait too see Dezful, cmon Raisi, do something!
> 
> If we compare it to russian TorM2, it has lesser range (TorM2 -> 16km vs 12km)
> But again, maybe they are not telling us the real numbers
> Would be great if Dezful would be comparable to TorM2
> 
> Words are out that Dezful can also engage armored ground targets and can shoot during movement.
> The system is fully digital, equipped with very powerful optics and is able to operate in passive mode.



I'm sure they'll show it soon, if anything they will probably show it among other things like Bavar-375, so it'll be an interesting day when it comes out and we can take a look at it 

Usually no one says the real numbers for reasons you probably know  

I'd expect some sort of passive capability because we have seen those 3rd Khordads upgraded with TI optics so I'd expect similar capability employed there.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saleh99

Draco.IMF said:


> Man, I cant wait too see Dezful, cmon Raisi, do something!
> 
> If we compare it to russian TorM2, it has lesser range (TorM2 -> 16km vs 12km)
> But again, maybe they are not telling us the real numbers
> Would be great if Dezful would be comparable to TorM2
> 
> Words are out that Dezful can also engage armored ground targets and can shoot during movement.
> The system is fully digital, equipped with very powerful optics and is able to operate in passive mode.





skyshadow said:


> agreed, but remember no one in there right mind should believe that Iran or any other country in that matter will give us the real range of the missile or there system you want to hit the enemy off guard not to tell then when to release there weapons ( outside the 400 km range of you system ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Majid and Dezful* ( word on street is that Iranian version of Tor M-2 will use coil spring instead of gas to eject the missile which in turn will make it cheaper and less complex for mass production )
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 775354
> 
> 
> View attachment 775355
> *


The photo they posted about dezful belongs to a original TOR system not the iranian one.
12km range means they reverse engineered the old missile or developed a new one with that range.
We still need to wait to see the upgrades they did on the radar also. The search radar is outdated.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

just a general question for anyone that might know.

Is it possible to guide a SAM with TI optics alone?

For example, if the TI camera observes and tracks a aircraft flying near by, could the SAM be guided via data-link from the optics alone for full passive engagement or does the TELAR still need to illuminate the target at the very last stages of missile flight for a SARH missile to be guided accurately?

I ask because I was curious to see if it is possible to engage targets with fully passive capability without a single bit of radar emission.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Stryker1982 said:


> just a general question for anyone that might know.
> 
> Is it possible to guide a SAM with TI optics alone?
> 
> For example, if the TI camera observes and tracks a aircraft flying near by, could the SAM be guided via data-link from the optics alone for full passive engagement or does the TELAR still need to illuminate the target at the very last stages of missile flight for a SARH missile to be guided accurately?
> 
> I ask because I was curious to see if it is possible to engage targets with fully passive capability without a single bit of radar emission.


Yes,there are already SAM that use EO/IR guided missiles that dont use any sort of radars,but those are short range systems,many medium range systems also have EO/IR guidance as secondary guidance mostly ment to engage targets at short ranges ,

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> Yes,there are already SAM that use EO/IR guided missiles that dont use any sort of radars,but those are short range systems,many medium range systems also have EO/IR guidance as secondary guidance mostly ment to engage targets at short ranges ,



Is this the direction that countries would like to go towards in the future? Especially to negate the effects of EW?



Seems that in the medium range category, it is not quite used as a primary method.
It appears to me that continuously improving EO/IR systems would allow for a air defense network to be built that would be difficult for a sophisticated country like the US to build a electronic emissions map of it. It would make sense for a country like Iran who would have to deal with high-grade EW hardware would really need this for point defense, but in medium ranges as well. (3rd Khordad?)

I suppose the curvature of the earth would really limit this in the longer ranges, and this really seems more feasible for a small country like Austria, as apposed to larger countries where more coverage is required.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Is this the direction that countries would like to go towards in the future? Especially to negate the effects of EW?
> 
> 
> 
> Seems that in the medium range category, it is not quite used as a primary method.
> It appears to me that continuously improving EO/IR systems would allow for a air defense network to be built that would be difficult for a sophisticated country like the US to build a electronic emissions map of it. It would make sense for a country like Iran who would have to deal with high-grade EW hardware would really need this for point defense, but in medium ranges as well. (3rd Khordad?)
> 
> I suppose the curvature of the earth would really limit this in the longer ranges, and this really seems more feasible for a small country like Austria, as apposed to larger countries where more coverage is required.



EO/IO can guide an object to a specific area when talking about short distances (less than 15KM), but you will still need the missiles on board computer to locate the enemy for the terminal phase and further away you will need a passive radar to illuminate the target so the missile doesn’t waste to much energy reaching the projected Area.

You have to remember EO/IO shows you where the object is NOW not where it is likely to be. And a fighter jet that is traveling at Mach 1-2 will be in a completely different location in 1 min let alone 3-4 mins. So you need an accurate prediction of where the aircraft is going to be when talking about ranges beyond 50KM.

When the Global Hawk was downed it was the EO/IO data being fed to passive radar station further inside iran who then used that information to refine the target location and send it back to the 3rd Khordad who then fired the missile which upon entering the kill zone turned on its SARH and did a top attack kill of the Global Hawk.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Stryker1982 said:


> Is this the direction that countries would like to go towards in the future? Especially to negate the effects of EW?
> 
> 
> 
> Seems that in the medium range category, it is not quite used as a primary method.
> It appears to me that continuously improving EO/IR systems would allow for a air defense network to be built that would be difficult for a sophisticated country like the US to build a electronic emissions map of it. It would make sense for a country like Iran who would have to deal with high-grade EW hardware would really need this for point defense, but in medium ranges as well. (3rd Khordad?)
> 
> I suppose the curvature of the earth would really limit this in the longer ranges, and this really seems more feasible for a small country like Austria, as apposed to larger countries where more coverage is required.


3th khordad has EO/IR already,EO/IR is important addition,since small objects is extremly difficult detect and targe at low atlitude and short ranges, and it gives AD system additional channel to engage more targets at same time...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

EO/TI won't give you range without laser range finder or radar.

3rd Khordad won't work with its TI sight alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

PeeD said:


> EO/TI won't give you range without laser range finder or radar.
> 
> 3rd Khordad won't work with its TI sight alone.


Yes,if intention is to have all passive unit than laser range finder would fit in to SHORAD,while there are some passive radars that can also fit but this would be suitable in as search and acquisition role,for engagement laser range finder is best option. As I remember Iran has Hearz 9 that can work in fuly passive mode,I remeber defense minister mark this as one of most important feature of Hearz 9,in addition to be fuly mobile .Now,also there are IR range finder,that could be integrated in to EO/IR setup ,that would allow air defense system or surveillance kit to work without using laser range finder. But I am not familiar with IR range finders,I know there are different IR range finder devices,proximity and distance based..but I really have no clue how these perform vs laser range finders or did Iran integrated any in EO/IR suites

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar

skyshadow said:


> agreed, but remember no one in there right mind should believe that Iran or any other country in that matter will give us the real range of the missile or there system you want to hit the enemy off guard not to tell them when to release there weapons ( outside the 400 km range of you system ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Majid and Dezful* ( word on street is that Iranian version of Tor M-2 will use coil spring instead of gas to eject the missile which in turn will make it cheaper and less complex for mass production )
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 775354
> 
> 
> View attachment 775355
> *

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

سامانه ی ضد زره "پیروز" منصوب بر خودروی تاکتیکی ارس در حال شلیک موشک دهلاویه

پیروز اولین سامانه ای هست که در داخل کشور اختصاصا برای شکار تانک و ادوات زرهی طراحی و ساخته شده . این سامانه دارای ۴ پرتابگر موشک دهلاویه بعلاوه ی یک سیستم الکترواپتیکی پیشرفته هست .


"Pirooz" anti-armor system assigned to Aras tactical vehicle firing Dehlawieh missile

Pirooz is the first system designed and built in the country specifically for hunting tanks and armored vehicles. This system has 4 Dehlawiyeh missile launchers in addition to an advanced electro-optical system.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Now,after looking in to similar EO/IR suits available on the market today,now I am sure Iranian EO/IR suits include multiple LRF/IRF,in fact as I can see every comercial night vision,thermal camera include LRF integrated in to lens.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> سامانه ی ضد زره "پیروز" منصوب بر خودروی تاکتیکی ارس در حال شلیک موشک دهلاویه
> 
> پیروز اولین سامانه ای هست که در داخل کشور اختصاصا برای شکار تانک و ادوات زرهی طراحی و ساخته شده . این سامانه دارای ۴ پرتابگر موشک دهلاویه بعلاوه ی یک سیستم الکترواپتیکی پیشرفته هست .
> 
> 
> "Pirooz" anti-armor system assigned to Aras tactical vehicle firing Dehlawieh missile
> 
> Pirooz is the first system designed and built in the country specifically for hunting tanks and armored vehicles. This system has 4 Dehlawiyeh missile launchers in addition to an advanced electro-optical system.



Many Iranian armoured vehicles are being built, few are reaching mass production.

Iran has a HUGE industrial arms complex, but without outside orders it’s hard to reach mass production on many orders. Iran doesn’t have a massive military budget and army has very little of overall budget.

A lot of prototypes ready for funding, but sanctions and low military budget are preventing them from reaching mass production.


sanel1412 said:


> Now,after looking in to similar EO/IR suits available on the market today,now I am sure Iranian EO/IR suits include multiple LRF/IRF,in fact as I can see every comercial night vision,thermal camera include LRF integrated in to lens.
> View attachment 775616



My original point stands, laser range finder is not suitable for beyond short ranges. Hence why 3rd of Khordad relies on other radars if it is going for passive kill (like in case of global Hawk).

The risk in activating it’s active Radar is high end systems (F-22, F-35, B-2,etc) can “read” active radar emissions from a good distance. In fact, F-117 from several decades ago did this very well navigating/avoidance between AD kill zones.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*now that's one hell of a upgraded S-200 with a cool black and white color










*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## jauk

Kit export opportunity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434555669856858118

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> *now that's one hell of a upgraded S-200 with a cool black and white color
> 
> 
> View attachment 775861
> 
> 
> View attachment 775862
> *



Mock-up

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Mock-up


really ? i didn't know, mock up in middle of an operational air base? for whom ? enemy ?


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> really ? i didn't know, mock up in middle of an operational air base? for whom ? enemy ?



Yes, its the best way to create decoys for otherwise static launchers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The photos are not complete, several others are missing. And the S-300 is a PMU 3 version upgrade from version 2


----------



## Stryker1982

Mr Iran Eye said:


> The photos are not complete, several others are missing. And the S-300 is a PMU 3 version upgrade from version 2


It was officially PMU-2's and the other missing items are from IRGC-AD not Army AD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No, no and no ! It was an S 300 modifier with elements of the S-400 and even of the S 350. It is S-300 PMU III

The analysis was done on the forum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1435325451593940995

Reactions: Like Like:
11 | Love Love:
1


----------



## sha ah

Tor not included ?



Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 776158
> View attachment 776159
> View attachment 776161


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1435589280546578433

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sha ah

If the Israeli's are thinking about striking Iran's nuclear program, they're suicidal. If they were able to pull it off somehow to damage any of Iran's facilities, Iran will respond by striking Dimona, water desalination plants in Israel and other vital targets, ports, military bases and many more. Iran's arsenal, along with Hezbollah and Hamas would decimate them.

Not to mention the fact that after such a strike Iran would take its entire program underground. With IR-9 centrifuges a large sprawling complex is not required. Even a small warehouse can be enough.

So far Iran has 10 KG of highly enriched Uranium and is currently enriching at 60%. Israelis state that Iran is realistically 2 months away from going nuclear.

Iran should stay on alert and expect the unexpected. Iranians should constantly think how they would strike the facilities if they were to do it. Move vital material at night, use decoys, seriously beef up air defense capabilities.









Israel’s military chief says ‘accelerating’ Iran strike plans


Chief of General Staff Kohavi’s comments follow a series of warnings from high-level Israeli officials towards Iran.




www.aljazeera.com













They may want to commit suicide for fear of death: Army chief on Israeli ‘Iran strike plans’


Iran’s Army commander reacts to the Israeli military chief’s claims that the regime had sped up alleged Iran strike plans.




www.presstv.ir







TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1435589280546578433

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1436372218699829262

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1436372232184422400

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DJ_Viper

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1436372218699829262
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1436372232184422400



Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhhhttttt!! If ONLY life was this easier to take out -35!! This tells me that Israel is wanting to attack and Iran's telling them that they know about it and Israel might lose some jets. Lastly, the modern world's over from X band based technologies a long time ago. X and Ku bands are easy to jam as they've widely used in the older Russian junk ( I mean Russian tech).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

DJ_Viper said:


> Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhhhttttt!! If ONLY life was this easier to take out -35!! This tells me that Israel is wanting to attack and Iran's telling them that they know about it and Israel might lose some jets. Lastly, the modern world's over from X band based technologies a long time ago. X and Ku bands are easy to jam as they've widely used in the older Russian junk ( I mean Russian tech).



Clearly you don’t know how radar or jamming works on different radar bands/frequencies. Radar bands aren’t Jammable or not based on how “old” it is.

“Might lose some jets”

Yes nothing like losing a $80M jet to drop a couple 250lb bomb on an reinforced concrete underground nuclear facility that.....isn’t even where Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

Seems like a complete waste of time. Might as well just fire conventional tipped Jericho’s missiles at Iran, would do about the same damage and you wouldn’t lose any planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1438825715655397379

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Draco.IMF

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1438825715655397379



Its finally time to unveil this beast, I cant wait anymore....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> Its finally time to unveil this beast, I cant wait anymore....



Not really new. If this is the design for Arman then kind of disappointed.

This design was guessed way back during initial unveiling when the Bavar was blurred leading to speculation there was a mast being hidden.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1438847156077617158

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Not really new. If this is the design for Arman then kind of disappointed.
> 
> This design was guessed way back during initial unveiling when the Bavar was blurred leading to speculation there was a mast being hidden.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1438847156077617158


this is most likely a anti ballistic version and not Arman

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

skyshadow said:


> this is most likely a anti ballistic version and not Arman


s300 VM like, they have a similar mast. may be b373 ABM version or extended b373

i hope Arman will be something based on a round tube launcher, cold launch, and zolzannah 10x10 heavy truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> s300 VM like, they have a similar mast. may be b373 ABM version or extended b373
> 
> i hope Arman will be something based on a round tube launcher, cold launch, and zolzannah 10x10 heavy truck.



It now makes sense why Iran kept rejecting the S-300 VM or Antey-2500 Russia kept pitching to Iran to accept as replacement for S-300 contract.....because Iran could already build a similar system.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Saleh99

skyshadow said:


> View attachment 778681


What’s that?


----------



## HAIDER

Saleh99 said:


> What’s that?


Seem a gift from Afghanistan.


----------



## PeeD

Skyguard, nothing important

+ Afghanistan has no gifts that Iran could use or learn from

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> Skyguard, nothing important
> 
> + Afghanistan has no gifts that Iran could use or learn from



I think the engines used in Humvees and overall design would be useful for improvements to their armoured transport carriers.

I am not sure if Afghanistan had any Abrams tanks. Or else the engine could be valuable for the Karrar project and even the cannon.

Again these are more “bonuses” rather than something the Iranian military complex is actively seeking (like warship design blueprints, jet engine blueprints and tech, etc).

Blackhawk is still to costly for Iran to reverse engineer. Iran’s experience in helicopter engine development is lackluster. Not that helicopters are a major need right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> I think the engines used in Humvees and overall design would be useful for improvements to their armoured transport carriers.



Aras jeep is better than Humvee in many respects. Humvee is not even superior in suspension. Just somewhat bigger/carry more.
Its engine reduces the range and needs more fuel. So Iran sticks with the Nissan derived Chinese diesel.
Basically nothing a Humvee can give here.



TheImmortal said:


> I am not sure if Afghanistan had any Abrams tanks. Or else the engine could be valuable for the Karrar project and even the cannon.



Iraq has Abrams, Afghanistan not. Again Iran would never opt for reverse engineering the turbine engine of the Abrams. Too expensive, too large, too fuel thirsty=lowered range=more fuel supply.

Blackhawks would be the only interesting thing and even there: Too expensive design and too difficult to copy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sanel1412

Well iran could be more interest in seondary equipment as eletro optics,lasers,IR...night vision devices...different sensors from Blak Hawk and maybe newer C-130...there are also super tucanos and Iran ould be intersted for these...So nothing like game changer teh but still may be usefull in some wa,even Iran probably already has most of US ground troops equipment and weapons from Yemen,Iraq...but again there are some secondary staff it can be useful to speed up domestic developments...I suppose there are no many left advanced thermal imaging devices,high def. cameras,newer generation EO,IR,laser devices and staff like that...these are already available to Iran but US has some damn good new generation long range surveilance devices,thermal imaging devices that is not easily to develop...also it is not so much about high tech weapons and equipment even they left some of those too probably..it is about amount of weapons delivered...you can build 3 armies from that amount....most NATO members dont have even close...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow

*Iran/Azerbaijan Transfer of the 3rd Khordad/RAAD/Tabas system to the northwestern borders of the country to create a defense tour *

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> *Iran/Azerbaijan Transfer of the 3rd Khordad/RAAD/Tabas system to the northwestern borders of the country to create a defense tour *
> 
> View attachment 780967


something that was missing , but we need more system in class of Mersad-16 there to provide adequate protection for the forces against drone . ideally the airdefence there must be consisted of at least two battalion of 3rd of Khordad or the 15th of khordad to protect against enemy airforce and alot more of Mersad-16 for protection against larger drones and then implemented with system like Saa'er

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> something that was missing , but we need more system in class of Mersad-16 there to provide adequate protection for the forces against drone . ideally the airdefence there must be consisted of at least two battalion of 3rd of Khordad or the 15th of khordad to protect against enemy airforce and alot more of Mersad-16 for protection against larger drones and then implemented with system like Saa'er


well we know that this khordad was a Tell which only means it part of a battery and they moved Saeer short range systems there too for point defense its only logical to think other systems are there too

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

not Iranian but, new North Korean Surface to Air missile, 2 stage
We saw some similar, iranian prototype model, I think it was much smaller, Tor missile sized
The NK one looks a bit like David Slings missile...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> not Iranian but, new North Korean Surface to Air missile, 2 stage
> We saw some similar, iranian prototype model, I think it was much smaller, Tor missile sized
> The NK one looks a bit like David Slings missile...



The issue with all these NK “achievements” is they don’t have enough funds to build MOST of the projects they unveil. They simply are too poor a country even when the communist state/military hoards 99% of the resources.

At the end of the day unless China subsidies most of the raw materials and components/subsystems most of these systems will never be mass produced and at best you get a few of them.

So what they should do is sell these technology to countries like Pakistan/Iran/Iraq/etc and pocket the money on these ToT or license deals to further develop their domestic industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*For the first time, inside of Iranian mobile air defense command and control center, location: near Azerbaijan *

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## skyshadow

*shams, its S-300 PMU2 high altitude engagement simulator




*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## DoubleYouSee

skyshadow said:


> *shams, its S-300 PMU2 high altitude engagement simulator
> 
> View attachment 781558
> *


might it be something related to S-200?!








عکس/ رونمایی از سامانه‌های شمس و هرمز


سامانه‌های بومی شمس و هرمز صبح امروز شنبه ١٠ مهر ۱۴۰۰ با حضور امیر سرتیپ صباحی فرد فرمانده نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش رونمایی شدند.




www.mashreghnews.ir




even the hormoz radar seems to be hawk's AN/MPQ-61 acquisition radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

S-300 PMU3 = S-300 I.R


----------



## Draco.IMF

Mr Iran Eye said:


> S-300 PMU3 = S-300 I.R



S-300 I.R = S-300 PMU2+
S-300 PMU3 = S-400

____________


Radar "Hormuz"

The new medium-range radar system, dubbed “Hormuz,” was designed to detect and identify airborne targets with speed and accuracy. The radar can relay information to the air defense missile fire control center. The radar is also efficient and easy to maintain. Its technical specifications were not revealed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> *shams, its S-300 PMU2 high altitude engagement simulator
> 
> View attachment 781558
> *



Seems kind of expensive to build a simulator for something you don’t have a lot of (Iran’s S-300 order was rather small).

Unless Iran plans on buying S-500 in future to complement its S-300 system and Bavar/Arman systems. Then it makes sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

TheImmortal said:


> Seems kind of expensive to build a simulator for something you don’t have a lot of (Iran’s S-300 order was rather small).
> 
> Unless Iran plans on buying S-500 in future to complement its S-300 system and Bavar/Arman systems. Then it makes sense.


Since this is the domain that I worked many years on I provide some info. Considering that 80% of any Static based simulator is the software then all they have to change are the algorithms for the intercepting missile flight dynamics and the physical control panels...The rest (Synthetic scenario and environment and target profiles) will remain intact for use by any other AD system simulator...Now if you simulate the Radar detection profiles of that AD system then things become much more expensive but for that you need a lot of radar data..
In some cases they actually remove the radar antenna (they use an actual working radar) and feed the target(s) data that is generated synthetically by an equipment to the actual radar to see if detections occurs. That way you can easily decide how many targets you want to feed and what the targets are doing and observe the behaviour of the the actual radar (detection probability)...The equipment that generates those targets are called STImulators.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1444313733879275527

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

I have to wonder if the title of the system,ie "High altitude engagement simulator",is an obvious clue,in other words a simulator optimized for ABM [high altitude] engagements....
























It certainly looks like an accurate representation of the system,and interestingly to put it in perspective,heres the s300 simulator,the ALTEK 300,that the russians were using up until fairly recently

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

There are various levels of simulators for sophisticated systems such as S-300, Bavar 373 or any high end aircraft. The first level just being mostly non-dynamic in nature and having all the control panels and displays generated through software and presented to the "Student" on a display... As the student gets familiar with basic operation then they will graduate to higher level (more dynamic) and more realistic simulators. The final level will be actually in a mockup presenting the Command truck with all panels and displays 100% as the actual system with fully dynamic scenario driven events..Instructors presence will be non-intrusive and present at all time. Operators will not touch anything real before passing all levels just as a pilots has to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

These simulators are actually used not only for training purpose...it can be linked to actual air defense network to simulate various scenarios..test different engagement methods and provide different solutions...so you it can be used even in real war situation where it will analyze and simulate different engagement scenarios. This is damn good tool...without these systems you would have to actualy engage in real war scenarios before you can analyze and learn from it. Now it can simulate and analyze scenarios before it happen,And it can do it even in real time....even with all limitation when used in real time scenario still it can provide information that can make difference...So...these simulators are not just some limited training devices...these are very advanced,complex and expensive systems that provide you something,in normal situation you could only get after engagement ...which is still useful for future engagements but enemy may not repeat that same scenario ever again...so having capability to analyze and test different scenarios before engagement or even feed it from real air defense network and literary simulate different outcomes using real time data collected in real time....so crew can choose best location, method and best system to engage enemy...that is priceless

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> These simulators are actually used not only for training purpose...it can be linked to actual air defense network to simulate various scenarios..test different engagement methods and provide different solutions...so you it can be used even in real war situation where it will analyze and simulate different engagement scenarios. This is damn good tool...without these systems you would have to actualy engage in real war scenarios before you can analyze and learn from it. Now it can simulate and analyze scenarios before it happen,And it can do it even in real time....even with all limitation when used in real time scenario still it can provide information that can make difference...So...these simulators are not just some limited training devices...these are very advanced,complex and expensive systems that provide you something,in normal situation you could only get after engagement ...which is still useful for future engagements but enemy may not repeat that same scenario ever again...so having capability to analyze and test different scenarios before engagement or even feed it from real air defense network and literary simulate different outcomes using real time data collected in real time....so crew can choose best location, method and best system to engage enemy...that is priceless


Well well, aren't you full of information 🤩

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1445881266318938115
Next Israeli weapon to be reverse engineered assuming Israel uses them in Syria and Iranian naval targets (maybe already has been used).

10-30% failure rate with cruise missiles means Iran should get a handful of samples quickly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1445881266318938115
> Next Israeli weapon to be reverse engineered assuming Israel uses them in Syria and Iranian naval targets (maybe already has been used).
> 
> 10-30% failure rate with cruise missiles means Iran should get a handful of samples quickly.


Is this 10-30% failure rate common amongst missile manufacturers. I know some of those Russian Kalibrs failed during flight in Iran, and Iran seems to have a 10-30% failure during flight rate, but I'm curious if other, lets say, higher quality build, more expensive missiles made in the USA or France, South Korea would also have such failure rates.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Is this 10-30% failure rate common amongst missile manufacturers. I know some of those Russian Kalibrs failed during flight in Iran, and Iran seems to have a 10-30% failure during flight rate, but I'm curious if other, lets say, higher quality build, more expensive missiles made in the USA or France, South Korea would also have such failure rates.



_When Russia launched their Kh-101 cruise missiles last year, they were said to have a success rate of around *85%.* The American Tomahawks launched during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had a success rate of around _*80%.*



Redirect Notice

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mohsen

TheImmortal said:


> _When Russia launched their Kh-101 cruise missiles last year, they were said to have a success rate of around *85%.* The American Tomahawks launched during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had a success rate of around _*80%.*
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


From 3 French ships which were participated in the missile raid against Syria in 2018, 2 ships failed to launch any MdCN missile, and third ship just managed to fire 3 of them! 94% fail rate.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> From 3 French ships which were participated in the missile raid against Syria in 2018, 2 ships failed to launch any MdCN missile, and third ship just managed to fire 3 of them! 94% fail rate.


and those three hit mountains, the only answer I can give to the dilemma is they need to invest a lot more on their military or it was deliberate and unlike American they really didn't want to participate in the operation

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Amazing footage of the new short range anti drone sam system in action

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447424844912529412

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
5


----------



## IranDefence

Sineva said:


> Amazing footage of the new short range anti drone sam system in action
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447424844912529412
> View attachment 783797
> 
> View attachment 783798
> View attachment 783800
> View attachment 783801
> View attachment 783802


I hope we see this beast in Armenia Lebanon Gaza and Yemen 😈

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Sineva said:


> Amazing footage of the new short range anti drone sam system in action
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447424844912529412
> View attachment 783797
> 
> View attachment 783798
> View attachment 783800
> View attachment 783801
> View attachment 783802


just out of curiosity;where did you get these footages from?!
regarding to the generator which is installed on the truck;it seems that the whole system is a test bed of a forthcoming system.
might it be Iranian copy of pantsir?


----------



## Sineva

DoubleYouSee said:


> just out of curiosity;where did you get these footages from?!


I found the video on this guys twitter
https://twitter.com/mohamadf8413

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447425087930519552

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447514825475727360

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447520302263590914

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447517509301809152

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447528050409840642

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447528050409840642



Need to make it at least a 4 canister system if not a 6 one (3 on each side).

Assuming this is the prototype, but final version shouldn’t have 2 missiles. Too little for a SOHRAD.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> Need to make it at least a 4 canister system if not a 6 one (3 on each side).
> 
> Assuming this is the prototype, but final version shouldn’t have 2 missiles. Too little for a SOHRAD.


I would like to see this on the same 3rd Khordad chassis that Hael uses and integrate with Hael on one vehicle acting similar to pantsir. 
If this systems go into mass production, I would imagine IRGC Air Defences would use the pickup truck versions whereas Artesh Air Defence might integrate the eo/ir sensors and missiles with Hael on same chassis. Might not even need the radar if it is integrated into Artesh systems and the National Air Defence Grid. The radar would be useful if the system is to operate by itself though.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

TheImmortal said:


> Need to make it at least a 4 canister system if not a 6 one (3 on each side).
> 
> Assuming this is the prototype, but final version shouldn’t have 2 missiles. Too little for a SOHRAD.


Yes, the final version should have 8 missiles in total (4 on each side).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Draco.IMF

New Iranian Short Air Defence System with vertical launch technology

Reactions: Like Like:
14 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Draco.IMF

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447847988345417728

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447826255479455744

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Draco.IMF said:


> New Iranian Short Air Defence System with vertical launch technology
> 
> View attachment 784135


the whole forum would be gratefull if you send the link of video


----------



## Sineva

DoubleYouSee said:


> the whole forum would be gratefull if you send the link of video


Its the twitter vid in the post directly below the one with the pic of the new sam,ie #5,811

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Sineva said:


> View attachment 784172
> 
> View attachment 784174
> 
> View attachment 784175
> 
> 
> Its the twitter vid in the post directly below the one with the pic of the new sam,ie #5,811


the system would be so practical if they add ha'el system to it.it seems they are hard working on short range system;we have great progress in short range systems not only the missiles but also the radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dexon

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447853816112500740
Hope for 12 missiles version..


----------



## TheImmortal

Is this supposed to be TOR-M1 copy?

It appears to be hot launch system from the exhaust trap underneath the canisters.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

It's amazing how Iran can build any kind of defense system. Iran is a collosal power and an air defense system

Nothing to do with TOR-M1 lolllllllll


----------



## Shams313

Mr Iran Eye said:


> It's amazing how Iran can build any kind of defense system. Iran is a collosal power and an air defense system
> 
> Nothing to do with TOR-M1 lolllllllll


SO Tor M1 and pantsir Yet to be unveiled?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Stopping to say TOR M1 has already told us for a long time. It's a different version of TOR and Pantsir new genre coming up


----------



## NaCon

TheImmortal said:


> Is this supposed to be TOR-M1 copy?
> 
> It appears to be hot launch system from the exhaust trap underneath the canisters.


A couple of years ago there were rumors that iran wants to buy the umkhonto AD system. Iran might have copied the system after buying some batteries or there was some kind of a transfer of technology deal with South Africa.





Umkhonto | Denel Dynamics


The Umkhonto-IR missile is a vertically-launched, high-velocity, infrared homing missile




www.deneldynamics.co.za

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

NaCon said:


> A couple of years ago there were rumors that iran wants to buy the umkhonto AD system. Iran might have copied the system after buying some batteries or there was some kind of a transfer of technology deal with South Africa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Umkhonto | Denel Dynamics
> 
> 
> The Umkhonto-IR missile is a vertically-launched, high-velocity, infrared homing missile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.deneldynamics.co.za
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 784296



Systems are pretty different. For one, Iran’s combines the radar vehicle and the battery together.

Other than a somewhat similar resemblance in canisters the design seems pretty different. Until we see the missile I wouldn’t say it’s based on the South African system.


----------



## NaCon

TheImmortal said:


> Systems are pretty different. For one, Iran’s combines the radar vehicle and the battery together.
> 
> Other than a somewhat similar resemblance in canisters the design seems pretty different. Until we see the missile I wouldn’t say it’s based on the South African system.


Combining the missile launcher and the radar doesn’t fundamentally change anything about the system. And besides the system is offered in multiple configurations. The one in the picture were the radar is separate from the launcher was done to increase the radar detection range. So it can engage low flying tragets like suicide drones and cruise missiles. Russians have the same configurations for their engagement radars as well.
This is an article about a potential deal that might have concluded and was not publicly announced due to obvious reasons.





ایران از آفریقای جنوبی سامانه موشکی می خرد؟+عکس - مشرق نیوز







www.mashreghnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

NaCon said:


> Combining the missile launcher and the radar doesn’t fundamentally change anything about the system. And besides the system is offered in multiple configurations. The one in the picture were the radar is separate from the launcher was done to increase the radar detection range. So it can engage low flying tragets like suicide drones and cruise missiles. Russians have the same configurations for their engagement radars as well.
> This is an article about a potential deal that might have concluded and was not publicly announced due to obvious reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ایران از آفریقای جنوبی سامانه موشکی می خرد؟+عکس - مشرق نیوز
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mashreghnews.ir


South Africa? 

You must be kidding. Impossible considering the US imposed restrictions. SA is well within American sphere of influence.


----------



## NaCon

Muhammed45 said:


> South Africa?
> 
> You must be kidding. Impossible considering the US imposed restrictions. SA is well within American sphere of influence.


When a country is cash strapped they get desperate. Remember what the US did to their F14s so spare parts wouldn’t end up in Iran, they destroyed them.
this means the US doesn’t even trust contractors that work with US government to not sell in one way or another us technologies or weapons.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447974162509799433

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447971892187521027

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447971087363497992

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SalarHaqq

Muhammed45 said:


> You must be kidding. Impossible considering the US imposed restrictions. SA is well within American sphere of influence.



Less than many others. Which is also why one of Iran's three major mobile phone networks is a joint-venture with South Africa's MTN Group. On the whole Pretoria has had a rather constructive relationship with Iran since the fall of the apartheid system, given Iran's significant support for the opposition to that regime.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

I think there is a naval version of that South African system and it was discussed for Iran in this forum before.


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Less than many others. Which is also why one of Iran's three major mobile phone networks is a joint-venture with South Africa's MTN Group. On the whole Pretoria has had a rather constructive relationship with Iran since the fall of the apartheid system, given Iran's significant support for the opposition to that regime.



Doesn’t mean SA just magically turned over ToT to Iran and somehow also hide the funds from the prying eyes of Uncle Sam.

It’s likely that Iran’s defense industry could have built the system on its own but it would have been cheaper to first acquire and breakdown the system. When the deal fell thru, Iran decided to proceed anyway and at a higher cost than if it had access to the system.

Iran has built MRAPs that look exactly like Strykers and other foreign MRAPs, did those companies also give Iran their blueprints?


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448019061846204420

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

@PeeD

What do you think boss?
Have we ever seen the launcher for the legend, the missile 358?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Doesn’t mean SA just magically turned over ToT to Iran and somehow also hide the funds from the prying eyes of Uncle Sam.
> 
> It’s likely that Iran’s defense industry could have built the system on its own but it would have been cheaper to first acquire and breakdown the system. When the deal fell thru, Iran decided to proceed anyway and at a higher cost than if it had access to the system.
> 
> Iran has built MRAPs that look exactly like Strykers and other foreign MRAPs, did those companies also give Iran their blueprints?



I have no idea if this new Iranian short range SAM has any connection to South Africa's Umkhonto. Most probably not, although it's not completely impossible. I merely intended to address the notion that South Africa is particularly subjugated to the US in comparison to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Draco.IMF

NaCon said:


> A couple of years ago there were rumors that iran wants to buy the umkhonto AD system. Iran might have copied the system after buying some batteries or there was some kind of a transfer of technology deal with South Africa.



+ many Ukhonto engineers are retired now and many lost theyr job, its possible Iran could recruit some of them for good cash









Denel’s employee numbers shrink 15% over the last year - defenceWeb


In a presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises today on its annual financial results for 2019/20, Denel revealed that it had lost nearly 500 employees over the last year. The presentation by Interim Group CEO William Hlakoane showed Denel’s workforce shrinking – as of 1 April...




www.defenceweb.co.za





*" Many people have left Denel over the non-payment of salaries last year – a matter that went to court and is awaiting judgement by the Labour Court. Denel Dynamics, for example, has lost almost all its engineers, many of whom have gone to work for companies in the Middle East. "*

I didnt say this new Iranian AD system has something to do with them, but I also read the story Iran was interested in the Umkhonto SAM missile:



IRAN LOOKS TO BUY SOUTH AFRICA’S UMKHONTO SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE – DCSS News











SA hoping to sell weapons to Iran - defenceWeb


South Africa is hoping to sell some R1.5 billion worth of weapons to Iran, including Umkhonto surface-to-air missiles. This is according to an article published in Rapport, which says South Africa has requested permission from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to sell Iran the weapons...




www.defenceweb.co.za


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> + many Ukhonto engineers are retired now and many lost theyr job, its possible Iran could recruit some of them for good cash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denel’s employee numbers shrink 15% over the last year - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> In a presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises today on its annual financial results for 2019/20, Denel revealed that it had lost nearly 500 employees over the last year. The presentation by Interim Group CEO William Hlakoane showed Denel’s workforce shrinking – as of 1 April...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *" Many people have left Denel over the non-payment of salaries last year – a matter that went to court and is awaiting judgement by the Labour Court. Denel Dynamics, for example, has lost almost all its engineers, many of whom have gone to work for companies in the Middle East. "*
> 
> I didnt say this new Iranian AD system has something to do with them, but I also read the story Iran was interested in the Umkhonto SAM missile:
> 
> 
> 
> IRAN LOOKS TO BUY SOUTH AFRICA’S UMKHONTO SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE – DCSS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SA hoping to sell weapons to Iran - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> South Africa is hoping to sell some R1.5 billion worth of weapons to Iran, including Umkhonto surface-to-air missiles. This is according to an article published in Rapport, which says South Africa has requested permission from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to sell Iran the weapons...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za



I think the Israeli’s also gave Iran the design too

Look at canisters of Iron dome









You guys need to realize there are only so many different ways to “skin” a cat. So for air defense platforms either the launch tubes will be circular like S-300, Arrow, etc. or they will be square like PAC-3, Khordad, Bavar and for shorter range systems square and compact with many canisters. No need to re design the wheel everytime a country creates an air defense system.

Doesn’t mean any system is copy of the other.

I doubt anyone would say this:






Is a copy of this:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PeeD

Shawnee said:


> View attachment 784338
> View attachment 784339
> View attachment 784340
> 
> View attachment 784345
> @PeeD
> 
> What do you think boss?
> Have we ever seen the launcher for the legend, the missile 358?



358 is man portable, an ambush SAM.
Majid is a different beast.

In some ways I would say Iran has now the second rank in SHORAD after Russia, surpassing even China

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sineva

Draco.IMF said:


> + many Ukhonto engineers are retired now and many lost theyr job, its possible Iran could recruit some of them for good cash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denel’s employee numbers shrink 15% over the last year - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> In a presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises today on its annual financial results for 2019/20, Denel revealed that it had lost nearly 500 employees over the last year. The presentation by Interim Group CEO William Hlakoane showed Denel’s workforce shrinking – as of 1 April...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *" Many people have left Denel over the non-payment of salaries last year – a matter that went to court and is awaiting judgement by the Labour Court. Denel Dynamics, for example, has lost almost all its engineers, many of whom have gone to work for companies in the Middle East. "*
> 
> I didnt say this new Iranian AD system has something to do with them, but I also read the story Iran was interested in the Umkhonto SAM missile:
> 
> 
> 
> IRAN LOOKS TO BUY SOUTH AFRICA’S UMKHONTO SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE – DCSS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SA hoping to sell weapons to Iran - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> South Africa is hoping to sell some R1.5 billion worth of weapons to Iran, including Umkhonto surface-to-air missiles. This is according to an article published in Rapport, which says South Africa has requested permission from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to sell Iran the weapons...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za


I think that most of these ended up being poached by saudi to work on its drone program,with the most notable example being the saqr male class uav,which bore a rather,shall we say "striking",resemblance to the denel bataleur male class uav. 
The claims of iran - south africa arms deals are echoed in this story,which was released when the wests propaganda campaign against iran was at full force in the early 2010s,so take everything in it with a very,very large grain[salt mines worth?] of salt.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ribed-its-way-into-iran-idUSBRE85E0CF20120615
In the end,south africa was no more a reliable supplier of weapons or technology than most of the other nations that iran attempted to work with in the 90s and 2000s.
Indeed theres probably only one military system that might well have come to iran from south africa,and that would`ve been the airframe or more likely airframe data/plans for what became the ababil 3 uav,altho there are some obvious differences to the denel seeker uav on which its based.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

I predicted such a system in 2019





__





Iranian Air Defense Systems


Since the site is still up, I feel confident to speak about some detail products: The product X-MR is basically all you need in terms of radar for a Iranian Pantsir. It is also what you need for the most critical component of the Bavar-373 system: the engagement radar. The most powerful thermal...



defence.pk





So nobody got disappointed !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448150212632002564

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448190575845560322

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448191632541732865

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448191853610905603

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448197166732808192

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448200253363064834

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Muhammed45

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448150212632002564


I think that the 10 KM part could be solved by the new Iranian copy of Tor-M shorad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## makranman

is it possible for majid to have 2 different missiles?
one for the day with no smoke. one for the night with smoke?


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448224750229147649

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Shams313

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448236205892673545oaw...

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

Irans progress in AD systems is unbelievable....

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## scimitar19

Is it me or just an imagination? 8x8 truck can detach the payload and the canisters loaded with missiles can independently stand on its own using heat deflector as a solid stand. Truck drives away with its radar to somewhere else establishing wireless or wired connection with the canisters reducing the overal footprint. I say if this is true this approach gives significant flexibility over all Russian S300/400 systems with their cold launch system. S300/400 TELARS cant detach their canisters and always need to be on the truck.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448269054377140227

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448268371271815168

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448288496712564740

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448292259825324036

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## MTN1917

Well, Iran's joint "Modafean Aseman Velayat 1400" has concluded and it did not certainly dissapointed us.

IRIADF and IRGC ASF have almost entirely employed Iranian made systems and many good developement in Iranian SHORADs were employed for the first time.

IRIADF have used Mersad-16, Talash, 15th Khordad and Newly revealed Joshan AD systems, while IRGC ASF have employed Tabas, 3rd Khordad and Sayyad AD systems.

In SHORADs, IRIADF shown its Majid AD system in action and teased one currently unkown Morfey like SAM, IRGC ASF have used the long awaited Iranian version of Tor M1, the Dezful(previously known as Oghab).

IRIADF Mersad-16














IRIADF Talash
One of early attempts in utilising Sayyad-2 sam(75 km range) with Ofogh fire control radar









IRIADF 15th Khordad
Talash's more advanced brother, uses Sayyad-2 & 3 sam(75 and 120kms range respectively) and equipped with Najm-804B AESA radar.









IRIADF Joshan
A newly unveiled system, a more recent version of 15th Khordad with a new unnamed PESA radar.













IRGC ASF Tabas
A medium range AD system equipped with Taer-2 and Sayyad-2 sams





IRGC ASF 3rd Khordad
Tabas's more advanced brother





IRGC ASF Sayyad-2
15th Khordad less advanced brother equipped Sayyad-2 sam and Najm-802B radar

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## MTN1917

SHORAD section

IRIADF Majid
A short range air defense system with a range of 8kms and a hit to kill missile













IRGC ASF Dezful
The long awaited Iranian version of Tor M1, previously named Oghab, equipped with new optics and cooling condensors





















And most intriguing a new currently unkown SHORAD seen in IRIADF paint scheme














Lots of radar like Bashir, Matla ul Fajr-2 and etc were also used

Noteworthy was the entering of Quds radar into operational use.
Quds is based on Vostok E.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I am amazed at how much Iran can produce so many different air defense systems. The enemies must be very surprised.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

Iran’s Army, IRGC unveil new domestically-developed air defense systems in joint drill


Iran’s Army and the IRGC unveil new homegrown air defense systems on the second day of a joint drill in central Iran.




www.presstv.ir




^ So according to this article one of the systems tested today morning is called "Khatam". Maybe they are refering to that unknown system described by some as "Iran's Morpheus"?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Not to detract from the conversation but many Denel Dynamics engineers went to the UAE and are working there developing missiles. I would assume it's in the 100-200 employees range but that's just my guesstimate and it could be completely wrong.


Dezful seems pretty nice but wouldnt a more modern radar be better?


----------



## TheImmortal

Are we 100% sure Oghab is built from scratch and not a canabalized TOR-M1 that is being “upgraded” to Oghab standard?

Because to me it looks like Iran ripped off the top of a TOR-M1 and attached it to this truck instead of the track based locomotive method.

Russian TOR-M1 owned by Iran






Iranian TOR-M1







Look at the 2nd cell/square (from the left) in both pictures. They both have a smaller “square” held by rivets within the larger square.

What are the chances of that happening unless they are infact both Russian TOR-M1’s?

@PeeD

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I am amazed at how much Iran can produce so many different air defense systems. The enemies must be very surprised.


Well I am not sure they are surprised,I am not surprised to be said...enemies .. they have resources ...For more than 15 years I am saying that Iran capability is far more than we see...When I want to know more about some country capability to produce something...I look in to industry...human resources...and than compare it to what we see...Iran civilian industry ,tech development,education,science..everything is there for years. There is already industry,large scale production...car production,trucks,machinery...avio industry is much larger than many think..Iran is maintaining 4th largest helicopter fleet..5th worlds largest aircraft fleet(civilian and military combined)...ship building is big...That is what you need to look,that is what wins wars...wars are won by industry..it is not important how advanced your weapon is..it is important how many you can bring and at what price..One German Tiger was so powerful that it could knock out whole T/34 or Sherman batalion..one tank..in some cases they were limited only by amunition..But it was complex,expencive...not produced in high numbers..German MG 34 was amazing ,but UK produced 8 Sterns for every MG34..Germans tryed to fix this with mg 42...there is a lot of more but bottom line is,if you look production numbers in first 2 years of WWII ,you will see German production was far higher than west...but in every year after..end of 1942,1943,1944 and 1945 ,west..or better say US..production outperformed whole powers of axis and if you look when Germany started to loose...it is when its production crumble...This is simplified,there are other factors ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sanel1412 said:


> Well I am not sure they are surprised,I am not surprised to be said...enemies .. they have resources ...For more than 15 years I am saying that Iran capability is far more than we see...When I want to know more about some country capability to produce something...I look in to industry...human resources...and than compare it to what we see...Iran civilian industry ,tech development,education,science..everything is there for years. There is already industry,large scale production...car production,trucks,machinery...avio industry is much larger than many think..Iran is maintaining 4th largest helicopter fleet..5th worlds largest aircraft fleet(civilian and military combined)...ship building is big...That is what you need to look,that is what wins wars...wars are won by industry..it is not important how advanced your weapon is..it is important how many you can bring and at what price..One German Tiger was so powerful that it could knock out whole T/34 or Sherman batalion..one tank..in some cases they were limited only by amunition..But it was complex,expencive...not produced in high numbers..German MG 34 was amazing ,but UK produced 8 Sterns for every MG34..Germans tryed to fix this with mg 42...there is a lot of more but bottom line is,if you look production numbers in first 2 years of WWII ,you will see German production was far higher than west...but in every year after..end of 1942,1943,1944 and 1945 ,west..or better say US..production outperformed whole powers of axis and if you look when Germany started to loose...it is when its production crumble...This is simplified,there are other factors ....



I know full well that Iran is way ahead of their public announcement process. I can't wait to see any future surprises they will give us about fighter jets.


----------



## Draco.IMF

TheImmortal said:


> Are we 100% sure Oghab is built from scratch and not a canabalized TOR-M1 that is being “upgraded” to Oghab standard?



the same thing also crossed today my mind
what if thats just an cannibalised russian Tor put on a truck?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

Draco.IMF said:


> + many Ukhonto engineers are retired now and many lost theyr job, its possible Iran could recruit some of them for good cash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denel’s employee numbers shrink 15% over the last year - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> In a presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises today on its annual financial results for 2019/20, Denel revealed that it had lost nearly 500 employees over the last year. The presentation by Interim Group CEO William Hlakoane showed Denel’s workforce shrinking – as of 1 April...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *" Many people have left Denel over the non-payment of salaries last year – a matter that went to court and is awaiting judgement by the Labour Court. Denel Dynamics, for example, has lost almost all its engineers, many of whom have gone to work for companies in the Middle East. "*
> 
> I didnt say this new Iranian AD system has something to do with them, but I also read the story Iran was interested in the Umkhonto SAM missile:
> 
> 
> 
> IRAN LOOKS TO BUY SOUTH AFRICA’S UMKHONTO SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE – DCSS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SA hoping to sell weapons to Iran - defenceWeb
> 
> 
> South Africa is hoping to sell some R1.5 billion worth of weapons to Iran, including Umkhonto surface-to-air missiles. This is according to an article published in Rapport, which says South Africa has requested permission from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to sell Iran the weapons...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.defenceweb.co.za


Majority of those went to company in the UAE called Halcon for a huge salary and stole IP on their way out, we shall see if the Emirati locals can absorb the expertise from the South Africans in the next 10 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Philip the Arab said:


> Not to detract from the conversation but many Denel Dynamics engineers went to the UAE and are working there developing missiles. I would assume it's in the 100-200 employees range but that's just my guesstimate and it could be completely wrong.
> 
> 
> Dezful seems pretty nice but wouldnt a more modern radar be better?


Radar is not model..it doesnt go to fashion week in Milano..for god sake...more modern radar..what that even mean..Tor is best you can get in short range class...Russians deployed it in Syria after Pantsir show too many flaws...Tor crews could catch even bird,plastic drones..and engage it..it is Shorad...it will be last defense..it will engage at few km range...it has Kasta 2E included as search radar and it has also own acquisition radar...So,it is very mobile,accurate..can detect and lock on on the move while it stop only half second to lunch missile..what is modern?...large static missile system like Israel deploy that can only survive Palestinian rocks..Tor is unique and modern system,development started long time ago but it is modernized every while..I would always preffer it over Pantsir...Pantsir showed flawed which prompted Russians to request new version for its troops,Syrian AD now use BUK more extensive and they are more succesfull....I heard that in some cases Pantsir was used only at extremly short range where it can use gun...it wasnt good as Tor when it comes to very small targets at low attlitude

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

sanel1412 said:


> Radar is not model..it doesnt go to fashion week in Milano..for god sake...more modern radar..what that even mean..Tor is best you can get in short range class...Russians deployed it in Syria after Pantsir show too many flaws...Tor crews could catch even bird,plastic drones..and engage it..it is Shorad...it will be last defense..it will engage at few km range...it has Kasta 2E included as search radar and it has also own acquisition radar...So,it is very mobile,accurate..can detect and lock on on the move while it stop only half second to lunch missile..what is modern?...large static missile system like Israel deploy that can only survive Palestinian rocks..Tor is unique and modern system,development started long time ago but it is modernized every while..I would always preffer it over Pantsir...Pantsir showed flawed which prompted Russians to request new version for its troops,Syrian AD now use BUK more extensive and they are more succesfull....I heard that in some cases Pantsir was used only at extremly short range where it can use gun...it wasnt good as Tor when it comes to very small targets at low attlitude


I mean a newer radar like the one seen in the newer versions of TOR such as M2E.


----------



## Draco.IMF

Philip the Arab said:


> Majority of those went to company in the UAE called Halcon for a huge salary and stole IP on their way out, we shall see if the Emirati locals can absorb the expertise from the South Africans in the next 10 years.



whats IP?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I like it better on the wheel and it is clear that it is an improved version because we can see that the optics are improved


----------



## NaCon

photoshoped image of how it might look like with 8 missiles per launcher

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

Draco.IMF said:


> whats IP?


Intellectual property such as datapacks of missiles.

Basically the run down is that the UAE paid for the development of these 2 missiles when Denel was still functional but wanted their full info and got the datapacks illegaly.

They are now much more independent than before but still dependent on South African contractors and import a ton of parts from India which is a fairly secure import partner for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> Radar is not model..it doesnt go to fashion week in Milano..for god sake...more modern radar..what that even mean..Tor is best you can get in short range class...Russians deployed it in Syria after Pantsir show too many flaws...Tor crews could catch even bird,plastic drones..and engage it..it is Shorad...it will be last defense..it will engage at few km range...it has Kasta 2E included as search radar and it has also own acquisition radar...So,it is very mobile,accurate..can detect and lock on on the move while it stop only half second to lunch missile..what is modern?...large static missile system like Israel deploy that can only survive Palestinian rocks..Tor is unique and modern system,development started long time ago but it is modernized every while..I would always preffer it over Pantsir...Pantsir showed flawed which prompted Russians to request new version for its troops,Syrian AD now use BUK more extensive and they are more succesfull....I heard that in some cases Pantsir was used only at extremly short range where it can use gun...it wasnt good as Tor when it comes to very small targets at low attlitude



Russian TOR deployed in Syria is TOR-M2E non export version.

Iran has TOR-M1. There is a big difference between the two.

Inside TOR-1







Inside of TOR-M2







_“The Tor M2/M2E is a “deep modernisation” of the baseline Tor M1 weapon system

The Tor M2E has an improved weapon system. The new planar array surveillance radar can track up to 48 targets concurrently, retaining the range performance of the legacy system. The revised phased array engagement radar uses new phase shifters, and is capable of tracking targets within a claimed 30° solid angle around the antenna boresight. Paired command link antennas are mounted on both sides of the array, used to acquire the missiles post launch, while they are out of the field of view of the engagement radar array. Missiles can be launched 2 seconds apart. The manufacturer has identified the missile design as an area of future improvement, the turret permitting the carriage of a large number of smaller and lighter future missiles.”_

Not to mention TOR-M2 now uses a newer missile better suited for smaller object interception.

So yes what Iran has is basically a Cold War era system. A simple EO/IO would have prevented the system from confusing a civilian airliner with a cruise missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Tor is intended to be used at worst place you can be..battlefield..that is why it has unique capabilities,because it suppose to protect troops from everything..mortars,shells,missiles,aircrafts..and it is also capable to protect itself,this is where most systems are bad...due these reasons it is developed to be fast,responsive...it can engage at minus attlitude..which only few system can..you can take module from tracked chasis and put it on ship..everywhere and it will work..M2 version got more channels and double missile magazine which make it even better

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Russian TOR deployed in Syria is TOR-M2E non export version.
> 
> Iran has TOR-M1. There is a big difference between the two.
> 
> Inside TOR-1
> 
> View attachment 784645
> 
> 
> 
> Inside of TOR-M2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“The Tor M2/M2E is a “deep modernisation” of the baseline Tor M1 weapon system
> 
> The Tor M2E has an improved weapon system. The new planar array surveillance radar can track up to 48 targets concurrently, retaining the range performance of the legacy system. The revised phased array engagement radar uses new phase shifters, and is capable of tracking targets within a claimed 30° solid angle around the antenna boresight. Paired command link antennas are mounted on both sides of the array, used to acquire the missiles post launch, while they are out of the field of view of the engagement radar array. Missiles can be launched 2 seconds apart. The manufacturer has identified the missile design as an area of future improvement, the turret permitting the carriage of a large number of smaller and lighter future missiles.”_
> 
> Not to mention TOR-M2 uses a newer missile better suited for smaller object interception.
> 
> So yes what Iran is basically a Cold War era system.



Iran's Tor has at least one component not present on the most elementary version of the system. Much like Iran's S-300 has some component from the S-400 in fact.


----------



## sanel1412

NaCon said:


> photoshoped image of how it might look like with 8 missiles per launcher
> View attachment 784644


It doesnt matter how many missiles you put on truck..it is important how many it can engage in same time..it is always better to have less missiles on more trucks,it provides better redundancy ,if you put all missiles on one TEL,enemy needs only one missile to knock it out...you can always add more TELs ..but as I said..it all depends how many targets it can engage in same time

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Draco.IMF said:


> the same thing also crossed today my mind
> what if thats just an cannibalised russian Tor put on a truck?



Not if, I’m convinced this is Tor-M1 put on a truck. The question is why. I assume the command center in the truck is upgraded similar to other command centers in Iran’s AD trucks. But the radar staying the same along with the missile.

Looks like modernization job from analog to digital.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aryobarzan

In a way it is not so bad to buy the older systems that are less digitized and use the basics to design a fully digitized Iranian version..Imagine if Iran had to deal with Russian legacy software....They will skin you to give you the source code and if you do not have the source code then you need to be their bitch to get any new update..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

Draco.IMF said:


> the same thing also crossed today my mind
> what if thats just an cannibalised russian Tor put on a truck?



There are various differences in the details of Iran's Russian-imported Tor and in Dezful. That square with rivets on the second cell could be anything, we need exact knowledge of the system's architecture to draw conclusions.


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> Iran's Tor has at least one component not present on the most elementary version of the system. Much like Iran's S-300 has some component from the S-400 in fact.



Lipstick on a pig.

S-300 is a terrible example. For one, Iran received its S-300 recently at a time when there was no longer an S-300 production line anymore. It was shut down to make way for S-400 and S-500 line. Thus it was assembled using parts of existing S-400 line.

ToR-m1 was recieved 13 years ago and was a basic version. Iran upgraded the range by lifting export restriction in the coding of the software. But since then the system has remained largely untouched minus the component you mention. The radar and missile have all been upgraded in newer models along with the switch to digital.


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> ToR-m1 was recieved 13 years ago and was a basic version. Iran upgraded the range by lifting export restriction in the coding of the software. But since then the system has remained largely untouched minus the component you mention. The radar and missile have all been upgraded in newer models along with the switch to digital.



Which could be the case of Dezful. Also, to my knowledge no recent images of the interior of Iran's imported Tors were released so here too, potential modernization is not out of the question.


----------



## TheImmortal

SalarHaqq said:


> The entire bottom row or basis of the structure is completely different in Iran's Russian-imported Tor and in Dezful. That square with rivets on the second cell could be anything, we need exact knowledge of the system's architecture to draw conclusions.



Doesn’t explain why you would use same radar and array when Iran has access to the latest radars. The difference is evident by comparing Morpheus and Dezful and tech that was incorporated into both.


----------



## WudangMaster

Could the Joshan pesa be added to Bavar to make it passive, if the need should arise? 
Can a system have both an aesa and pesa and switch between them?


----------



## SalarHaqq

TheImmortal said:


> Doesn’t explain why you would use same radar and array when Iran has access to the latest radars. The difference is evident by comparing Morpheus and Dezful and tech that was incorporated into both.



I have no idea about the radars and arrays to be honest. On the other hand why would the IRGC dismount the launching system from its tracked chassis and put it on a truck while modifying the bottom half of it, and then present it as an indigenous weapon? What would the purpose of such an effort be?

By the way Tor M-1 or 9K331 was released in 1991 ie at the very end of the Cold War. The vintage 9K330 which entered service in 1986 is simply called Tor apparently (without the -M1 suffix).


----------



## Sina-1

If you know anything about engineering then you know this simple fact: digital is much easier than analogue today. It’s multifaceted but basically it goes down to available component in market and also workforce knowledge. Hence there is no doubt whatsoever that iranian tor m1 is a digital system. We can actually see this with the “copy” of BUK and the Iranian variant 3rd of Kho










irgc copied tor m1 because it is the most optimal shorad system in the world in terms of product architecture. Onwards it will be improved with better missiles and radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PeeD

TheImmortal said:


> Are we 100% sure Oghab is built from scratch and not a canabalized TOR-M1 that is being “upgraded” to Oghab standard?
> 
> Because to me it looks like Iran ripped off the top of a TOR-M1 and attached it to this truck instead of the track based locomotive method.
> 
> Russian TOR-M1 owned by Iran
> 
> View attachment 784631
> 
> 
> Iranian TOR-M1
> 
> View attachment 784632
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the 2nd cell/square (from the left) in both pictures. They both have a smaller “square” held by rivets within the larger square.
> 
> What are the chances of that happening unless they are infact both Russian TOR-M1’s?
> 
> @PeeD



For all details it looks like a local variant. But not certain, maybe this is a prototype

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sina-1

PeeD said:


> For all details it looks like a local variant. But not certain, maybe this is a prototype


Exactly. Architecturally they are similar. Which is the point! But in detail they differ in every aspect!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

PeeD said:


> For all details it looks like a local variant. But not certain, maybe this is a prototype





Sina-1 said:


> Exactly. Architecturally they are similar. Which is the point! But in detail they differ in every aspect!
> View attachment 784656



Im not convinced....that riveting on the second panel square stands out.

I’m not saying it’s a TOR-M1, but rather an upgrade TOR-M1 using parts from an older TOR-M1


----------



## sanel1412

Reason they made it very similar is probably they will use it with TOR M1,short range frontal air defence is very different than rest,it is reason why s-300V was also on tracked TELs and differ in deployment and usage of rest s-300. S 300V was originaly developed for Army ground troops to be deployed closed to front to protect large units from balistic missiles and aircrafts and army deployed it in PUKs ..One of the unique factors is that frontal air defence is operated outside networks,frontal AD are deployed in larger units than it is case in IADS...if you look video clips you will see mostly whole battalions of Thunguska,Tors follow troops...So there are no IADS,fixed network ..or anything to inter connect air defense...they operate very often on the move so there is no time for deployment..that is one reason...also I should mention that while TOR development started long time ago..TOR-M1 is 3th gen of system and is full of advanced technology..there are not many systems capable to detect and lock on target while moving fast as TOR...engagement at minus attlitude...cold lunch...missile itself is advanced..so there are many reasons while they may want to reverse engeener it..latter they can improve technology and use it on other projects..you see..having air defence that can engage on the move is not easy..Iran made great progress but none of air defence systems before Dezful was capable engage on the move...even this Majid system as we can see must first stop..deploy lunchers in vertical position..etc...with TOR like system and cold lunch...they can for first time have system capable to engage on the move

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

سال ۲۰۱۱ شایعه‌ای بود که ایران تور ام وان رو باز کرده برای مهندسی معکوس و روسها فهمیدن و روابط نظامی شکر آب شده بود

من فکر نمیکنم بعد ده سال ساخت تور ام وان برای ما دشوار بوده و حتی حدس میزنم ما به دلایل سیاسی روی تور ام وان داخلی خیلی دیر مانور دادیم​

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yavar



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448374113169551363^ Get your Chos-e Fil or Pofak ready boys

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

yavar said:


>



This is one weird cold launch technology. Instead of being pushed out via cold gas and then the engine turning on after a delay.

It seems it gets pushed out and there is a timed fuse on fire on the missile when it’s coming out which then lights the missile engine to take off.

Anyone else notice this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Im not convinced....that riveting on the second panel square stands out.
> 
> I’m not saying it’s a TOR-M1, but rather an upgrade TOR-M1 using parts from an older TOR-M1



No, you're definitely onto something.

There's a *strong chance *that what we are seeing is indeed a cannibalized TOR-M1 unit from Iran's current small stockpile retrofitted on a wheeled chassis but I don't doubt that the internals of the system have been upgraded and the C&C module itself is brand-new.

It remains to be seen if Iran can set-up a streamlined production chain for the TOR-M1 complex. I'm not convinced personally since what was showed is highly suspect in my opinion. I mean we can all agree it looks nice and cool but it's not something like the Majid which looks more like something Iran could outright build without too much of doubt on how Iran is producing such a system.

Looks great (like really great) but I'm extremely skeptical, if it's a 100% from the ground-up copy of the TOR-M1 straight from the factory of which they're now producing then that's good but my gut tells me that this is cannibalized (to some extent).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> This is one weird cold launch technology. Instead of being pushed out via cold gas and then the engine turning on after a delay.
> 
> It seems it gets pushed out and there is a timed fuse on fire on the missile when it’s coming out which then lights the missile engine to take off.
> 
> Anyone else notice this?



I am not sure if you mean this:
Compared to the Russian or NK cold launch, there is no initial cold launch cloud.

S300 and NK launches have black smoke. Iskander has initial white smoke.


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> This is one weird cold launch technology. Instead of being pushed out via cold gas and then the engine turning on after a delay.
> 
> It seems it gets pushed out and there is a timed fuse on fire on the missile when it’s coming out which then lights the missile engine to take off.
> 
> Anyone else notice this?


I heard somewhere here recently that Iran might be using springs to eject the missile and such a mechanism might still need a fuse maybe?


----------



## Shawnee

WudangMaster said:


> I heard somewhere here recently that Iran might be using springs to eject the missile and such a mechanism might still need a fuse maybe?



I heard it in the forum here to use kinetic energy or spring. Nothing official.

If true it is even better than gas driven cold launch.

Cold launch also uses side spring around the vacuum chamber above the protection rubber plate but pure spring is a break through.

Anyway, these are speculations only.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

It is same cold lunch implemented on original TOR...missile is ejected than side boosters will kick off and direct missile in right direction....it is fully mobile short range SAM..it must engage target in seconds ....it is small misile..no need for large amount of energy....so you dont see smoke..S-300 use tvc to direct missile in right direction..but with short range SAM you need much faster acceleration and better response so everything is accelerated,TOR use same cold lunch tech as S/300 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shawnee

sanel1412 said:


> It is same cold lunch implemented on original TOR...missile is ejected than side boosters will kick off and direct missile in right direction....it is fully mobile short range SAM..it must engage target in seconds ....it is small misile..no need for large amount of energy....so you dont see smoke..S-300 use tvc to direct missile in right direction..but with short range SAM you need much faster acceleration and better response so everything is accelerated,TOR use same cold lunch tech as S/300 ...



Tor M1 has some black smoke too.
Again, it was dark and the frame rate was low to the point that side nozzle flare was only transiently seen.

You may be correct. We were speculating only.


----------



## TheImmortal

sanel1412 said:


> It is same cold lunch implemented on original TOR...missile is ejected than side boosters will kick off and direct missile in right direction....it is fully mobile short range SAM..it must engage target in seconds ....it is small misile..no need for large amount of energy....so you dont see smoke..S-300 use tvc to direct missile in right direction..but with short range SAM you need much faster acceleration and better response so everything is accelerated,TOR use same cold lunch tech as S/300 ...



Bro you can clearly see the fuse on fire light the engine. I’m starting to wonder why you spread misinformation


Shawnee said:


> I heard it in the forum here to use kinetic energy or spring. Nothing official.
> 
> If true it is even better than gas driven cold launch.
> 
> Cold launch also uses side spring around the vacuum chamber above the protection rubber plate but pure spring is a break through.
> 
> Anyway, these are speculations only.



Yes spring launches the missile, but engine needs to turn on. In Russian missiles the engine is programmed to turn on after X amount of time based on pressure difference (similar to a sub launch missile breaking the water).

In Iran’s you can clearly see the fuse is on fire when it goes up then you hear the crackle as it lights the engine and then engine kicks on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> Bro you can clearly see the fuse on fire light the engine. I’m starting to wonder why you spread misinformation
> 
> 
> Yes spring launches the missile, but engine needs to turn on. In Russian missiles the engine is programmed to turn on after X amount of time based on pressure difference (similar to a sub launch missile breaking the water).
> 
> In Iran’s you can clearly see the fuse is on fire when it goes up then you hear the crackle as it lights the engine and then engine kicks on.



Very limited frame rate but this is it:
Fragments, track mark, maybe black cloud?
Then side nozzles

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Shawnee said:


> Very limited frame rate but this is it:
> Fragments, track mark, maybe black cloud?
> Then side nozzles
> 
> View attachment 784761
> 
> View attachment 784762
















Part of ignition is unfortunately not in this (last) frame but you can see it if you play the video 1:27-1:28 mark the engine kicks on from initial fuse.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Compare this to TOR-M2














Another launch (another example)





























I respectfully disagree with @sanel1412 these are same launch technology

For one the Russian missile ignites Almost immed and is a much faster missile than Iranian one. Likely because TOR-M2 uses a different missile than TOR-M1 or whatever Iranian missile is in Oghab if Iran changed the missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> This is one weird cold launch technology. Instead of being pushed out via cold gas and then the engine turning on after a delay.
> 
> It seems it gets pushed out and there is a timed fuse on fire on the missile when it’s coming out which then lights the missile engine to take off.
> 
> Anyone else notice this?


Heres a slow mo of a tor launch,right after the missile is ejected you can see the small solid fueled rocket motors on the nose of the missile firing to orient the missile in the direction of the target.
This is a system thats used on some russian cruise missiles as well,such as the p800 oniks/yakhont


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryGfys/comments/336hkc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Heres a slow mo of a tor launch,right after the missile is ejected you can see the small solid fueled rocket motors on the nose of the missile firing to orient the missile in the direction of the target.
> This is a system thats used on some russian cruise missiles as well,such as the p800 oniks/yakhont
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryGfys/comments/336hkc



Yes, Iran’s doesn’t orient itself using side boosters. Look at Iran video the exhaust plume is straight down rather than at an angle like your example and my example.

Very few Iran AD missiles do horizontal orientation (I think only one I can recall is one of the Sayyad’s and now two with Morpheus).






Proof is right here- exhaust plume from engine start up is nearly vertical. Thus there Is no horizontal orientation from side boosters like in Russian missiles.

Thus one must speculate that isn’t a side booster for horizontal orientation, but a timed fuse to ignite the engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shawnee

TheImmortal said:


> Yes, Iran’s doesn’t orient itself using side boosters. Look at Iran video the exhaust plume is straight down rather than at an angle like your example and my example.
> 
> Very few Iran AD missiles do horizontal orientation (I think only one I can recall is one of the Sayyad’s and now two with Morpheus).
> 
> View attachment 784787
> 
> 
> Proof is right here- exhaust plume from engine start up is nearly vertical. Thus there Is no horizontal orientation from side boosters like in Russian missiles.
> 
> Thus one must speculate that isn’t a side booster for horizontal orientation, but a timed fuse to ignite the engine.




I think what you see as a fuse or maybe let’s call it flash is the ignition of side nozzles but side nozzles did not aim to reorient it at least in this test.

Look at the arrows for the bottom of the missile and side nozzles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

TheImmortal said:


> Yes, Iran’s doesn’t orient itself using side boosters. Look at Iran video the exhaust plume is straight down rather than at an angle like your example and my example.
> 
> Very few Iran AD missiles do horizontal orientation (I think only one I can recall is one of the Sayyad’s and now two with Morpheus).
> 
> View attachment 784787
> 
> 
> Proof is right here- exhaust plume from engine start up is nearly vertical. Thus there Is no horizontal orientation from side boosters like in Russian missiles.
> 
> Thus one must speculate that isn’t a side booster for horizontal orientation, but a timed fuse to ignite the engine.


Right,I see what you`re getting at now,and you`re right the vertical orientation is weird for a tor m1,usually you have the firing of the nose thrusters for positioning first and then firing of the main motor once the missile has begun to rotate into a horizontal attitude.
I came across a video of a night time firing of a newer tor m2u system,and what it shows is very interesting,because with this version you can clearly see the main motor firing first,and likely the positioning thrusters firing just a milisecond later.
I think that they may have done this to shave a second or two off of the launch sequence,which doesnt sound like much,but for a shorad even seconds count during an engagement. 

The sequence starts @0:22





So what we could be looking at here is a faster modified launch sequence for the dezful based on later improvements to the newer tor models.
Instead of two separate steps where the positioning thrusters were fired first,and only when the missile had begun to rotate towards the horizontal was the main motor fired,here you have one step,with the positioning thrusters firing while the main motor is also firing.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## EvilWesteners

Regarding Iran's new SHORAD that looks like an old Tor-M1 ... I read that SOME of the posts here are based on disappointment with Iran copying an old technology. 

May I be allowed to offer a different PERSPECTIVE here:

I use a software for my work even these day that I got from work some 20 years ago, and it had been developed in Oxford in 1998 or about then. The newer versions are better though, but the French alternative is incredible. This piece of software is clunky and a 100% pain in the @$$ to use, without a shadow of a doubt. Not wanting to bore everyone here with fancy technical mumbo jumbo, let's just call this software SSA, and let's say it is a HYDRA CFD (used for fluid dynamics for gas turbine engine design).

SSA is one of the most painful and nightmarish pieces of software for mathematical modeling I have ever used, and I honestly think i have used them all. IT IS THAT BAD. Absolute nightmare.

It was about $50K a long time ago, and it could only be used/run on RISC-based sparcstation that could run this ****ing thing.

Now I have transferred it to a high end laptop, and built an emulator (operating system) to run it and use it at work. 

So, why the hell did I do that ????

BECAUSE I CAN USE IT WELL AFTER INVESTING SO MUCH TIME BETWEEN 1999-2003. BECAUSE I CAN USE IF FASTER THAN ALL THE NEW ONES THAT HAVE 1000 MORE ADVANCED FEATURES. BECAUSE I CAN DO A PIECE OF PRESENTATION WITH DATA EXTRACTED IN A MATTER OF 6 HOURS. I CAN DO MIRACLES WITH THIS ****ING SOFTWARE AT WORK.

That's why I spend lots of money and time to build an emulator for it so I can continue to use the stupid software that I hate so much.

Iran was offered (I would say had no choice) and got Tor-m1 in place of mig-31s (second time disappointed) which after paying for, the U.S. interceded and Russia refused to honor the contract and deliver the migs, and for the money it offered Iran the Tor's.

Actually, right around the time that I started with SSA software (give or take a bit).

*My point:*

Iran knows Tor-M really, really well. I am assuming, it knows all of its good and bad points, and knows how to use it well (yes I know it shot down a passenger airliner, but for that I blame the commander and the operator, and Rohani for refusing to shut down the commercial air traffic because his office wanted Iran to continue collecting for air space usage fees).

Once you know a system EXTREMELY WELL, you can use it in very creative ways, and that experience gives you incredible leverage in both usage and time investment. YES, YES, at some point technology moves on and you have to move with it. Using an F-14A today is nonsense. Iran needs a better fighter jet, with a realistic hybrid PESA radar, IRST/FLIR, ECM and ECCM, IRST/AR warning systems, etc. 

But Tor-M (old technology) is a subset of an overall Air Defense Platform & Strategic Coverage. There is ROOM (IMO) in Iran's air defense for something like a Tor-M (even somewhat older ones, though I hope they have at least more powerful, much faster digital processing using advanced computers for data processor, lower S/N ratios, multiple discrete channels, better transmitters, better digital signal processing hardware that is available OTS in Malaysia, and I would keep my list to just that). 

If Iran is using this platform in a creative way, in innovative strategic aggregated air defense, for certain defense scenarios against certain adversaries, then we may all be surprised how well Iranian AD experts have thought this through.

Or may be even, Iran has literally done nothing other than replaced the tracked vehicle with wheeled vehicle, and may be even a few basic updates. Who can be 100% sure? I have not seen the quantities to tell me that it definitely is being mass produced.

The other things Iran is doing with SHRAD is impressive, I had heard about it from someone more than couple of months ago. I was waiting to see it.

Good news for Iran.

More good news coming.

Stay well. Long live Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sineva

I decided to finally clean this up into one pic




And this is a close up of the radar




Interestingly it looks like its got 2 sets of antennas,you`ve got the rotating antenna on top,and what looks like it could be a set of 4 fixed panel [aesa?] antennas underneath.

Reactions: Like Like:
11 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448236192936439808

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Some more pics of the Joshan pesa radar
















I`ve gotta say,I`m getting a real s300 gravestone/tombstone radar vibe off of this system,it does bear more than just a passing resemblance,plus going for pesa when you already have excellent working aesas?.
Is it a reverse/reengineered iranian copy of the gravestone?,or is it just a look a like with very different engineering and capabilities?
It`d be interesting to know if its primarily just for fire control like the gravestone,or whether it has search capabilities like the patriot sams mpq-53 search+fire control radar.
This is a real puzzle.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

WudangMaster said:


> Could the Joshan pesa be added to Bavar to make it passive, if the need should arise?
> Can a system have both an aesa and pesa and switch between them?


PESA is not passive radar...it is named pesa because it use one transmitter for all arrays ,unlike AESA...where all modules are also transmitters and recivers but PESA is radar which transmit and recive signals as any radar...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448514484746731520

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt




----------



## Shawnee

WudangMaster said:


> Could the Joshan pesa be added to Bavar to make it passive, if the need should arise?
> Can a system have both an aesa and pesa and switch between them?



Yes. Theoretically yes. I am not sure if it is practically done but it can be added to AESA radars to be used in specific situations.



sanel1412 said:


> PESA is not passive radar...it is named pesa because it use one transmitter for all arrays ,unlike AESA...where all modules are also transmitters and recivers but PESA is radar which transmit and recive signals as any radar...



It is just a military jargon. Not really passive.
The separate pure receiver component will be passive which is a plus.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

It is same technology..it depend on target direction and attlitude when and where missile will kick on boosters.....Tor and S-300 use same cold lunch technology..it is missile where you see difference ,Tor dont use TVC to direct missile,instead it use side boosters..while s-300 kick on main propulision after it is ejected using cold lunch,Iranian version eject missile than side booster kick on...so at same way,you can see clearly if watch video at slow speed .what happens after cold lunch depends on many factors and there could be even different missile but that doesnt change anything..cold lunch is cold lunch...Normaly I would not waste my time to prove something which is clear,but here it is..cold lunch,Iranian version









And than boom..booster




Here ,at last image you can see this side boosters just kick on....first one or two will ignite to direct missile than all boosters will kick on

Video clips above show M2 version,Iran got M1E and it could be some difference between Iranian version and org in sequnces or ejection speed..or missile..but fundamentaly everything is same..cold lunch ejects missile without using missile own boosters or motor..and it ends there,what came after that doesnt change cold lunch technology

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

I will wait for Imad Media’s video. Iran is hiding something about this system similar to the Bavar revealing.

With Majid and Morpheus we got clear concise footage of engaging the target.

With Iran TOR-M1 the video shows the system at the daytime, but only shows a launch footage from a terrible bottom angle in the dead of night and it only last a few seconds.

So something is not right about this prototype and I’m going to wait for more evidence to come out rather than argue and speculate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

Sineva said:


> I decided to finally clean this up into one pic
> View attachment 784825
> 
> And this is a close up of the radar
> View attachment 784826
> 
> Interestingly it looks like its got 2 sets of antennas,you`ve got the rotating antenna on top,and what looks like it could be a set of 4 fixed panel [aesa?] antennas underneath.


Maybe the lower array does something similar to the radome of the original morpheus?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> Maybe the lower array does something similar to the radome of the original morpheus?



It’s what allows for 360 coverage.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1447995302271651843

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aryobarzan

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448603492684337154

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## skyshadow

*"one of the commanders in exercise said Talash-5 has launched" It seems like Iran was testing Talash-5 , up until now we only had Talash-1-2 and 3 *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448410419886891015
Iran should adopt this anti thermal technology for their TELs so far I only see anti thermal camo nets for the front of the car. Not the wheels or doors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

skyshadow said:


> *" one of the commanders in exercise said Talash-5 has launched " It seems like Iran was testing Talash-5 , we only have Talash-3 *



Talash-5 may be Joshan and I also have a candidate for Talash-4

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## skyshadow

PeeD said:


> Talash-5 may be Joshan and I also have a candidate for Talash-4


could very well be Joshan yes


----------



## PeeD

IRIADF has 5 "hubs" equipped with S-200

Talash projects improve these 5 hubs, step by step to create "fortresses"
Now Talash-5 has started. New radars, new missiles (Sayyad-2, -3, etc.)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

well now we know *Tabas *radar has *350 km range* and *+100 km missile engagement range.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> well now we know *Tabas *radar has *350 km range* and *+100 km missile engagement range.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 785263



Tabas is older tech. More vulnerable in ECW environment. Lower cost however...better to defend less vital areas.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Natalya Shadova

TheImmortal said:


> Need to make it at least a 4 canister system if not a 6 one (3 on each side).
> 
> Assuming this is the prototype, but final version shouldn’t have 2 missiles. Too little for a SOHRAD.


It can carry 4-8


----------



## skyshadow

TheImmortal said:


> Tabas is older tech. More vulnerable in ECW environment. Lower cost however...better to defend less vital areas.


its passive mode can help it 70 - 90 km after that the radar is on its own, we better hope Iran is upgrading its radar as time goes on

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

skyshadow said:


> its passive mode can help it 70 - 90 km after that the radar is on its own, we better hope Iran is upgrading its radar as time goes on



The upgrade to Tabas is 3rd Khordad, it’s more expensive and capable brother with a more powerful radar.

No point in upgrading Tabas. It’s role is clearly defined.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449080763316678658

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*Joshan air defense system, it uses upgraded Sayyad-3 missile, official maximum range up until now was 120 kms *


Iranian air defense officer : " Target is closing in, speed 600 km/h, range 132 kms, over "

Air defense headquarter : " we received your report, you are clear to engage, over "

Iranian air defense officer : " message received, missile away, over "

*this proves that upgraded Sayyad-3 missile (and Joshan system ) now has 150 kms maximum range 





*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WudangMaster

skyshadow said:


> *Joshan air defense system, it uses upgraded Sayyad-3 missile, official maximum range up until now was 120 kms *
> 
> 
> Iranian air defense officer : " Target is closing in, speed 600 km/h, range 132 kms, over "
> 
> Air defense headquarter : " we received your report, you are clear to engage, over "
> 
> Iranian air defense officer : " message received, missile away, over "
> 
> *this proves that upgraded Sayyad-3 missile (and Joshan system ) now has 150 kms maximum range
> 
> 
> View attachment 785384
> *


Seem Joshan is more of a variant of the 15th of Khordad rather than a totally different system altogether, similar to the Raad/Tabas/3rd Khordad family.
In this exercise, we have seen a rather robust family of systems centered around Sayyads 2/3 and very powerful associated radars and control systems.

I think it goes something like Talash 2/Sayyad/15th Khordad/Joshan though I think Sayyad and Talash originally part of one project because I still don't believe Talash to be mass produced so far as a testing platform leading to the final products like 15th Khordad and Bavar and I think maybe Mersad 16.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WudangMaster

PeeD said:


> IRIADF has 5 "hubs" equipped with S-200
> 
> Talash projects improve these 5 hubs, step by step to create "fortresses"
> Now Talash-5 has started. New radars, new missiles (Sayyad-2, -3, etc.)


So were the original S200s ever made mobile? I have seen pictures of them accompanying Talash in previous exercises, always on a truck mount but never firing. Shouldn't they be used up as sooner than later or do they still have some capabilities over Sayyads 2/3 and what about Sayyad 4?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

WudangMaster said:


> So were the original S200s ever made mobile? I have seen pictures of them accompanying Talash in previous exercises, always on a truck mount but never firing. Shouldn't they be used up as sooner than later or do they still have some capabilities over Sayyads 2/3 and what about Sayyad 4?



S-200 missiles will never become mobile

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449281111457157120^ So this system which is named "Zobin" is the land variant of "Navab" which is the naval version for the Iranian Navy.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Ali_Baba

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449080763316678658



Now all Iran needs to do is a better job of getting this Command and Control centre to talk to the people who push the "red" buttons and all will be sorted..

I do think Iran has done a fantastic job of building a home grown radars and SAM systems and wish that Pakistan could one day catch up with Iran in that area.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Muhammed45



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

@PeeD 

*Talash-5 hitting a GBU bomb, the speed on that missile is crazy



 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1448589102312472581 *

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Shawnee

PeeD said:


> S-200 missiles will never become mobile



رهبری ده پونزده سال پیش گفت متحرک بشن






What do you think of this LRAD from NK?
What is our long term plan for replacing S200?

@PeeD
سوال اخر اینکه
ما قبلا همون چیزهایی رو رونمایی میکردیم که کره شمالی داشت

حالا ما شدیم مکمل کره
کره موشک هایپرسانیک، موشک بالستیک
زیردریایی و موشک های قاره پیمای مختلف داره

ما موتور سلمان، رادارهای پیشرفته تر
پهپاد های پیشرفته تر
زیردریایی متفاوت
تیربار موشکی متفاوت
ناو متفاوت

چه دلیلی داره کره معادلی برای موتور سلمان نداشته باشه

به نظرت علت این گسست چیه
تاکتیک یا کاهش همکاری

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Shawnee said:


> رهبری ده پونزده سال پیش گفت متحرک بشن
> 
> View attachment 785640
> 
> 
> What do you think of this LRAD from NK?
> What is our long term plan for replacing S200?
> 
> @PeeD
> سوال اخر اینکه
> ما قبلا همون چیزهایی رو رونمایی میکردیم که کره شمالی داشت
> 
> حالا ما شدیم مکمل کره
> کره موشک سوپرسانیک، موشک بالستیک
> زیردریایی و موشک های قاره پیمای مختلف داره
> 
> ما موتور سلمان، رادارهای پیشرفته تر
> پهپاد های پیشرفته تر
> زیردریایی متفاوت
> تیربار موشکی متفاوت
> ناو متفاوت
> 
> چه دلیلی داره کره معادلی برای موتور سلمان نداشته باشه
> 
> به نظرت علت این گسست چیه
> تاکتیک یا کاهش همکاری


چند سال پیش سردار حاجی زاده تو یه مصاجبه تلویزیونی گفت ماتوزمینه موشکی از کره جلو زدیم......فک کنم هردوکشور همکاریهاشون رو دارن ولی متناسب با تهدیدات برایه خودشون سامانه-سلاح تولید می کنن......لزومی نداره هرچیزی کره داره ماعینا داشته باشیم و بالعکس......
ما دشمن شماره یکمون اثراعیل دز فاصله ۱۳۰۰کیلومتریه پس قاره پیما نمیخوایم ولی کره شمالی برای حمله به خاک امریکا قاره پیما میخواد و الی آخر برای بقیه سامانه ها.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shawnee

DoubleYouSee said:


> چند سال پیش سردار حاجی زاده تو یه مصاجبه تلویزیونی گفت ماتوزمینه موشکی از کره جلو زدیم......فک کنم هردوکشور همکاریهاشون رو دارن ولی متناسب با تهدیدات برایه خودشون سامانه-سلاح تولید می کنن......لزومی نداره هرچیزی کره داره ماعینا داشته باشیم و بالعکس......
> ما دشمن شماره یکمون اثراعیل دز فاصله ۱۳۰۰کیلومتریه پس قاره پیما نمیخوایم ولی کره شمالی برای حمله به خاک امریکا قاره پیما میخواد و الی آخر برای بقیه سامانه ها.



اون وقت کره پهپاد و رادار بهتر نمیخواد

ما هایپرسونیک و موشک بالستیک زیردریایی نمیخواهیم


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Shawnee said:


> اون وقت کره پهپاد و رادار بهتر نمیخواد
> 
> ما هایپرسونیک و موشک بالستیک زیردریایی نمیخواهیم


صد البته که ما زیردریایی و هایپر سونیک می خوایم و شواهد و قراین هم اینو نشون میده که تو اون نقاط هم داره کار میشه.....والبته کره شمالی هم تو زمینه پهپادی و راداری سرمایه گذاری کرده......ولی دکترین ما بازدارندگی(موشک بالستیک)دفاعیست و سامانه های پدافندی ما نمود بیشتری داره ولی کره بازدارندگی(اتمی )وآفندیست....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Wow, just amazing work coming out from Iran recently!

The Zobin looks to be a very professional and integral AD system that will undoubtedly play an important role in expanding both ground and NAVAL capabilities of Iranian armed forces.

Iran seems to have really hit a stride in domestic AD R&D as well as production (possibly). By whatever means Iran is making these, whether it be industrial espionage, cooperation with China or just good ol' fashioned research and development (with trial and many errors of course lol). We are proud and will continue to show great interest in this field!

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## EvilWesteners

Blue In Green said:


> Wow, just amazing work coming out from Iran recently!
> 
> The Zobin looks to be a very professional and integral AD system that will undoubtedly play an important role in expanding both ground and NAVAL capabilities of Iranian armed forces.
> 
> Iran seems to have really hit a stride in domestic AD R&D as well as production (possibly). By whatever means Iran is making these, whether it be industrial espionage, cooperation with China or just good ol' fashioned research and development (with trial and many errors of course lol). We are proud and will continue to show great interest in this field!



More is coming ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 785606


The radar and its shape is most suitable for a naval platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeeD

Shawnee said:


> What is our long term plan for replacing S200?



Sayyad-5 or -6, an variant of Sayyad-4 with ~400km range

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449622412123848705

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449622427789631488
So I guess now the list of not-yet-unveiled, anticipated Iranian air-defense systems should look as follows:
- Separ
- possibly Oghab
- Navab
- Khatam (?)
- ground-based Kamand CIWS
- Arman

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

A Photoshop from Majid ADS. 8 launchers.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> View attachment 785726
> 
> 
> A Photoshop from Majid ADS. 8 launchers.


Now if they produce it they can replace all those legacy crotale with it.
And the system would be perfect for ambushing enemy crafts as it has no emission

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

No country in the world has released so much defense system in a short period of time, Iran is in an unprecedented scientific boom

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ali_Baba

The Russians must be kicking themselves - they have lost a large and what once was a captive market for their SAM systems as Iran can now build all she needs and the "era" of tech denial that Russia indulged in preventing the delivery of the S300 systems is over.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Flotilla

Just a question, which missile uses Majid ADS?. It seems to be nearly twice times thicker than Misgah-2 and even a bit longer. Being Misgah-2 missile 6km max. range, this missile could reach even 12 km. It is so interesting for intercepting UAVs like those from Azerbaiyán. If it has a range like that, it can be comparable to the last Mistral III IR missile (10 km).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Flotilla said:


> Just a question, which missile uses Majid ADS?. It seems to be nearly twice times thicker than Misgah-2 and even a bit longer. Being Misgah-2 missile 6km max. range, this missile could reach even 12 km. It is so interesting for intercepting UAVs like those from Azerbaiyán. If it has a range like that, it can be comparable to the last Mistral III IR missile (10 km).


according to Aljazeera it has detection range of 30km and engagement range of 8km
the system use its optical system mainly and has the option to link with Kashef-99 radar









the important thing about Majid is how fast it can fire , just in 3 second after detecting target

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Let’s see how many Majid and Zubin get mass produced. Hopefully Iran’s defense orders a significant amount.

Right now I see mostly 3rd Khordad getting mass produced and some Talash/15 Khordad/etc.

Bavar has been noticeably absent in major showings.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449622412123848705
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449622427789631488
> So I guess now the list of not-yet-unveiled, anticipated Iranian air-defense systems should look as follows:
> - Separ
> - possibly Oghab
> - Navab
> - Khatam (?)
> - ground-based Kamand CIWS
> - Arman


In regards to the Russian stock of Tor missiles, will Iran produce a clone of the missile when the stocks are exhausted or will it replace with a different design that can fit the same space like the future Oghab?


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1451128116051578880

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skyshadow

*finally its here first image of missile 358 ready to use in Iraq ( this is SAM version ) , these could be the ones used to hit American base last night ( the surface to surface version of course)*

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

skyshadow said:


> *finally its here first image of missile 358 ready to use in Iraq ( this is SAM version ) , these could be the ones used to hit American base last night ( the surface to surface version of course)*


not designed for ground target. the missile wasn't even fired


----------



## skyshadow

Hack-Hook said:


> not designed for ground target. the missile wasn't even fired


yes not the one I posted but this family has a surface to surface version too which is used in Syria multiple times by Iranian baked groups and we know at least 2 drones/missiles took off from Syria


----------



## NaCon

*Iran sending advanced anti-aircraft batteries to challenge Israel*
*Israel carries out strikes in Syria in an attempt to thwart Iranian entrenchment and the smuggling of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon.*
By ANNA AHRONHEIM 
OCTOBER 25, 2021 21:32

















Iranian flag flies in front of the UN office building in Vienna
(photo credit: REUTERS/LISI NIESNER/FILE PHOTO)


Iran has begun deploying advanced anti-aircraft missile batteries to the region, including in Syria where Israeli jets routinely carry out airstrikes, in an attempt to challenge Israel Air Force jets.

Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes in Syria in an attempt to thwart Iranian entrenchment and the smuggling of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon, according to foreign reports, and in countries like Iraq and even further as part of its war-between-wars campaign against Iran.

Over the past year, while Israeli strikes have intensified in Syria, the response time by Syrian air-defense batteries has become quicker. This has lead to the IAF changing how it acts during such operations, including by having larger formation during operations so that more targets can be struck at once instead of having jets return to the same target.




In 2018, an F-16 crashed in northern Israel after it was struck by an S-200 missile fired by Syrian forces during an Israeli operation. Syrian missiles have also landed in Israel in recent years, including this year when shrapnel from one missile hit northern Tel Aviv, and when another errant interceptor missile landed close to the Dimona nuclear site in the Negev Desert.

Iran is a top priority for Israel’s military, and Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kohavi has set aside an additional defense budget for war readiness and military exercises. The IAF has also resumed intensive training for scenarios in which Iran’s nuclear facilities are targeted.



Israeli soldiers from the Armored Corps seen near the Syrian border in the northern Golan Heights, October 17, 2021. (credit: MICHAEL GILADI/FLASH90)

In an attempt to challenge Israeli jets, Iran has changed the deployment of its anti-aircraft missile batteries, separating their radars from the missile launchers. Such a move forces more Israeli jets to take part in any possible operation against the country’s nuclear program.

The Israel Air Force understands that the Islamic Republic’s defense industry is robust. While it might not have an air force, its drone capabilities are worrisome and pose a major threat to Israel and other regional countries, as seen by the 2019 Aramco attack and the recent deadly Mercer Street attack earlier this year.

Defense officials have identified an increased amount of Iranian drones in the hands of Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups.


Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah have all used weaponized drones to carry out attacks after they invested in drone capabilities.

Drones have breached Israeli airspace in recent years, leading the IDF to scramble jets or fire missiles. Hamas used Iranian drones during the last war in May, and several Iranian drones tried to breach Israeli airspace in the North of the country.

Following the Mercer Street attack, Defense Minister Benny Gantz warned that Iran has used its drones in several attacks, and that is “exactly why we must act now against Iran. Iran not only strives to gain nuclear capabilities, but it is also sparking a dangerous arms race and sowing instability in the Middle East via terrorist militias armed with hundreds of UAVs, in Iran, Yemen, Iraq and other countries.”

Warning that the threat posed by Iran is “not a future threat but a tangible and immediate one,” Gantz vowed that Israel will work to remove any threat against Israeli citizens and interests.
*Iranian air defenses tried to shoot down Israeli fighter jets over Syria *
*IDF says unsuccessful attempt two years ago resulted in no damage to planes or casualties for Air Force in what appears to be the first direct military confrontation between the two enemy countries*

It was reported on Monday that during an airstrike by Israeli fighter jets in Syria about two years ago, Iranian air defenses attempted to shoot down one of the planes. 

The attempt was unsuccessful and resulted in no causalities on the Israeli side, with the Iranian battery destroyed. It appears the attempted attack was the first military confrontation between the two enemy states.





An Israeli F-15 fighter jet 
(Photo: EPA)
Earlier Monday, the Syrian government said Israel carried out an attack in southern Syria in a frontier zone where Israel has long been concerned about the presence of Iran-backed groups.

The Israeli military declined to comment.
A Syrian foreign ministry source said Israel had committed "a new aggression in the southern region" at dawn, the Syrian state news agency SANA reported. It did not say what was hit or whether there were any casualties.

Israel has mounted regular strikes against what it has described as Iranian-linked targets in Syria, where Tehran-backed forces including Lebanon's Hezbollah have deployed in support of President Bashar al-Assad during Syria's war.





A Hezbollah fighter in Southern Syria 
(Photo: AP)


A pro-Assad source familiar with the incident said an Israeli drone had struck several sites including a base operated by Hezbollah in al Baath city in Quneitra province and a second target. A third missile hit a reconnaissance tower near a Syrian army base, the source said.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based organization which reports on the war, said an Israeli aircraft had fired rockets at two positions held by Syrian government forces and their allies in Quneitra province.
The attack had caused material damage and there was no information yet about casualties, it said.
Syria was discussed last week at a meeting in Sochi between Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Assad's most powerful ally.






Prime Minister Naftali Bennett meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi last week 
(Photo: AFP)
Bennett told his cabinet on Sunday the two secured "stable and good" understandings over Syria - an allusion to deconfliction efforts with Russian forces amid continued Israeli airstrikes on suspected Iranian assets.
They also discussed Iran's nuclear program, according to Bennett's office.
Assad recovered control of the Quneitra area from rebel forces in 2018.
Syria affirmed its right to respond to the attacks, the foreign ministry source quoted by SANA said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Been hearing this a lot over the past few years. Do you suppose they might be of the 3rd Khordad family of something on their chassis like 9th Dey or Hael or combo of those and more?


----------



## Iranitaakharin

NaCon said:


> *Iran sending advanced anti-aircraft batteries to challenge Israel*
> *Israel carries out strikes in Syria in an attempt to thwart Iranian entrenchment and the smuggling of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon.*
> By ANNA AHRONHEIM
> OCTOBER 25, 2021 21:32
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian flag flies in front of the UN office building in Vienna
> (photo credit: REUTERS/LISI NIESNER/FILE PHOTO)
> 
> 
> Iran has begun deploying advanced anti-aircraft missile batteries to the region, including in Syria where Israeli jets routinely carry out airstrikes, in an attempt to challenge Israel Air Force jets.
> 
> Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes in Syria in an attempt to thwart Iranian entrenchment and the smuggling of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon, according to foreign reports, and in countries like Iraq and even further as part of its war-between-wars campaign against Iran.
> 
> Over the past year, while Israeli strikes have intensified in Syria, the response time by Syrian air-defense batteries has become quicker. This has lead to the IAF changing how it acts during such operations, including by having larger formation during operations so that more targets can be struck at once instead of having jets return to the same target.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 2018, an F-16 crashed in northern Israel after it was struck by an S-200 missile fired by Syrian forces during an Israeli operation. Syrian missiles have also landed in Israel in recent years, including this year when shrapnel from one missile hit northern Tel Aviv, and when another errant interceptor missile landed close to the Dimona nuclear site in the Negev Desert.
> 
> Iran is a top priority for Israel’s military, and Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kohavi has set aside an additional defense budget for war readiness and military exercises. The IAF has also resumed intensive training for scenarios in which Iran’s nuclear facilities are targeted.
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli soldiers from the Armored Corps seen near the Syrian border in the northern Golan Heights, October 17, 2021. (credit: MICHAEL GILADI/FLASH90)
> 
> In an attempt to challenge Israeli jets, Iran has changed the deployment of its anti-aircraft missile batteries, separating their radars from the missile launchers. Such a move forces more Israeli jets to take part in any possible operation against the country’s nuclear program.
> 
> The Israel Air Force understands that the Islamic Republic’s defense industry is robust. While it might not have an air force, its drone capabilities are worrisome and pose a major threat to Israel and other regional countries, as seen by the 2019 Aramco attack and the recent deadly Mercer Street attack earlier this year.
> 
> Defense officials have identified an increased amount of Iranian drones in the hands of Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups.
> 
> 
> Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah have all used weaponized drones to carry out attacks after they invested in drone capabilities.
> 
> Drones have breached Israeli airspace in recent years, leading the IDF to scramble jets or fire missiles. Hamas used Iranian drones during the last war in May, and several Iranian drones tried to breach Israeli airspace in the North of the country.
> 
> Following the Mercer Street attack, Defense Minister Benny Gantz warned that Iran has used its drones in several attacks, and that is “exactly why we must act now against Iran. Iran not only strives to gain nuclear capabilities, but it is also sparking a dangerous arms race and sowing instability in the Middle East via terrorist militias armed with hundreds of UAVs, in Iran, Yemen, Iraq and other countries.”
> 
> Warning that the threat posed by Iran is “not a future threat but a tangible and immediate one,” Gantz vowed that Israel will work to remove any threat against Israeli citizens and interests.
> *Iranian air defenses tried to shoot down Israeli fighter jets over Syria *
> *IDF says unsuccessful attempt two years ago resulted in no damage to planes or casualties for Air Force in what appears to be the first direct military confrontation between the two enemy countries*
> 
> It was reported on Monday that during an airstrike by Israeli fighter jets in Syria about two years ago, Iranian air defenses attempted to shoot down one of the planes.
> 
> The attempt was unsuccessful and resulted in no causalities on the Israeli side, with the Iranian battery destroyed. It appears the attempted attack was the first military confrontation between the two enemy states.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An Israeli F-15 fighter jet
> (Photo: EPA)
> Earlier Monday, the Syrian government said Israel carried out an attack in southern Syria in a frontier zone where Israel has long been concerned about the presence of Iran-backed groups.
> 
> The Israeli military declined to comment.
> A Syrian foreign ministry source said Israel had committed "a new aggression in the southern region" at dawn, the Syrian state news agency SANA reported. It did not say what was hit or whether there were any casualties.
> 
> Israel has mounted regular strikes against what it has described as Iranian-linked targets in Syria, where Tehran-backed forces including Lebanon's Hezbollah have deployed in support of President Bashar al-Assad during Syria's war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Hezbollah fighter in Southern Syria
> (Photo: AP)
> 
> 
> A pro-Assad source familiar with the incident said an Israeli drone had struck several sites including a base operated by Hezbollah in al Baath city in Quneitra province and a second target. A third missile hit a reconnaissance tower near a Syrian army base, the source said.
> The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based organization which reports on the war, said an Israeli aircraft had fired rockets at two positions held by Syrian government forces and their allies in Quneitra province.
> The attack had caused material damage and there was no information yet about casualties, it said.
> Syria was discussed last week at a meeting in Sochi between Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Assad's most powerful ally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prime Minister Naftali Bennett meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi last week
> (Photo: AFP)
> Bennett told his cabinet on Sunday the two secured "stable and good" understandings over Syria - an allusion to deconfliction efforts with Russian forces amid continued Israeli airstrikes on suspected Iranian assets.
> They also discussed Iran's nuclear program, according to Bennett's office.
> Assad recovered control of the Quneitra area from rebel forces in 2018.
> Syria affirmed its right to respond to the attacks, the foreign ministry source quoted by SANA said.





__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1452665402182545418


----------



## Sineva

WudangMaster said:


> Been hearing this a lot over the past few years. Do you suppose they might be of the 3rd Khordad family of something on their chassis like 9th Dey or Hael or combo of those and more?


No,its just repeating the same tired old crap.
You dont bring in one solitary sam system,you bring in an entire battery ie 6 tels+long range radar+a command post and all of the secure communications gear that goes with it,plus tel reloaders and various other assorted vehicles,and I`ve no doubt that theres a literal sh!tload more other things that I`m missing out.You cant really do transfers like this covertly.
Doing this sort of thing is really only feasible once syria has been stabilized to a certain point militarily,its not there yet,and tha the us occupation forces have left and that the israelis are left with no doubts that any attacks on transfers of this sort of equipment would be met with the harshest of responses.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

NaCon said:


> *IDF says unsuccessful attempt two years ago resulted in no damage to planes or casualties for Air Force*
> 
> ...
> 
> The attempt was unsuccessful and resulted in no causalities on the Israeli side, with the Iranian battery destroyed



Zionist propagandistic fairy tales.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ray_Atek

Zionist tooth is it's Air Force and should taken out by a powerful network of air defence systems.


----------



## Darius77

Ray_Atek said:


> Zionist tooth is it's Air Force and should taken out by a powerful network of air defence systems.


Actually, the Zionists have 7 major airbases in Occupied Palestine and now with massive introduction of drones, precision missiles and loitering munitions in Hezbollah and Axis of Resistance hands, all can be shut down in the first strike and incapacitated with delayed action cluster bomblets and runaway denial munitions. That is the reason the Zionists have signed defence arrangements with Greece and British colony of Cyprus for landing rights to their airforce in case of war.

The Zionist pinprick "attacks" on Syria by standoff missiles are only for domestic consumption and have no real military value as Iranian influence in Syria is now irreversible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> Been hearing this a lot over the past few years. Do you suppose they might be of the 3rd Khordad family of something on their chassis like 9th Dey or Hael or combo of those and more?



Would need a OTH seeker missile since Israel drops bombs over Lebanon. The issue here is Israel will then begin using other aircraft as shields And you run the risk of what happened when Syrian S-200 shot down a Russian spy plane that Israel used as a cover off of Lebanon coast.

So in reality not a lot of options for Iran. If it decides to target the bombs itself then it becomes a rising cost since Israel can release 20-30 bombs and Iran has to spend more and more funds intercepting them. Even with Iranian lower cost of materials, it’s a losing proposition over time.

Thus the only viable alternative is to hit ONE Israeli jet and either kill pilot or take him alive as POW. This will create enough deterrence to prevent future strikes for a period of time as Israeli public will start to turn on government if pilots lives Become at risk.




SalarHaqq said:


> Zionist propagandistic fairy tales.



Not quite. At least one Iranian AD tech/soldier was killed at T4 a couple years ago. A video of his martyrdom was published and posted here by @yavar , in the video you can even see he met Gen Hajizadeh at one point. There was rumors around the same time that Iran had unloaded an AD system to defend T4.

Again impossible to verify if he died in an Iranian AD system or a Syrian one. But his field expertise was Iranian AD systems. So it’s possible this actually happened rather than a pure psychops campaign.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SalarHaqq

> Not quite. At least one Iranian AD tech/soldier was killed at T4 a couple years ago. A video of his martyrdom was published and posted here by @yavar , in the video you can even see he met Gen Hajizadeh at one point. There was rumors around the same time that Iran had unloaded an AD system to defend T4.
> 
> Again impossible to verify if he died in an Iranian AD system or a Syrian one. But his field expertise was Iranian AD systems. So it’s possible this actually happened rather than a pure psychops campaign.



Unless evidence is provided, it's basically an unsubstantiated claim by a zionist news outlet which does not even mention any sources. I know about the AD martyr but he could have been martyred inside the hangar that was struck, and not necessarily while manning a SAM system. His mission there could have consisted in advising or instructing Syrians, observing enemy air force tactics on local radars and surveillance systems etc.


----------



## skyshadow

*Majid vibes


RIM-166 block 2






Majid 




*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Darius77

The reality is that Zionist cowards has been barking incessantly boasting of "Iranian expulsion" from Syria while the opposite is happening. Recently the US losers illegal occupation base came under sustained drone attacks from "unknown origin" and nothing was left intact. The US diaper force was given an hours notice to vacate before the attack.
*US base in al-Tanf suffered serious damage from drone attack operated by unknown groups*









*Iranian-backed forces launched several drones during an exercise in the eastern Syrian governorate of Deir Ezzor, the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported on October 29. *


The drones were launched from farmlands located in the outskirts of the town of al-Mayadin in the southern Deir Ezzor countryside. The drones flew over al-Rahbah citadel in al-Mayadin, where Iranian-backed forces allegedly store their weapons and ammunition.


According to the SOHR, the drones were launched as a part of a training course being held by the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).


As a part of the training course, Iranian officers are training some 25 pro-government fighters on the use of drones. The course began in the first week of October.


The SOHR didn’t provide any information on the type of the drones, which may very much be small fixed-wing or quadcopters drones.


Iranian-backed forces have been operating drones over Deir Ezzor for several years now. On August 21, a US fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone that approached a US base in the al-Omar oil fields in the eastern countryside of Deir Ezzor, which is held by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces.


*Very recently, the US sanctioned a network of individuals and companies for supporting Iran’s drone program. Iranian forces were blamed for the October 20 attack on the US al-Tanf garrison in southeastern Syria. Five suicide drones targeted the garrison during the attack. The drones were launched from Syria and Iraq.*









Iranian-Backed Forces Launched Drones During Exercise In Syria’s Deir Ezzor – Report


Iranian-backed forces launched several drones during an exercise in the eastern Syrian governorate of Deir Ezzor, the London-based Syrian Observatory...




southfront.org

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Draco.IMF



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Stefano84

Draco.IMF said:


>


what is this?


----------



## skyshadow

Stefano84 said:


> what is this?


Iranian short range air defense system called Dezful ( TOR-M1 copy on a truck)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stefano84

skyshadow said:


> Iranian short range air defense system called Dezful ( TOR-M1 copy on a truck)


I can't find any other pictures.. could you link me something?


----------



## sanel1412

Stefano84 said:


> I can't find any other pictures.. could you link me something?


Just go back few pages,it was used at recent air defence drills

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darius77

Stefano84 said:


> I can't find any other pictures.. could you link me something?







__





New SHORAD systems seen in Iranian exercise


New short-range air-defence (SHORAD) systems featured in Exercise ‘Defenders of the Velayet Skies 1400' , which was held by Iranian air-defence forces on 12–13 October,...



www.janes.com






The Dezful was identified as a system that appeared to be a Tor-M1 mounted on a commercial IVECO truck.


Russia announced in December 2005 that Iran had ordered up to 30 Tor-M1s and the ones subsequently seen in Iranian service have all been mounted on the tracked carrier used by the Russian military. The Dezful may be one of these systems that has been remounted on a more easily maintained vehicle, but it has also been reported that Iran received some towed versions, one of which have been turned into the Dezful.


The Majid and Dezful were reported to be respectively Artesh and Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Darius77 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New SHORAD systems seen in Iranian exercise
> 
> 
> New short-range air-defence (SHORAD) systems featured in Exercise ‘Defenders of the Velayet Skies 1400' , which was held by Iranian air-defence forces on 12–13 October,...
> 
> 
> 
> www.janes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Dezful was identified as a system that appeared to be a Tor-M1 mounted on a commercial IVECO truck.
> 
> 
> Russia announced in December 2005 that Iran had ordered up to 30 Tor-M1s and the ones subsequently seen in Iranian service have all been mounted on the tracked carrier used by the Russian military. The Dezful may be one of these systems that has been remounted on a more easily maintained vehicle, but it has also been reported that Iran received some towed versions, one of which have been turned into the Dezful.
> 
> 
> The Majid and Dezful were reported to be respectively Artesh and Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) assets.



The hope is that Iran has manage to somehow reverse-engineer the Tor-M1 complex as well as set-up a domestic production chain for the fabrication of newly made Dezful (Iranian TOR-M1) units. This is a very important SHORAD but the ZOBIN and MAJID that were also showed off are good too. 

I'm just waiting for Iran to produce a SHORAD system like they did 3rd of Khordad AD. That one was a hit and Iran is producing them in bulk (it seems).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Darius77

Blue In Green said:


> The hope is that Iran has manage to somehow reverse-engineer the Tor-M1 complex as well as set-up a domestic production chain for the fabrication of newly made Dezful (Iranian TOR-M1) units. This is a very important SHORAD but the ZOBIN and MAJID that were also showed off are good too.
> 
> I'm just waiting for Iran to produce a SHORAD system like they did 3rd of Khordad AD. That one was a hit and Iran is producing them in bulk (it seems).


Various versions of SHORAD and medium range systems are now being deployed. Have you noticed that the Zionists don't fly near Lebanon or Syria now and this time used ineffective ground based missiles.








600 × 400



600 × 398



512 × 346

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

Darius77 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New SHORAD systems seen in Iranian exercise
> 
> 
> New short-range air-defence (SHORAD) systems featured in Exercise ‘Defenders of the Velayet Skies 1400' , which was held by Iranian air-defence forces on 12–13 October,...
> 
> 
> 
> www.janes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Dezful was identified as a system that appeared to be a Tor-M1 mounted on a commercial IVECO truck.
> 
> 
> Russia announced in December 2005 that Iran had ordered up to 30 Tor-M1s and the ones subsequently seen in Iranian service have all been mounted on the tracked carrier used by the Russian military. The Dezful may be one of these systems that has been remounted on a more easily maintained vehicle, but it has also been reported that Iran received some towed versions, one of which have been turned into the Dezful.
> 
> 
> The Majid and Dezful were reported to be respectively Artesh and Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) assets.



The Tor-M1 looking turret mounted on the Truck based Dezful system is different to that which is mounted on the original Tor-M1. Although both turrets seem identical, there are enough differences between the two to suggest that this is a brand new build. Why would an Iranian designed Tor-M1 clone turret not look similar the original? Frankly those claiming that the IRGC simply cannibalized a Tor-M1 turret to create the Dezful Shorad are really selling the IRGC short!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aryobarzan

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The Tor-M1 looking turret mounted on the Truck based Dezful system is different to that which is mounted on the original Tor-M1. Although both turrets seem identical, there are enough differences between the two to suggest that this is a brand new build. Why would an Iranian designed Tor-M1 clone turret not look similar the original? Frankly those claiming that the IRGC simply cannibalized a Tor-M1 turret to create the Dezful Shorad are really selling the IRGC short!


Good to see you back Bahram..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari

aryobarzan said:


> Good to see you back Bahram..


Thank you! Its good to be back.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> Why would an Iranian designed Tor-M1 clone turret not look similar the original?



For one TOR-M1 uses older radar tech and older missile. So Iran copying this very closely instead of the newer missile use in TOR-M2 and the upgraded radar and avionics of TOR-M2 is a bit strange.

Will wait to see more pictures of this system. To me it’s a prototype and not a finished product. I don’t see Iranian air defense branch purchasing this in its current state when it’s lacking the radar advancements that many other Iranian AD systems have had for several years.

Need to see a image of the inside of the truck to understand what Iran changed underneath the hood.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Bahram Esfandiari said:


> The Tor-M1 looking turret mounted on the Truck based Dezful system is different to that which is mounted on the original Tor-M1. Although both turrets seem identical, there are enough differences between the two to suggest that this is a brand new build. Why would an Iranian designed Tor-M1 clone turret not look similar the original? Frankly those claiming that the IRGC simply cannibalized a Tor-M1 turret to create the Dezful Shorad are really selling the IRGC short!



You are so right, there are people who don't understand that here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

I had always thought that the latest 15th of khordad tels had had the new fairings fitted to them purely for reasons of appearance




I now realise from looking at this picture that this is probably not the case,and that it was very likely done for a purely practical reason,so as to allow the launcher to have a full 360 degrees of traverse and fire capability,as previously altho the launcher could traverse 360 degrees,it was only capable of firing within a 270 degree arc,otherwise its exhaust would scorch and likely damage the previously exposed components/systems on the tel.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1456976885632622600
Possible Alam ol Hoda radar sighting used to track AWACS, bombers, support aircraft, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457323147817062400

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457391837321338887

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457717957845467137

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457717957845467137


Completely wrong tweet its PESA not Passive.
in short its sort of downgrade

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Sina-1

Hack-Hook said:


> Completely wrong tweet its PESA not Passive.
> in short its sort of downgrade


*Passive* electronically scanned array!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457929902263619590

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457963202390671365

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Draco.IMF

no idea what this is

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## xbat

a drone jammer o r a sniper finding system with a radar and microphones, to me

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sina-1 said:


> *Passive* electronically scanned array!


Passive is different with *Passive* electronically scanned array! or PESA
passive radars are like Kolchuga. they have no emission

AESA radar on 15th of Khordad is a lot more capable than PESA radar on Joshan


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Draco.IMF said:


> no idea what this is
> 
> 
> View attachment 791693
> 
> View attachment 791692


maybe a passive sensor


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Completely wrong tweet its PESA not Passive.
> in short its sort of downgrade





Hack-Hook said:


> Passive is different with *Passive* electronically scanned array! or PESA
> passive radars are like Kolchuga. they have no emission
> 
> AESA radar on 15th of Khordad is a lot more capable than PESA radar on Joshan



PESA easier for mass production and cheaper to operate than AESA.

Hence military uses all forms. It’s too expensive to have an AESA only force. Most of the time radars would be off to save money...defeating the purpose....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> PESA easier for mass production and cheaper to operate than AESA.
> 
> Hence military uses all forms. It’s too expensive to have an AESA only force. Most of the time radars would be off to save money...defeating the purpose....


The point is first it's not passive at all. Who ever first time said it's passive had no business talking about such thing.

And it maybe cheaper but still it's a downgrade.


----------



## brlfc1969

xbat said:


> a drone jammer o r a sniper finding system with a radar and microphones, to me


If it is a sniper finding device, how does it work. I thought that a sniper would be too far away for it too pick up any sound of a weapon firing or, failing that, the sniper could take out the device. Any explanations, as I have never heard or seen of such a device.


----------



## Sineva

Can someone translate this please?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Sineva said:


> Can someone translate this please?


I saw similar picture with specs in English,but I am not sure does it show exact same seeker since it was few months ago..one I saw showed missile ARH(active radar homing)seeker with active range of 45km.
ARH with 45km active range means missile has small onboard radar and can track and lock on its own in 45km range
SARH - semi-active radar homing relay on aircraft radar for homing it has also reduntant(backup) passive detector on missile that can detect signal reflected from target which is sent by radar from aircraft that cunched missile..So,unlike many belive,it can detect,track and lock target even if connection between aircraft and missile broke..but only if aircraft that lunched missile continue to scan/track target..it is called bistatic radar implementation. That is why it is named SEMI-ACTIVE,it has limited capability to operate on its own..


----------



## makranman

Sineva said:


> Can someone translate this please?


I am not really proficient at translating these technical terms. hope it helps.

features​notes​seeker type​active radio (maybe ARH?)​range seeking limit​>50km​azimuth seeker limit​>50°​elevation seeker limit​>50°​transmitter Technology​Semiconductor​output update rate​>20Hz​output data type​Digital Data​output data format​adaptive (?)​input data update rate​100Hz (actual number depends on the amount of data and Transmission speed)​input data type​Digital Data​input data format​adaptive (?)​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bahram Esfandiari



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## skyshadow

*strange Iranian "Radar Device" at Tehran. One week - two images (deployed & stowed)
*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

This looks to be footage of a test firing of the early talash sam system,we can see the earlier version of the oghab cw illuminator being used.
Whats interesting is that it looks like they may be using the mersad/kamin 16 AN/MPQ-50 radar as the search radar in this test,possibly another test involving inter-operability of sam system components?

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1465749973631320066


----------



## Sineva

skyshadow said:


> *strange Iranian "Radar Device" at Tehran. One week - two images (deployed & stowed)*
> 
> 
> View attachment 792793
> 
> 
> View attachment 792794


I suspect from the curved antenna that its probably the truck mounted tor/tor copy sam system.


----------



## skyshadow

Sineva said:


> I suspect from the curved antenna that its probably the truck mounted tor/tor copy sam system.


Could be but I have no idea what it is, Iran has several SAM products in testing phase


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyshadow

*First complete photo of the Sayyad-X (Sayyad-3 vertical launch)*










__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1466788878854021133

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

I like the Misagh's pull at sea from a small boat. Very important for combat at sea

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yugocrosrb95

makranman said:


> I am not really proficient at translating these technical terms. hope it helps.
> 
> features​notes​seeker type​active radio (maybe ARH?)​range seeking limit​>50km​azimuth seeker limit​>50°​elevation seeker limit​>50°​transmitter Technology​Semiconductor​output update rate​>20Hz​output data type​Digital Data​output data format​adaptive (?)​input data update rate​100Hz (actual number depends on the amount of data and Transmission speed)​input data type​Digital Data​input data format​adaptive (?)​


Is there information on what missile is using that ARH seeker?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Mr Iran Eye said:


> I like the Misagh's pull at sea from a small boat. Very important for combat at sea


if they put a single Nasr-e Basir or Kowsar instead of those rocket launcher on those boats , they would have become a lot more effective

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> if they put a single Nasr-e Basir or Kowsar instead of those rocket launcher on those boats , they would have become a lot more effective


107mm 9 tube multiple rocket launcher, right?

9 of those rockets are 160 kilograms.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> 107mm 9 tube multiple rocket launcher, right?
> 
> 9 of those rockets are 160 kilograms.


one kowsar is 100kg and has a range of about 20km 
nasr-e-basir is not that heavier and have a range of 35km


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> one kowsar is 100kg and has a range of about 20km
> nasr-e-basir is not that heavier and have a range of 35km


107mm MRL only makes sense for coastal bombardment, but those small craft won't have enough fuel to reach coast on other side except strait of Hormuz.

Also have two of those close range anti ship missiles would certainly degrade performance of the fast craft and I find it funny that some have ZU-23-2...

ZU-23-2 would be more useful in canyons and mountains for low flying targets and on ships it should be replaced with MANPADS and heavier.

Then with that and air surveillance radar on some fast craft on patrol could potentially in case of war come across LACMs and shot it down.


----------



## Hack-Hook

yugocrosrb95 said:


> 107mm MRL only makes sense for coastal bombardment, but those small craft won't have enough fuel to reach coast on other side except strait of Hormuz.
> 
> Also have two of those close range anti ship missiles would certainly degrade performance of the fast craft and I find it funny that some have ZU-23-2...
> 
> ZU-23-2 would be more useful in canyons and mountains for low flying targets and on ships it should be replaced with MANPADS and heavier.
> 
> Then with that and air surveillance radar on some fast craft on patrol could potentially in case of war come across LACMs and shot it down.


Those boats already have a small radar and a single kowsar is more useful than 9 of those rockets and is actually lighter


----------



## yugocrosrb95

Hack-Hook said:


> Those boats already have a small radar and a single kowsar is more useful than 9 of those rockets and is actually lighter


They have maritime radars, there are bigger craft that have two ASM.

There should be some small craft with SAM capability enough to out range UH-60 and AH-64 armed with Hellfire ATGM.


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 805562


Good for cruise missiles weak against drones


----------



## Dariush the Great

It is high time to down another US drone, even if they are not near our territories.


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AmirPatriot

I updated my Bavar-373 article with analysis of the new information, text is below. Full article at https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html

*Update 4th January 2022*
Bavar-373 has appeared on the Ministry of Defence's export page as AD-200, with a detailed specsheet improving public understanding of the system, specifically the Sayyad-4 missile.

The missile's basic proportions are very close to the 48N6E2 missile used in the S-300PMU2. Sayyad-4 has a large 180kg warhead, the same as its Russian counterpart. It has the same airframe diameter and length (not including aerodynamic control surfaces) as the 48N6E2, but is 150kg heavier at 2050kg. Despite this, it has a 200km range to the 48N6E2's 195km. This kinematic performance is quite impressive considering the extra weight, and it is reasonable to assume that later versions of the Sayyad-4 will reach similar performance to the more mature 48N6E3.

The main difference between the two is the seekers. The 48N6E2 found on the S-300PMU2 already had a very robust mode of guidance called SAGG. With the release of the specsheet, this guidance mode can also be confirmed on Sayyad-4, which has "Inertial + Update Via Data Link Semi-active". On its own, that description would describe at least a TVM system as used on the MIM-104 Patriot PAC-2. TVM sends receiver data back to the ground radar via a datalink. The ground radar then calculates the appropriate guidance commands and sends these back to the missile.

However, the specsheet says "Semi-active/ *Active Radar Homing*". Active Radar Homing uses a self-contained radar set which none of the 48N6 series use. ARH on long-range missiles is a feature also used on the 40N6 missile of the S-400. This also confirms that Sayyad-4 would have onboard computation, making it capable of SAGG. SAGG is best described as a more robust form of TVM, because in addition to the raw receiver data sent to the ground radar, the missile can calculate its own guidance commands, which can be datalinked to the ground radar to check for errors between the missile-computed commands and the ground radar commands. The missile can also act on its own if guidance commands from the radar are being jammed but the target is still being painted by the ground radar.

However, when defending against the S-300 or Patriot series, a defending aircraft could hide below the horizon or behind terrain to break line of sight with the ground radar. This would defeat even SAGG, which is fundamentally a SARH-based guidance mode relying on line of sight. By including an active seeker, Sayyad-4 has the ability to guide on to the target even if line of sight to the ground radar has been broken in the little time the target has to react. The use of inertial guidance also allows the ARH mode to be used based on the target's predicted flight path at the time the radar lock was broken. This is particularly useful in Iran's mountainous terrain, but also makes Bavar-373 potent in naval applications where most targets will drop to very low altitude in the final phases of flight. Bavar-373 has clearly been designed for maximum resilience against jamming and reducing the ability of the target to defend to an absolute minimum.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

New mystery AD radar sighted....




The radar on the right hand side of the pic is clearly not a Quds radar,its far too long,indeed just using crude measurements based on the actual Quds radar on the left hand side of the pic,this thing is *almost two thirds longer* than the Quds.In addition the transporter is very long,perhaps with 6 axles,and it looks like the radar might fold into 2 pieces with one on each side of the transporter.
So,an interesting mystery.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> New mystery AD radar sighted....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The radar on the right hand side of the pic is clearly not a Quds radar,its far too long,indeed just using crude measurements based on the actual Quds radar on the left hand side of the pic,this thing is *almost two thirds longer* than the Quds.In addition the transporter is very long,perhaps with 6 axles,and it looks like the radar might fold into 2 pieces with one on each side of the transporter.
> So,an interesting mystery.



Likely high altitude very long range radar for Al-Hoda system.

System hasn’t been fully declassified, but is likely used against high value US assets like B-21/U-2/AWACS, Tankers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486244503467933696

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## mohsen

Interview With gen. Esmaili:





گفتگوی صریح با امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی درباره شایعات اخیر/ هیچ فامیلی در نیروهای مسلح ندارم/ ورود جنگنده‌های اسرائیل به آسمان ایران دروغ است- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim


«شایعات دروغ همیشه وجود دارد. در مورد تقرب جنگنده‌های اف 35 رژیم اشغالگر قدس به مرزهای کشور که قبلاً هم منتشر شده بود، رژیم اشغالگر قدس می‌داند استفاده نادرست از امکاناتی که دارند، کمترین تبعاتش نابودی موجودیت آنهاست.»




www.tasnimnews.com






Some Highlights:

I will give an example of whether the Islamic Republic is capable of detecting stealth fighters and aircraft. It was once said that the American U2 plane flies over Iran at an altitude of 80,000 feet and that Iran could not deal with it, but we made published the sound of a conversation and a warning to this plane and was broadcasted on radio and TV.

The plane was traveling from the coast of Pakistan to Afghanistan, which was warned by two radars of our country, while in the international tradition, only one radar warns the plane, but with two radars, we warned this plane - which Itself processes the defense systems of other countries - to let it know that it's being processed through two radars with two different frequencies. In addition, a radar lock was performed on it at 67,000 feet, and the aircraft itself realized this through its Doppler system and side looking radars.

Today we have the technology to detect and intercept even a ballistic missile that dives toward the ground at an altitude of 150,000 feet.

Fate of any intruding bird is the same as befell the American Archive 170, and Obama was willing to pay more than the cost of it's production to get it's wreckage back.

When we still had not received the S300 from Russia, General Bondarev, the commander of the Russian Air Force, once came to Iran. He asked me two questions: one, did you really hit the American Archive 170, and the second, did you build the Iranian S300 or not? After our meeting and his return to Russia almost two months later, the S300 systems were delivered to Iran.

In fact, they came to the conclusion that we could do it, but maybe a little later. It is very good that we can go and buy a system from a country and use it. For example, we bought the S300 system from Russia, but it's good to go to one of our war games to see if the S300 which we use is it the same one used in the Russian army.

The day we tested and evaluated this system in the Semnan desert during the Damavand wargame, was outside the instructions which Russians expected from us.

Our trained friends defined something for the S300 that was not defined in Russia itself. We received the upgraded PMU2 S300 but changed it according to our needs. Of course, we also changed the S200 system with a very high percentage, and even fired medium-range missiles with it.

The Russians themselves said that they fired dozens of missiles for the test of S300 against ballistic missiles. But we did it with a very limited number of missiles. This also shows the capabilities of our air defense. Of course, after that, there was a ballistic missile that we could not hit with the S300 and we hit it with the Bavar 373 system.

The S300 is very successful against semi-ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, but better than the S300 are systems like the Talash, B373 and other systems we have. Achieving such systems is very costly, and to say that a system has high reliability, we have to do a lot of shots that cost a lot, but we have been able to design systems in the shortest time and with the lowest cost, the least shots and depreciation, and made them operational in several war games.

...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Muhammed45

mohsen said:


> Interview With gen. Esmaili:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> گفتگوی صریح با امیر فرزاد اسماعیلی درباره شایعات اخیر/ هیچ فامیلی در نیروهای مسلح ندارم/ ورود جنگنده‌های اسرائیل به آسمان ایران دروغ است- اخبار نظامی | دفاعی | امنیتی - اخبار سیاسی تسنیم | Tasnim
> 
> 
> «شایعات دروغ همیشه وجود دارد. در مورد تقرب جنگنده‌های اف 35 رژیم اشغالگر قدس به مرزهای کشور که قبلاً هم منتشر شده بود، رژیم اشغالگر قدس می‌داند استفاده نادرست از امکاناتی که دارند، کمترین تبعاتش نابودی موجودیت آنهاست.»
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tasnimnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some Highlights:
> 
> I will give an example of whether the Islamic Republic is capable of detecting stealth fighters and aircraft. It was once said that the American U2 plane flies over Iran at an altitude of 80,000 feet and that Iran could not deal with it, but we made published the sound of a conversation and a warning to this plane and was broadcasted on radio and TV.
> 
> The plane was traveling from the coast of Pakistan to Afghanistan, which was warned by two radars of our country, while in the international tradition, only one radar warns the plane, but with two radars, we warned this plane - which Itself processes the defense systems of other countries - to let it know that it's being processed through two radars with two different frequencies. In addition, a radar lock was performed on it at 67,000 feet, and the aircraft itself realized this through its Doppler system and side looking radars.
> 
> Today we have the technology to detect and intercept even a ballistic missile that dives toward the ground at an altitude of 150,000 feet.
> 
> Fate of any intruding bird is the same as befell the American Archive 170, and Obama was willing to pay more than the cost of it's production to get it's wreckage back.
> 
> When we still had not received the S300 from Russia, General Bondarev, the commander of the Russian Air Force, once came to Iran. He asked me two questions: one, did you really hit the American Archive 170, and the second, did you build the Iranian S300 or not? After our meeting and his return to Russia almost two months later, the S300 systems were delivered to Iran.
> 
> In fact, they came to the conclusion that we could do it, but maybe a little later. It is very good that we can go and buy a system from a country and use it. For example, we bought the S300 system from Russia, but it's good to go to one of our war games to see if the S300 which we use is it the same one used in the Russian army.
> 
> The day we tested and evaluated this system in the Semnan desert during the Damavand wargame, was outside the instructions which Russians expected from us.
> 
> Our trained friends defined something for the S300 that was not defined in Russia itself. We received the upgraded PMU2 S300 but changed it according to our needs. Of course, we also changed the S200 system with a very high percentage, and even fired medium-range missiles with it.
> 
> The Russians themselves said that they fired dozens of missiles for the test of S300 against ballistic missiles. But we did it with a very limited number of missiles. This also shows the capabilities of our air defense. Of course, after that, there was a ballistic missile that we could not hit with the S300 and we hit it with the Bavar 373 system.
> 
> The S300 is very successful against semi-ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, but better than the S300 are systems like the Talash, B373 and other systems we have. Achieving such systems is very costly, and to say that a system has high reliability, we have to do a lot of shots that cost a lot, but we have been able to design systems in the shortest time and with the lowest cost, the least shots and depreciation, and made them operational in several war games.
> 
> ...


What did he mean by semi-ballistic missile? Was he pointing to quasi ballistic missiles?


----------



## xbat

U2 and stealth hmmm...but how much?


----------



## mohsen

xbat said:


> U2 and stealth hmmm...but how much?


Enough to hide from Soviet radars, when had a Aluminum body, unlike it's current RAM body.


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Muhammed45 said:


> What did he mean by semi-ballistic missile? Was he pointing to quasi ballistic missiles?


most likely he meant quasi ballistic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

DoubleYouSee said:


> most likely he meant quasi ballistic


Russians having Iskander family among their missile, are one of the bests if not the best in the area of quasi ballistic missiles. Hence there is no doubt that they know how to defend against such low altitude BMs. 

That's Great news to me, a great asset for the know how. Specially knowing the fact that the S-300 that Russians gave Iran was the one that served Russia itself which means no downgradation was done on the system. 

We can claim that Iran can intercept low altitude warheads plus detecting the high altitude BMs. Given specifics of BMs, it would not be hard to Track and target BMs given that Iran is already able to hit manuverable warheads using S-300 and B-373. If the issue of range is solved, then Iran has a formidable ABM force.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## skyshadow



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Muhammed45 said:


> Russians having Iskander family among their missile, are one of the bests if not the best in the area of quasi ballistic missiles. Hence there is no doubt that they know how to defend against such low altitude BMs.
> 
> That's Great news to me, a great asset for the know how. Specially knowing the fact that the S-300 that Russians gave Iran was the one that served Russia itself which means no downgradation was done on the system.
> 
> We can claim that Iran can intercept low altitude warheads plus detecting the high altitude BMs. Given specifics of BMs, it would not be hard to Track and target BMs given that Iran is already able to hit manuverable warheads using S-300 and B-373. If the issue of range is solved, then Iran has a formidable ABM force.


I red the whole essay in farsi,regarding to brigadier farzad esmaeli's speech the mission of S-300 is not defending agaist ballistic missile(at least it is not S-300's main goal) and as a matter of fact, Russians have had to use lots of S-300 missile to confront against ballistic threats.but in Iran we used less missiles at the first test of s-300 and in a more intricate scenarios of missile launchig we used Bavar-373 against ballistic missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 813356


they really need to miniaturize the system, something of that performance and only use 4 missile , I expect it be installed on the back of a hilux


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> they really need to miniaturize the system, something of that performance and only use 4 missile , I expect it be installed on the back of a hilux


It will certainly have more than just 4 missiles once operational.


----------



## Russel

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 813356


Could anyone pls translate the information?!


----------



## aryobarzan

Russel said:


> Could anyone pls translate the information?!


The poster is about Zubin AD system specs

Simultaneous target detection: 100
Simultaneous target track: 8
Radar detection range 30 km
Engagement range 20km

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> It will certainly have more than just 4 missiles once operational.


it don't have any room for more missile


----------



## Shams313

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 813466


i just wanted to see it 30km range, 8 missile config..that's all.


----------



## Iranian_Patriot

AmirPatriot said:


> I updated my Bavar-373 article with analysis of the new information, text is below. Full article at https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2019/08/irans-bavar-373-profile.html
> 
> *Update 4th January 2022*
> Bavar-373 has appeared on the Ministry of Defence's export page as AD-200, with a detailed specsheet improving public understanding of the system, specifically the Sayyad-4 missile.
> 
> The missile's basic proportions are very close to the 48N6E2 missile used in the S-300PMU2. Sayyad-4 has a large 180kg warhead, the same as its Russian counterpart. It has the same airframe diameter and length (not including aerodynamic control surfaces) as the 48N6E2, but is 150kg heavier at 2050kg. Despite this, it has a 200km range to the 48N6E2's 195km. This kinematic performance is quite impressive considering the extra weight, and it is reasonable to assume that later versions of the Sayyad-4 will reach similar performance to the more mature 48N6E3.
> 
> The main difference between the two is the seekers. The 48N6E2 found on the S-300PMU2 already had a very robust mode of guidance called SAGG. With the release of the specsheet, this guidance mode can also be confirmed on Sayyad-4, which has "Inertial + Update Via Data Link Semi-active". On its own, that description would describe at least a TVM system as used on the MIM-104 Patriot PAC-2. TVM sends receiver data back to the ground radar via a datalink. The ground radar then calculates the appropriate guidance commands and sends these back to the missile.
> 
> However, the specsheet says "Semi-active/ *Active Radar Homing*". Active Radar Homing uses a self-contained radar set which none of the 48N6 series use. ARH on long-range missiles is a feature also used on the 40N6 missile of the S-400. This also confirms that Sayyad-4 would have onboard computation, making it capable of SAGG. SAGG is best described as a more robust form of TVM, because in addition to the raw receiver data sent to the ground radar, the missile can calculate its own guidance commands, which can be datalinked to the ground radar to check for errors between the missile-computed commands and the ground radar commands. The missile can also act on its own if guidance commands from the radar are being jammed but the target is still being painted by the ground radar.
> 
> However, when defending against the S-300 or Patriot series, a defending aircraft could hide below the horizon or behind terrain to break line of sight with the ground radar. This would defeat even SAGG, which is fundamentally a SARH-based guidance mode relying on line of sight. By including an active seeker, Sayyad-4 has the ability to guide on to the target even if line of sight to the ground radar has been broken in the little time the target has to react. The use of inertial guidance also allows the ARH mode to be used based on the target's predicted flight path at the time the radar lock was broken. This is particularly useful in Iran's mountainous terrain, but also makes Bavar-373 potent in naval applications where most targets will drop to very low altitude in the final phases of flight. Bavar-373 has clearly been designed for maximum resilience against jamming and reducing the ability of the target to defend to an absolute minimum.


What is thé adress if the defense ministry catalogue ?


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> it don't have any room for more missile


It does.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> It does.


Where ?


----------



## SalarHaqq

mohsen said:


> Our trained friends defined something for the S300 that was not defined in Russia itself. We received the upgraded PMU2 S300 but changed it according to our needs. Of course, we also changed the S200 system with a very high percentage, and even fired medium-range missiles with it.



One of the most important statements of the interview in my opinion. Although the S-300 PMU2 Iran received was not an export version, it's great to learn that on top of this, Iran modified the system. Now the relative bonus NATO and the zionists enjoyed from training against S-300's in places such as Greece is neutralized. They will not know what exactly they are up against, may find it more difficult to jam etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Iranian_Patriot

Hello gents, do any of you know What is the address of the defense ministry products catalogue?


----------



## Robin rone

If Iran and Israel start a war in a hypothetical scenario None of Israel's future attacks start with IAF attacking Sam, instead they use cyber relam, they possibly try to sabotage or delay the sam systems responses so their strike packages can have safe pass, hence Iran is very large country they need huge number of long and medium range Sam Batteries to cover all possible entering zones and overlapping them as redundancy, Irans air defense look pretty impressive but they need more in numbers, but even in low numbers Iran's AD won't be a cake walk for IAF, they may have Successful strike but they will loose 2 or 3 birds from each packages minimum

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Russel

Shams313 said:


> i just wanted to see it 30km range, 8 missile config..that's all.


Exactly what was I thinking.

Hajidadeh is talking about strategic missile in air defense field. 








Top commander: IRGC to unveil ‘strategic missile’ soon


A senior commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the force is soon to unveil a “strategic missile” in the field of air defense systems.




www.presstv.ir


----------



## sanel1412

Russel said:


> Exactly what was I thinking.
> 
> Hajidadeh is talking about strategic missile in air defense field.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top commander: IRGC to unveil ‘strategic missile’ soon
> 
> 
> A senior commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the force is soon to unveil a “strategic missile” in the field of air defense systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.presstv.ir


Number of missile on one TEL depend on system performance, and you always must look at least one whole battery to understand. For example one Buk M1 system. One. battery needs has one Command post and you need only 1 TEL with radar, and that one can BE linked linked and can Control and guide missiles from 3 more TELs without radar dome... SO one Buk battery has 4 TELs....mostly 3 TELs with radar dome and one without that serve as TEL and transloader... But it is meaningless to put 8 missiles instead 4 when Buk has 2 channels and you can engage Limited Number of targets. It is always better to have 2 x 4 missile TELs than 1 x 8,you have redundancy and more dificult for Enemy to target 2 than one TEL. So they decide AD deployment design and num# missile on TEL with performance, doctrine and deployment in Mind. It is better for mobilne shorad to have 4 compatibile missile containers on every TEL since it is easier to maintain and reload, thus you have more TELs on different positions... Now, Russians designed some of their Shorad with offensive deployment in Mind, their doctrine in Europe is built Around plans, in case of war, to overun eastern Europe with large armored units(that is why they maintain that Crazy Number of MBTs), SO they need highly mobilne tracked Shorad that can follow armored units, also that is why they insisted from begining on fire on the Move capability Also that is why Russian ground force have own AD from shorad up to S300V... That is because their doctrine include fast movements in to deep Enemy teritory... So ground forces have own units up to IADS....Iran doesnt plan to do that, Iran has defansive doctrine and need differnt capabilities...So we will see different arrangement for Iranian SAMs...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Number of missile on one TEL depend on system performance, and you always must look at least one whole battery to understand. For example one Buk M1 system. One. battery needs has one Command post and you need only 1 TEL with radar, and that one can BE linked linked and can Control and guide missiles from 3 more TELs without radar dome... SO one Buk battery has 4 TELs....mostly 3 TELs with radar dome and one without that serve as TEL and transloader... But it is meaningless to put 8 missiles instead 4 when Buk has 2 channels and you can engage Limited Number of targets. It is always better to have 2 x 4 missile TELs than 1 x 8,you have redundancy and more dificult for Enemy to target 2 than one TEL. So they decide AD deployment design and num# missile on TEL with performance, doctrine and deployment in Mind. It is better for mobilne shorad to have 4 compatibile missile containers on every TEL since it is easier to maintain and reload, thus you have more TELs on different positions... Now, Russians designed some of their Shorad with offensive deployment in Mind, their doctrine in Europe is built Around plans, in case of war, to overun eastern Europe with large armored units(that is why they maintain that Crazy Number of MBTs), SO they need highly mobilne tracked Shorad that can follow armored units, also that is why they insisted from begining on fire on the Move capability Also that is why Russian ground force have own AD from shorad up to S300V... That is because their doctrine include fast movements in to deep Enemy teritory... So ground forces have own units up to IADS....Iran doesnt plan to do that, Iran has defansive doctrine and need differnt capabilities...So we will see different arrangement for Iranian SAMs...


no its not meaningless , mor missile means you can engage more wave of attack , don't forget the system can always engage another targets when the previous one is destroyed but having have to reload take time


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> no its not meaningless , mor missile means you can engage more wave of attack , don't forget the system can always engage another targets when the previous one is destroyed but having have to reload take time





Hack-Hook said:


> no its not meaningless , mor missile means you can engage more wave of attack , don't forget the system can always engage another targets when the previous one is destroyed but having have to reload take time


You didnt understand my point...they will always deploy same number of missiles ready to fire,it will always be max missiles can be online per battery,it is just metter will it be 16 missiles on 2 TELs with 8 missiles each(number is example) or 4 TELs with 4 missile on each...every AD system has limit on maximum missiles you can have online,they will always set max number...more TELs is always better...I served in PVO...everything is predefined...and there is always at least 6 to 8 times more missile in battery than system can fire at same time,reloading is done on rotation base while engage, one crew reload while other engage....if you fire all missiles in short time...second unit is take over and your go at secondary position any way....,that is how we operated every time.... that is why lowest AD deployment is battery level. So if you need let say more missiles ready to fire,you deploy more batteries or higher level unit. I understand what you are saying.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Russel

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 813466


Is there any video of test firing of this system?


----------



## Natalya Shadova

Iranian_Patriot said:


> Hello gents, do any of you know What is the address of the defense ministry products catalogue?


Couldn't find it either


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> You didnt understand my point...they will always deploy same number of missiles ready to fire,it will always be max missiles can be online per battery,it is just metter will it be 16 missiles on 2 TELs with 8 missiles each(number is example) or 4 TELs with 4 missile on each...every AD system has limit on maximum missiles you can have online,they will always set max number...more TELs is always better...I served in PVO...everything is predefined...and there is always at least 6 to 8 times more missile in battery than system can fire at same time,reloading is done on rotation base while engage, one crew reload while other engage....if you fire all missiles in short time...second unit is take over and your go at secondary position any way....,that is how we operated every time.... that is why lowest AD deployment is battery level. So if you need let say more missiles ready to fire,you deploy more batteries or higher level unit. I understand what you are saying.


It's better be 8 missile on 4 tel leek at Syria each time they attack it they use at least 60 missile 
by the way here it's stated that the system can control 8 missile but they only put 4 missile there


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> It's better be 8 missile on 4 tel leek at Syria each time they attack it they use at least 60 missile
> by the way here it's stated that the system can control 8 missile but they only put 4 missile there


AD system and missiles is not as AK 47 and magazine..so you just use bigger magazine..missiles are linked with system,they need two way communication,datalinks...have bandwidth limits,processing power limits..electricity limits...weight limits...etc...so military get system with its limitations..BUK battery has 16 online missiles(you can put it on 2 or 4 TELs it is 16 per battery)......but if you need more missiles,you deploy more units...But what I know I just earn pension in military

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> AD system and missiles is not as AK 47 and magazine..so you just use bigger magazine..missiles are linked with system,they need two way communication,datalinks...have bandwidth limits,processing power limits..electricity limits...weight limits...etc...so military get system with its limitations..BUK battery has 16 online missiles(you can put it on 2 or 4 TELs it is 16 per battery)......but if you need more missiles,you deploy more units...But what I know I just earn pension in military


As I said the system have datalink for 8 missile but only carry 4

And this is point defense system not a system for axample like 3rd of khordad this system have one unit per battery


----------



## sanel1412

Hack-Hook said:


> As I said the system have datalink for 8 missile but only carry 4
> 
> And this is point defense system not a system for axample like 3rd of khordad this system have one unit per battery


I didnt say it cant carry 8 missiles,in fact,I said oposite,I just say even if it carry 4 it just mean more TELs in complex, when I look at exhaust heat protection it looks to me it is built in size to cover 3 rows of containers.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499830026774192137

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## TheImmortal

Iran has used advanced air defense batteries against Israel in Syria


Since Iran has deployed new air defense batteries in Syria last year, the IAF has had to change how they carry out their strikes




www.google.com






_Since their introduction, the IAF has been studying the Iranian batteries, which have architecture unlike that of the Russian batteries._

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Iran has used advanced air defense batteries against Israel in Syria
> 
> 
> Since Iran has deployed new air defense batteries in Syria last year, the IAF has had to change how they carry out their strikes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Since their introduction, the IAF has been studying the Iranian batteries, which have architecture unlike that of the Russian batteries._


Nice.

Best way to become better and better train and refine against a worthy adversary.


----------



## TheImmortal

Israel released footage of F-35’s intercepting 2 Iranian Shahed flying wing UAVs near Israel. Incident took place last year. Israel claims they were trying to deliver weapons to Gaza, or at least one article I read said that. Find that hard to believe. Seems an attempt to gauge Israeli radar defenses for Intel purposes and war time planning.






Longer video here









WATCH: As Iranian drone threat increases, Israeli F35s down two


More and more unmanned aerial systems are being used by Iran to attack targets across the region.




www.google.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Israel released footage of F-35’s intercepting 2 Iranian Shahed flying wing UAVs near Israel. Incident took place last year. Israel claims they were trying to deliver weapons to Gaza, or at least one article I read said that. Find that hard to believe. Seems an attempt to gauge Israeli radar defenses for Intel purposes and war time planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Longer video here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WATCH: As Iranian drone threat increases, Israeli F35s down two
> 
> 
> More and more unmanned aerial systems are being used by Iran to attack targets across the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


They had to pull up F-35's for downing them..hmm

Maybe had some trouble tracking & downing them with SAMs...

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Israel released footage of F-35’s intercepting 2 Iranian Shahed flying wing UAVs near Israel. Incident took place last year. Israel claims they were trying to deliver weapons to Gaza, or at least one article I read said that. Find that hard to believe. Seems an attempt to gauge Israeli radar defenses for Intel purposes and war time planning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Longer video here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WATCH: As Iranian drone threat increases, Israeli F35s down two
> 
> 
> More and more unmanned aerial systems are being used by Iran to attack targets across the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


they say two F-35 but it seems two different targeting system to .
well , I'm not expert in that field , can someone who knows them better tell me if it was two F-35 or two different plane . to be honest one of them remotely looked like when Netanyahu showed the drone in UN


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> They had to pull up F-35's for downing them..hmm
> 
> Maybe had some trouble tracking & downing them with SAMs...



I think one of the article mentioned it was found either 45 mins before Israel border of 45KM (can’t remember).

Anyway, the most likely radar that tracked this is the OTH early warning radar inside Israel operated in conjunction with the USA. That would have detected this, but wouldn’t be able to be accurate enough for targeting.

So in response they probably sent up F-35 to test them out and due To nature to target. F-16’s don’t always hit on first try sometimes need multiple.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

Really hard to see someone who posts on this thread, go hard on the RUssia-Ukraine war, for Ukraine, almost like a paid agent. i will never like this person's posts on PDF again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> They had to pull up F-35's for downing them..hmm
> 
> Maybe had some trouble tracking & downing them with SAMs...


That was certainly the case on the first occasion that one of these drones was deployed to attempt an infiltration,as the israelis had to get an attack helo to engage it inside israeli airspace at very close range.
It does make sense to probe their ad radar coverage for any gaps or weak points,because in any war with the zionists iran will need accurate,and ideally in real time,assessments of the damage that the missile forces are inflicting and whether certain critical targets,such as air bases,have been knocked out for beyond the expected duration of the conflict,or whether there will need to be more follow up strikes,and only drones will be ale to provide this in the short to medium time scale,or at least until we have a constellation of iranian recon sats.
Another possibility is that before the missile forces are unleashed,drones like this could be used to target,either directly or with stand off munitions,critical bits of the israeli iads,such as the arrow,which being a fixed system makes it very vulnerable to this sort of surprise attack.
Lastly it is kind of funny,you have the [arab] claims of israeli f35s supposedly infiltrating iranian airspace,yet its the iranians who are the ones actually attempting to infiltrate israeli airspace using low observable drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sobhan

First images of Iranian laser cannon 😈💪 Sateb laser cannon

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jauk

Sineva said:


> That was certainly the case on the first occasion that one of these drones was deployed to attempt an infiltration,as the israelis had to get an attack helo to engage it inside israeli airspace at very close range.
> It does make sense to probe their ad radar coverage for any gaps or weak points,because in any war with the zionists iran will need accurate,and ideally in real time,assessments of the damage that the missile forces are inflicting and whether certain critical targets,such as air bases,have been knocked out for beyond the expected duration of the conflict,or whether there will need to be more follow up strikes,and only drones will be ale to provide this in the short to medium time scale,or at least until we have a constellation of iranian recon sats.
> Another possibility is that before the missile forces are unleashed,drones like this could be used to target,either directly or with stand off munitions,critical bits of the israeli iads,such as the arrow,which being a fixed system makes it very vulnerable to this sort of surprise attack.
> Lastly it is kind of funny,you have the [arab] claims of israeli f35s supposedly infiltrating iranian airspace,yet its the iranians who are the ones actually attempting to infiltrate israeli airspace using low observable drones.


Haha! You’re right seems we have a tag team of ‘OSINT’ (read Twitter) experts running loose here.😀

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 826578


The article that goes with the image is rather humorous
https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...t-missile-prowess-doha-exhibition-2022-03-23/

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## raptor22

Do they really wanna sell Bavar and commercialized it? or just presenting it as an achievement? though I don't think any would buy it due to sanctions and definite American pressure.


----------



## TheImmortal

raptor22 said:


> Do they really wanna sell Bavar and commercialized it? or just presenting it as an achievement? though I don't think any would buy it due to sanctions and definite American pressure.



Domestic and International Bavar will be two very different versions.

It’s important for Iran to export arms, it strengthens ties and will be a boon for the economy, jobs, and for future Iranian military projects as it will pave the way for more funding of r&d projects.

Iran could easily sell $25B+ worth of arms per year to various countries around the world from Russia all the way to South American and African countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Domestic and International Bavar will be two very different versions.
> 
> It’s important for Iran to export arms, it strengthens ties and will be a boon for the economy, jobs, and for future Iranian military projects as it will pave the way for more funding of r&d projects.
> 
> Iran could easily sell $25B+ worth of arms per year to various countries around the world from Russia all the way to South American and African countries.


Iran should never get into the arms export business. Ever. Instead focus on exporting high added value peacful technologies. Eg drones for commercial use. But much more as they become available. Iran's investment in space, nuclear, and defense systems should result in a tech boom.


----------



## TheImmortal

jauk said:


> Iran should never get into the arms export business. Ever. Instead focus on exporting high added value peacful technologies. Eg drones for commercial use. But much more as they become available. Iran's investment in space, nuclear, and defense systems should result in a tech boom.



Iran is already in arms export business. From Africa to Libya to Iraq to Yemen to Venezuela to Syria and more. Lifting of sanctions allows to expand the clientele to a lot more nations who were wary of US secondary sanctions.

Iran has a duty to provide security for countries who cannot afford or don’t want to fall under the arms extortion tactics of the West.

Strong countries lead to peace, weak countries get invaded/overthrown.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

TheImmortal said:


> Iran is already in arms export business. From Africa to Libya to Iraq to Yemen to Venezuela to Syria and more. Lifting of sanctions allows to expand the clientele to a lot more nations who were wary of US secondary sanctions.
> 
> Iran has a duty to provide security for countries who cannot afford or don’t want to fall under the arms extortion tactics of the West.
> 
> Strong countries lead to peace, weak countries get invaded/overthrown.


Correct. What you just said does not conflict with what I said. It conflicts with what you originally said. Iran should export to allies, at cost for those who have money and free for those who don't. Arms for profit is a crime worse than digging ditches for oil. It's a game for lowlifes. Not an Iranian one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


>


guys something is strange , there they show AD200 (bavar-373) and it seems its identical to iranian Bavar.
but then they show Talash pac3 (15th of Khordad) and it use some other radar than iranian 15th of khordad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Heres a larger resolution pic [3500 x 2153]


----------



## TheImmortal

Export version gets downgraded radar, not surprising. 

Also the radar can be mixed and matched based on clients need/affordability.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Hack-Hook said:


> guys something is strange , there they show AD200 (bavar-373) and it seems its identical to iranian Bavar.
> but then they show Talash pac3 (15th of Khordad) and it use some other radar than iranian 15th of khordad


The model on display looks to somewhat resemble the earlier Talash sam system.Its use of the ofoogh 3 cw illuminator as its fire control radar points to it being a sarh equipped system,it also lacks the najim 04 aesa search radar and appears to use the AN/MPQ-50 radar from the mersad 16 sam system instead.
This looks to be the cheap low tech [export only?] version of this system.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Export version gets downgraded radar, not surprising.
> 
> Also the radar can be mixed and matched based on clients need/affordability.


Why not same thing happen about Bavar or AD200
and its not just lower tier equipment , its 1-2 generation downgrade


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507408812508127246

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

TheImmortal said:


> Domestic and International Bavar will be two very different versions.
> 
> It’s important for Iran to export arms, it strengthens ties and will be a boon for the economy, jobs, and for future Iranian military projects as it will pave the way for more funding of r&d projects.
> 
> Iran could easily sell $25B+ worth of arms per year to various countries around the world from Russia all the way to South American and African countries.



Well what I meant was this, first we gotta see it fully operational and deployed in Iran like other AD system introduced by Iran and deployed then introduce its export version and list of its specifications some video etc ... where are these documents? that's why I asked ...
Russia has sold all versions of S300 and S400 which are available to purchased used in battles and war how on earth we could compete with them while it is not even operational within Iran yet or American system like Patriot and which majority of our neighbors are armed with it.
Other issue is as we've witnessed American even could not stand Iran showcasing its weapons in an exhibition let alone to sell them in market .. remember what happened to Turkey over S-400 .. for sure Turkey is a NATO member which makes it more complex but still I think no one would dare to buy such a weapon from Iran maybe small drones rifle and etc etc but not such a system due to American pressure.
For sure arm export could bring and inject fund in our army but such a thing has its own political and economical challenges.


----------



## TheImmortal

raptor22 said:


> Well what I meant was this, first we gotta see it fully operational and deployed in Iran like other AD system introduced by Iran and deployed then introduce its export version and list of its specifications some video etc ... where are these documents? that's why I asked ...
> Russia has sold all versions of S300 and S400 which are available to purchased used in battles and war how on earth we could compete with them while it is not even operational within Iran yet or American system like Patriot and which majority of our neighbors are armed with it.
> Other issue is as we've witnessed American even could not stand Iran showcasing its weapons in an exhibition let alone to sell them in market .. remember what happened to Turkey over S-400 .. for sure Turkey is a NATO member which makes it more complex but still I think no one would dare to buy such a weapon from Iran maybe small drones rifle and etc etc but not such a system due to American pressure.
> For sure arm export could bring and inject fund in our army but such a thing has its own political and economical challenges.



Bavar has been deployed in Iran for over 2 years. Iran isn’t going to show you were the batteries are deployed that’s National secret. Production is likely still slow and Bavar is still going thru upgrades.

Production lines for 3rd Khordad have been shown.

As for Russia, no one will touch Russia for years because of sanctions now. Also Russia made S-300 systems a political card against the West (see Iran and Syria), iran can sell Bavar to Syria, Venezuela, Libya, etc etc. smaller countries who the big arms dealers (Russia/China) avoid arming due to Western pressure and political games.

Lots of opportunity for Iran in arms dealing.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar has been deployed in Iran for over 2 years. Iran isn’t going to show you were the batteries are deployed that’s National secret. Production is likely still slow and Bavar is still going thru upgrades.
> 
> Production lines for 3rd Khordad have been shown.
> 
> As for Russia, no one will touch Russia for years because of sanctions now. Also Russia made S-300 systems a political card against the West (see Iran and Syria), iran can sell Bavar to Syria, Venezuela, Libya, etc etc. smaller countries who the big arms dealers (Russia/China) avoid arming due to Western pressure and political games.
> 
> Lots of opportunity for Iran in arms dealing.


Indeed Iran isn’t going to show me where the batteries are deployed but usually these things can not be hid from OSINT my only knowledge over it is Sabahifard once said first system has been deployed.. really I hope they did it as I said "like other AD system introduced by Iran and deployed" like 3rd Khordad as you mentioned ... but if really Iran is after commercializing its weapons gotta much more on presenting them especially when competition is severe in this field.


----------



## Blue In Green

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar has been deployed in Iran for over 2 years. Iran isn’t going to show you were the batteries are deployed that’s National secret. Production is likely still slow and Bavar is still going thru upgrades.
> 
> Production lines for 3rd Khordad have been shown.
> 
> As for Russia, no one will touch Russia for years because of sanctions now. Also Russia made S-300 systems a political card against the West (see Iran and Syria), iran can sell Bavar to Syria, Venezuela, Libya, etc etc. smaller countries who the big arms dealers (Russia/China) avoid arming due to Western pressure and political games.
> 
> Lots of opportunity for Iran in arms dealing.



Any realistic chances Iran might ink a deal with a now firmly isolated Russia for Su-30s/35s though?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Blue In Green said:


> Any realistic chances Iran might ink a deal with a now firmly isolated Russia for Su-30s/35s though?


no as Su-30 is outdated and let be honest , Russia production capability for these aircraft is limited , and also Russia is not willing to give Iran the technology to maintain Su-35 domestically .
I say the chance of Iran getting new aircraft from European countries is a lot more than the chance of getting them from Russia , now you can guess the chance of Iran getting new Su-35 from russia


----------



## TheImmortal

Blue In Green said:


> Any realistic chances Iran might ink a deal with a now firmly isolated Russia for Su-30s/35s though?



Putin may be more apt to share technology if he stays under sanctions. Russia arms industry about to take a big hit.

Still 50/50 if anything happens tho. Russia is pretty stubborn sharing sensitive tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Blue In Green said:


> Any realistic chances Iran might ink a deal with a now firmly isolated Russia for Su-30s/35s though?


I think that the chances of that have increased enormously.With the west now determined to use the same economic warfare against russia as it used against iran,one of the obvious targets will be its mic,both when it comes to imports of components as well as sales of finished products.
I suspect that from now on the number of potential customers for russian weapons will be greatly diminished,by the same token tho` russia will no longer have any reason not to sell weapons to iran,or indeed whoever else that it can,infact it will probably have few choices on that score if it wants to keep large parts of its mic functioning.
It will be very interesting to see if the egyptians ever do take delivery of su35s that they purchased,or are the f15s that they`re now finally going to be given by the us [after 40+ years of waiting and hoping] intended to be a replacement for the su35s,if so then russia may need to find a new buyer quickly.......I wonder who on earth it could turn to under those circumstances.........
I think theres a good chance that iran might actually do quite well out of this war economically and politically,from both east and west.
Time will tell of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> no as Su-30 is outdated and let be honest , Russia production capability for these aircraft is limited , and also Russia is not willing to give Iran the technology to maintain Su-35 domestically .
> I say the chance of Iran getting new aircraft from European countries is a lot more than the chance of getting them from Russia , now you can guess the chance of Iran getting new Su-35 from russia


No SU-30 is not outdated, please know what you are talking about. SU-30 has multiple variants, with the new SU-30SM2 having SU-35 radar, engine, and avionics. A possible SM3 could add SU-57 avionics over that. Iran is not going to get anything from Europe lol, but there's a much higher chance of SU-35 or SU-30SM2+

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> No SU-30 is not outdated, please know what you are talking about. SU-30 has multiple variants, with the new SU-30SM2 having SU-35 radar, engine, and avionics. A possible SM3 could add SU-57 avionics over that. Iran is not going to get anything from Europe lol, but there's a much higher chance of SU-35 or SU-30SM2+


The design is outdated and has 10 time radar signature of su35 and chance of getting aircraft from Europe is more than chance of Russia giving iran the technology to maintain su35

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

The Su-30 is not obsolete, it's nonsense! This forum continues its downward slide. Sad because it was better a few years ago.

This is the year of air defense, I hope that Iran and its supreme leader will agree to present us with some surprises. This will demonstrate as I have often said that Iran is much more advanced than these announcement processes. you have to shake up the forum people who are stagnating in their thoughts and analyses.

I think it will, and Raissi will speed up some of the unveilings that have been hidden for years. I've been feeling this for a few readings over the past few weeks. Iran always throws little clue to decode And I love it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> The design is outdated and has 10 time radar signature of su35 and chance of getting aircraft from Europe is more than chance of Russia giving iran the technology to maintain su35


You do realize the SU-35 and SU-30 basically have the same design besides the dual cockpit and canards?


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> chance of getting aircraft from Europe is more than chance of Russia giving iran the technology to maintain su35



No EU regime is going to sell Iran any fighter jets, not now and not in future, as long as the Islamic Republic is in power and stays its anti-imperialist and anti-zionist course. Unless you mean to say civilian aircraft, which is a different matter - and even on this front, they kept Iran under embargo for the most part.

Military aircraft, Russia is much more likely to sell to Iran. Just as Iran hasn't obtained any weapons system from the Europeans since 1979, except for the last few examples of the Sina class FAC ordered before the Revolution, which France agreed to deliver, some Steyr AUG anti-material sniper rifles as well as some small accessories for the border guards to be used in their fight against drug smugglers. By contrast, Russian arms exports to Iran have been much more meaningful and larger in quantity. As a matter of fact they have included fighter jets (batches of Mig-29 and Su-24 in the early 1990's).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> This is disconnected from the ground reality. No EU regime is going to sell Iran any fighter jets, not now and not in future, as long as the Islamic Republic is in power and stays its anti-imperialist and anti-zionist course. Unless you mean to say civilian aircraft, which is a different matter - and even on this front, they kept Iran under embargo for the most part.
> 
> Military aircraft, Russia is much more likely to sell to Iran. Just as Iran hasn't obtained any weapons system from the Europeans since 1979, except for the last few examples of the Sina class FAC ordered before the Revolution, which France agreed to deliver, some Steyr AUG anti-material sniper rifles as well as some small accessories for the border guards to be used in their fight against drug smuggling gangs. By contrast, Russian arms exports to Iran have been much more meaningful and larger in quantity. As a matter of fact they have included fighter jets (batches of Mig-29 and Su-24 in the early 1990's).


not really and Russia will only sell the aircraft , but not the technology behind it . so what i said is correct.


GrandBotBoi said:


> You do realize the SU-35 and SU-30 basically have the same design besides the dual cockpit and canards?


there are difference in material and small difference in shape



Mr Iran Eye said:


> The Su-30 is not obsolete, it's nonsense! This forum continues its downward slide. Sad because it was better a few years ago.
> 
> This is the year of air defense, I hope that Iran and its supreme leader will agree to present us with some surprises. This will demonstrate as I have often said that Iran is much more advanced than these announcement processes. you have to shake up the forum people who are stagnating in their thoughts and analyses.
> 
> I think it will, and Raissi will speed up some of the unveilings that have been hidden for years. I've been feeling this for a few readings over the past few weeks. Iran always throws little clue to decode And I love it.


why argue , we have seen its effectiveness, its a side step for our F-14s


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> not really and Russia will only sell the aircraft , but not the technology behind it . so what i said is correct.
> 
> there are difference in material and small difference in shape


Nothing significant in terms of shape. They're both absolutely massive aircraft. I believe SU-30SM2 is made with similar low RCS materials


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> not really and Russia will only sell the aircraft , but not the technology behind it . so what i said is correct.



Pray tell if there's something factually incorrect in my post. Technology will be difficult to obtain from Russia, but then it would be even more unrealistic to expect Europeans to agree to such a step wouldn't it? After all they're close military allies of Iran's major enemy the US. So you can sure doubt that Russia will supply Iran with anything game changing as far as the air force goes. Any of the Europeans acquiescing to it however is even less probable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Now super honest western media claim Iran has sent it's Bavar373 along the purchased S300 to Russia to help them fight in Ukraine and they have multiple sources on the field and in intelligence services as well !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!









Russia ‘using weapons smuggled by Iran from Iraq against Ukraine’


Iraqi militias and others say undercover networks being used to supply materiel such as RPGs and anti-tank missiles




www.theguardian.com






perhaps the next day they would claim that Iran has sent it's Kowthar fighter jet as well! It's a whole new level of lies distribution. I mean how can I trust a single line of these morons from now on!?

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

mohsen said:


> Now super honest western media claim Iran has sent it's Bavar373 along the purchased S300 to Russia to help them fight in Ukraine and they have multiple sources on the field and in intelligence services as well !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia ‘using weapons smuggled by Iran from Iraq against Ukraine’
> 
> 
> Iraqi militias and others say undercover networks being used to supply materiel such as RPGs and anti-tank missiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps the next day they would claim that Iran has sent it's Kowthar fighter jet as well! It's a whole new level of lies distribution. I mean how can I trust a single line of these morons from now on!?



This article is pure insanity.... what compelled them to write such utter nonsense?

I guess when the subject is focused on Iran, Russia or any other country they don't like. It's free game as far as what can be said lol.

Iran sending a low-production yield, still experimental, high-end, hard to produce domestic AD system like the BAVAR-373 to Russia.... wow, just wow...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammed45

mohsen said:


> Now super honest western media claim Iran has sent it's Bavar373 along the purchased S300 to Russia to help them fight in Ukraine and they have multiple sources on the field and in intelligence services as well !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia ‘using weapons smuggled by Iran from Iraq against Ukraine’
> 
> 
> Iraqi militias and others say undercover networks being used to supply materiel such as RPGs and anti-tank missiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps the next day they would claim that Iran has sent it's Kowthar fighter jet as well! It's a whole new level of lies distribution. I mean how can I trust a single line of these morons from now on!?


Have you forgot, Guardian was the main Pro ISIS outlet publishing anti Iran news 24/7? Their unnamed sources, the sources that couldn't be named, were reporting Iranian and Syrian chemical attacks against civilians. Beside the unnamed sources, Guardian quoted white helmets a branch of Al Qaeda. 

Queen's lackies lack the brain. 

The retarded media such as BBC Persian use words of Iranians to keep the useless channel relevant and to Hide their stupid goals. I promise you, the day Iranians stop contributing to such media, they would reveal their sheer stupidity in a matter of months.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

I don't get it , why they need such nonsense , at least they could name system that actually help Russia , for example they could name some UCAV system , not Bavar-373 or S-300 that Russia already have abundance of such systems


----------



## TheImmortal

Bavar-373 OS system boots up in Farsi

Russian soldier: what the hell is this...

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Bavar-373 OS system boots up in Farsi
> 
> Russian soldier: what the hell is this...


Do you think the Guardian just went on a Wikipedia list of Iranian AD, and just picked one of them? lol 

theirs nothing that annoys me more, than when they say "the Iranian version of the S-300". They are nothing alike.

Oooooooo that bothers me

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> Do you think the Guardian just went on a Wikipedia list of Iranian AD, and just picked one of them? lol
> 
> theirs nothing that annoys me more, than when they say "the Iranian version of the S-300". They are nothing alike.
> 
> Oooooooo that bothers me



The news media said 2 Shahed-1xx tried to infilitrate Israel and I’m like huh I don’t recognize that Shaheed model number. And I typed it in.....IT DIDNT EXIST.

Press TV and Tasmin have been guilty of this too. That’s why journalists shouldn’t be writing military articles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BigMelatonin

mohsen said:


> Now super honest western media claim Iran has sent it's Bavar373 along the purchased S300 to Russia to help them fight in Ukraine and they have multiple sources on the field and in intelligence services as well !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russia ‘using weapons smuggled by Iran from Iraq against Ukraine’
> 
> 
> Iraqi militias and others say undercover networks being used to supply materiel such as RPGs and anti-tank missiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps the next day they would claim that Iran has sent it's Kowthar fighter jet as well! It's a whole new level of lies distribution. I mean how can I trust a single line of these morons from now on!?


Wow a decade for Russians to deliver them just for us to give it right back!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Blue In Green

BigMelatonin said:


> Wow a decade for Russians to deliver them just for us to give it right back!



Thanks brother, you made me laugh!!

Such childish nonsense coming out of the Western "journalism" world... It's like a cauldron of abject stupidity.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MyNameAintJeff

Blue In Green said:


> Thanks brother, you made me laugh!!
> 
> Such childish nonsense coming out of the Western "journalism" world... It's like a cauldron of abject stupidity.


Western Journalism has long gone down the drain, to the point that for many ordinary westerners, the word "journo" is now an insult

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GrandBotBoi

TheImmortal said:


> The news media said 2 Shahed-1xx tried to infilitrate Israel and I’m like huh I don’t recognize that Shaheed model number. And I typed it in.....IT DIDNT EXIST.
> 
> Press TV and Tasmin have been guilty of this too. That’s why journalists shouldn’t be writing military articles.


Actually it was the IDF itself. They accidentally released some bullshit infographic claiming it flew at 2000km/h and the pic was a Shahed-171. In reality it was a piston engine Shahed-181

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515749847936212996

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

It's the first time I see such a config in Army's SAMs, thanks to traitor TV director we didn't even see it in the parade!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

Theres a new version of the dezful sam as well












Heres a short clip of it plus the other new system [majid]
*https://static0.afkarnews.com/servev2/ZB48Mf4INqdY/ZpB3KkdzT4k,/14010129000255.mp4*

Interestingly both of these 2 new systems are mounted on what looks to be brand new 4 axle chassis,rather than the previously standard 3 axle iveco derived types.
Good to see.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Blue In Green

Sineva said:


> Theres a new version of the dezful sam as well
> View attachment 835415
> 
> View attachment 835416
> 
> Heres a short clip of it plus the other new system [majid]
> *https://static0.afkarnews.com/servev2/ZB48Mf4INqdY/ZpB3KkdzT4k,/14010129000255.mp4*
> 
> Interestingly both of these 2 new systems are mounted on what looks to be brand new 4 axle chassis,rather than the previously standard 3 axle iveco derived types.
> Good to see.



Are these systems built 100% from the ground up? 

Or are they taking the lunchers/radar from old TOR tracked chassis and putting them on these domestically built wheeled platforms?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

Blue In Green said:


> Are these systems built 100% from the ground up?
> 
> Or are they taking the lunchers/radar from old TOR tracked chassis and putting them on these domestically built wheeled platforms?


I honestly dont know,tho one thing that would potentially point to it being a reverse/reengineered copy would be the new wheeled chassis,as it wouldnt make much sense for iran to simply rehouse the original tors on a new wheeled chassis as this would effectively be compromising their off road capability for no gain.
On the other hand,there have been 2 previous sam systems that iran rehoused on new wheeled transporters,one was the sa6,the other the hq7,however both of these were extensively modernized and in the case of the sa6 completely reworked,with no part of the original system left untouched.
If these are the original systems rehoused,then it seems a safe bet that these have been at a minimum completely modernised,which I think is probably just as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Atar god of the fire

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515972552321077253These trucks have been imported from czech republic last year.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> I honestly dont know,tho one thing that would potentially point to it being a reverse/reengineered copy would be the new wheeled chassis,as it wouldnt make much sense for iran to simply rehouse the original tors on a new wheeled chassis as this would effectively be compromising their off road capability for no gain.
> On the other hand,there have been 2 previous sam systems that iran rehoused on new wheeled transporters,one was the sa6,the other the hq7,however both of these were extensively modernized and in the case of the sa6 completely reworked,with no part of the original system left untouched.
> If these are the original systems rehoused,then it seems a safe bet that these have been at a minimum completely modernised,which I think is probably just as well.



I’m skeptical it’s a 100% ground built up TOR. As I said earlier, the bolts are in the same exact locations. Rarely does Iran reverse engineer something and it look carbon copy the same...much less a Cold War era design (TOR-M1).

What’s a possibility is this is a modernized TOR-M1 to bring it closer to TOR-M2 standard.

As for track, track is overrated. Those wheels can handle most off terrain and still drive on highway and get to destinations on their own accord. 

What people forget about track is, it’s not ment to be driven long distances. It’s ment to be taken to the site on flatbed, which is cumbersome. Track also damages roads and aren’t made for long distances.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stryker1982

mohsen said:


> It's the first time I see such a config in Army's SAMs, thanks to traitor TV director we didn't even see it in the parade!




Important all-in-one Sayyad based AD system with new chassis

Camera director -> "You know what we really need? Long range footage of Bell helicopters..."



Sineva said:


> I honestly dont know,tho one thing that would potentially point to it being a reverse/reengineered copy would be the new wheeled chassis,as it wouldnt make much sense for iran to simply rehouse the original tors on a new wheeled chassis as this would effectively be compromising their off road capability for no gain.
> On the other hand,there have been 2 previous sam systems that iran rehoused on new wheeled transporters,one was the sa6,the other the hq7,however both of these were extensively modernized and in the case of the sa6 completely reworked,with no part of the original system left untouched.
> If these are the original systems rehoused,then it seems a safe bet that these have been at a minimum completely modernised,which I think is probably just as well.


Nice to see a good Chassis, previous version that was being tested had a Chassis that looked a bit flimsy.



TheImmortal said:


> I’m skeptical it’s a 100% ground built up TOR. As I said earlier, the bolts are in the same exact locations. Rarely does Iran reverse engineer something and it look carbon copy the same...much less a Cold War era design (TOR-M1).
> 
> What’s a possibility is this is a modernized TOR-M1 to bring it closer to TOR-M2 standard.
> 
> As for track, track is overrated. Those wheels can handle most off terrain and still drive on highway and get to destinations on their own accord.
> 
> What people forget about track is, it’s not ment to be driven long distances. It’s ment to be taken to the site on flatbed, which is cumbersome. Track also damages roads and aren’t made for long distances.


I suppose the counter would be tracked vehicles having greater survivability, but realistically if your behind the front lines tracked AD is being attacked, chances are you are already screwed...

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043978948419591

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043990730252296

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515954111715364864

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515956885098274816

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TheImmortal

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043978948419591
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043990730252296
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515954111715364864
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515956885098274816



Are we sure that isn’t the final production version of Mersad system?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516012906126655497


Stryker1982 said:


> I suppose the counter would be tracked vehicles having greater survivability, but realistically if your behind the front lines tracked AD is being attacked, chances are you are already screwed...



How does tracked vehicle have greater survivability? Speed is much lower and distance it can travel is lower. Unless we are speaking of strictly armour standpoint, at which point it can survive smalls arms and heavy caliber. But chances are if you are getting shot by small arms or heavy weapons you already screwed.

The above system can be moved into city or a town and a tarp thrown over it to mimic a civilian truck very quickly. Probably has top speeds of 60-70 mph.

I don’t know where this thinking that tracked survives longer than off road terrain tires comes from. There is a reason S-400 and S-500 aren’t tracked (besides weight).

Also in this day and age of drones, any drone with a decent EO/IO FLIR can locate a tracked vehicle hiding in a forest. Just look at Ukraine war.

The only thing tracked provides in my opinion is being able to go thru mud terrain or deep snow without issues. Which in Ukraine conflict is important due to the frost thawing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043978948419591
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043990730252296


it seems he made a wrong conclusion here , Sayyad Tactical supposed to use up to Sayyad-3 while 3rd of Khordad use up to Sayyad-2 also the radar seems to be a lot larger on Sayyad Tactical


----------



## mohsen

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1515972552321077253These trucks have been imported from czech republic last year.


Too much differences.


----------



## Atar god of the fire

mohsen said:


> Too much differences.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516138513779077129

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

Atar god of the fire said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516138513779077129


Though this is the head:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> Unless we are speaking of strictly armour standpoint, at which point it can survive smalls arms and heavy caliber. But chances are if you are getting shot by small arms or heavy weapons you already screwed.


That was exactly what I was referring too. 



Which is why I also stated that if you are being engaged, anti-armor is already trained on you most likely. I literally said this. I'm not sure what the purpose of your comment was.


----------



## TheImmortal

Stryker1982 said:


> That was exactly what I was referring too.
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why I also stated that if you are being engaged, anti-armor is already trained on you most likely. I literally said this. I'm not sure what the purpose of your comment was.



The purpose was you saying survivability of track is better than off terrain tires.

I don’t follow the logic. Other than one having armour and another not, it’s irrelevant. The advantages I listed with off terrain tires chassis strongly outweighs any minimal armour protection from a tracked vehicle.

Unless your war plan is bulldozing thru the forests rather than scoot and shoot then yes go with track. Iran’s air defense systems are mostly on flat arid terrain bordering on desert like.


----------



## Stryker1982

TheImmortal said:


> The purpose was you saying survivability of track is better than off terrain tires.
> 
> I don’t follow the logic. Other than one having armour and another not, it’s irrelevant. The advantages I listed with off terrain tires chassis strongly outweighs any minimal armour protection from a tracked vehicle.
> 
> Unless your war plan is bulldozing thru the forests rather than scoot and shoot then yes go with track. Iran’s air defense systems are mostly on flat arid terrain bordering on desert like.


I agreed with you, and said the only viable counterpoint against wheeled is that tracked vehicles are armored. That's it. I never had a problem with Iran making everything on a wheeled chassis. It is the right move for this geography.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Blue In Green said:


> Are these systems built 100% from the ground up?
> 
> Or are they taking the lunchers/radar from old TOR tracked chassis and putting them on these domestically built wheeled platforms?



When the system was first unveiled, several differences in external details between the Dezful and Tor vehicles were spotted on photographs by knowledgeable users here. They actually do not look to like exact carbon copies.

See for instance:






Iranian Air Defense Systems


If you know anything about engineering then you know this simple fact: digital is much easier than analogue today. It’s multifaceted but basically it goes down to available component in market and also workforce knowledge. Hence there is no doubt whatsoever that iranian tor m1 is a digital...



defence.pk





https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/post-13381481

And now, differences were highlighted between the radars of the IRGCASF and IRIADF versions of the Dezful, no less.







__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043984719822848
Also, Iran had shown models of Tor-like surface-to-air missiles earlier on (meant for wind tunnel testing, I believe), which suggests that reverse-engineering work was carried out on the system.

Merely 29 Tor-M1's were purchased from Russia. That's not such a large amount, and considering Iran will probably want to field both wheeled and tracked variants since both have their uses, it would imply that any conversion of these Russian-made ones onto wheeled chassis would concern a really limited number of examples, which would make it even more unrealistic.

Add to it the fact that thanks to this week's military parade, it is known that two branches of the military (both IRGCASF and IRIADF) operate the type, thus it becomes quite apparent that the 29 Tor's obtained from Russia would hardly suffice to fulfill the overall demand in terms of Dezful systems. Not to mention it's rather unlikely that the IRGC, which operates the imported Tor's, would hand over some copies to the army after years.

So available data overwhelmingly puts to rest speculation about cannibalization of old Tor-M1's, and points to the Dezful SAM's being brand new systems entirely built from scratch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

SalarHaqq said:


> When the system was first unveiled, several differences were spotted by knowledgeable users here between external details on the Dezful and on the original Tor vehicles, based on photographs. They actually do not look to like exact carbon copies.
> 
> See for instance:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iranian Air Defense Systems
> 
> 
> If you know anything about engineering then you know this simple fact: digital is much easier than analogue today. It’s multifaceted but basically it goes down to available component in market and also workforce knowledge. Hence there is no doubt whatsoever that iranian tor m1 is a digital...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-air-defense-systems.326173/post-13381481
> 
> And now differences were even detected between the radars of the IRGCASF and IRIADF versions of the Dezful.
> 
> View attachment 836011
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1516043984719822848
> Also, Iran had shown models of Tor-like SAM missiles earlier on (suitable for wind tunnel testing, I believe), which suggests that reverse-engineering work was carried out on the system.
> 
> Merely 29 Tor-M1's were purchased from Russia. That's not such a large amount, and considering Iran will probably want to field both wheeled and tracked variants since both have their uses, it would imply that any conversion of the system onto a wheeled chassis would concern a really limited number of examples, which would be even more surprising.
> 
> Add to it the fact that since this week's military parade, it is known that two branches of the military, IRGCASF and IRIADF both operate the type, thus it becomes quite apparent that the 29 Tor's obtained from Russia would hardly suffice to fulfill the demand in terms of Dezful systems.
> 
> So available data overwhelmingly puts to rest speculation about cannibalization of old Tor-M1's, and points to the Dezful SAM being a new system entirely built from scratch.



I wonder if Iran got some sort of TOT from Russia (unannounced) for the TOR-complex and are essentially just producing new ones from scratch whilst adding domestic Iranian upgrades. 

We know I.R.I AD technology is quite advanced so the R&D team would be able to implement their own advancements to TOR. 

What do you think bro?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Blue In Green said:


> I wonder if Iran got some sort of TOT from Russia (unannounced) for the TOR-complex and are essentially just producing new ones from scratch whilst adding domestic Iranian upgrades.
> 
> We know I.R.I AD technology is quite advanced so the R&D team would be able to implement their own advancements to TOR.
> 
> What do you think bro?



I think it's as good as certain that Iran applied in-house modifications not just to its own Dezful variant of the Tor, but basically to every domestic weapons system stemming from or making partial use of reverse engineering. Not just in order to upgrade capabilities where feasible, but also to keep the enemy in the dark as much as possible about technical specifications, as this increases potential risks for the enemy and restricts its war planning options accordingly.

As for undisclosed transfer of technology from Russia with regards to Dezful, for sure there didn't need to be, considering Iran's technological and defense industrial advancement as well as its extensive experience and expertise in reverse engineering.

This said, I'd say it's possible that Russia over the years provided Iran with technological assistance or documentation at least in a limited number of instances, with both sides keeping these sorts of transactions under wraps.

A look at Iran's arsenals, whether in the area of air defense, radars, ground forces equipment and a few others, will suggest that a portion of its newly developed weapons appear to have some connection to, or to be remotely inspired by Russian equivalents.

We know that in some cases like the 3rd of Khordad SAM, it doesn't go beyond mere outer resemblance, with the Iranian-made system having practically nothing in common with the Russian platform it seems to share external similarities with (in this example the SA-6).

In other cases, Iran got hold of token samples of Russian weaponry from third parties including but not limited to black market actors. Naturally, items such as the Ukranian-sourced Kh-55 come to mind. Syria could also have been a source for a couple of these.

This leaves a few systems which raise the question as to how Iran could have developed them domestically with zero input from the Russians, or why then the resemblance is so striking whilst Iran never got near any one of these. Pertaining to this category, Iran's Rezonans-style OTH radars for instance.

To summarize, there's no doubt in my mind that Iran has become extremely self-sufficient at all levels when it comes to weapons design and production (with the exception of a few types of armaments such as fighter jets, for well known and often cited reasons). However, I also think it's possible that on a select few items, there's been stealthy cooperation with Russia and possibly China.

Last but not least, I would add that Iran has reached a level where in my opinion such cooperation, limited as it might be, could well have become bidirectional. If I'm not mistaken, Iranian military officials reported that Russia was interested in Iranian know how on drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Blue In Green

SalarHaqq said:


> I think it's highly probable that Iran applied in-house modifications not just to its own Dezful variant of the Tor, but basically to every domestic weapons system stemming from or making partial use of reverse engineering. Not just in order to upgrade capabilities where possible, but also to keep the enemy in the dark as much as possible about technical specifications, as this increases potential risks for the enemy and restricts its war planning options accordingly.
> 
> As for undisclosed transfer of technology from Russia with regards to Dezful, for sure there didn't need to be, considering Iran's technological and defense industrial advancement as well as its extensive experience and expertise in reverse engineering.
> 
> This said, I'd say it's possible that Russia over the years provided Iran with technological assistance or documentation at least in a limited number of instances, with both sides keeping these sorts of transactions strictly under wraps.
> 
> A look at Iran's arsenals, whether in the area of air defense, radars, ground forces equipment and a few others, will suggest that a non-negligible portion of its newly developed weapons systems appear to have some connection to, or to have been inspired by Russian equivalents.
> 
> Now we know that in some cases like the 3rd of Khordad SAM, it doesn't go beyond mere outer resemblance, with the Iranian-made system having practically nothing in common with the Russian platform it seems to share external similarities with (in this example the SA-6).
> 
> In other cases, Iran got hold of token samples of Russian weaponry from third parties including but not limited to black market actors. Naturally, items such as the Ukranian-sourced Kh-55 come to mind. Syria could also have been a source for a couple of these.
> 
> This leaves a few systems which raise the question how Iran could have developed them domestically with zero input from the Russians, or why then the resemblance is so striking considering that Iran never got near any one of these. Pertaining to this category, Iran's Rezonans-style OTH radars for instance.
> 
> To summarize, there's no doubt in my mind that Iran has become extremely self-sufficient at all levels when it comes to weapons design and production (with the exception of a few types of armaments such as fighter jets, for well known and often cited reasons). However, I also think it's possible that on a select few items, there's been stealthy cooperation with Russia and maybe China. Last but not least, I would add that Iran has reached a level where in my opinion such cooperation, limited as it might be, could well have become bidirectional. If I'm not mistaken, Iranian military officials reported that Russia was interested in Iranian know how on drones.



My sentiments exactly! 

Well said Salar-jan, and thanks for the reply!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Army day 2022
Yes Mr President that's the one !

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## N_Al40

Interesting how Bavar-373 was not on display during the parade

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

N_Al40 said:


> Interesting how Bavar-373 was not on display during the parade



That AD system has to still be undergoing upgrades/modifications. Or they don't have enough too spare and it's currently deployed. 

I really would like to know just how many they've built so far and are planning to build over the course of the next 5-10 years. 

Very high-end capable system.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## N_Al40

Blue In Green said:


> That AD system has to still be undergoing upgrades/modifications. Or they don't have enough too spare and it's currently deployed.
> 
> I really would like to know just how many they've built so far and are planning to build over the course of the next 5-10 years.
> 
> Very high-end capable system.


I was thinking if perhaps Bavar-373 is now being seen as a potent *display* of Iranian LD-AD prowess; as we know (and has been proven) Iranian R&D is exceptionally exponential such that by the time they've finished a project (Bavar-373 in this case) they already have significant improvement potential based on their new-found tech, experience, and innovations.

This leads to me to think, in light of the above and mentions of a successor to B-373, the as of yet obscure "Arman" system, that B-373 will not necessarily be mass produced but will be a *solid* foundation to the next level up being "Arman". Why mass produce a system that is more capable than the S-300 yet beneath the S-400 when you now have the technology and industrial undertaking to produce a system equivalent to the S-400 or perhaps even better than - in light of what Iranian scientists and researchers learnt during the development and eventual production of B-373

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

N_Al40 said:


> Why mass produce a system that is more capable than the S-300 yet beneath the S-400 when you now have the technology and industrial undertaking to produce a system equivalent to the S-400 or perhaps even better than - in light of what Iranian scientists and researchers learnt during the development and eventual production of B-373



Same reason US doesn’t have a ton of THAAD batteries.

Extremely potent air defense systems are expensive no matter who produces it. Cost is relative to the budget and military that is producing it.

You have to weight the extra cost vs the extra benefit and the zone it is being tasked to defend.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Blue In Green said:


> That AD system has to still be undergoing upgrades/modifications. Or they don't have enough too spare and it's currently deployed.
> 
> I really would like to know just how many they've built so far and are planning to build over the course of the next 5-10 years.
> 
> Very high-end capable system.


my guess is as they were talking about next generation bavar for next year and by what we see from Talash . perhaps they want to gave another role to bavar in its next generation and let Talash take the role that was supposed to be the role of Bavar


----------



## Blue In Green

N_Al40 said:


> I was thinking if perhaps Bavar-373 is now being seen as a potent *display* of Iranian LD-AD prowess; as we know (and has been proven) Iranian R&D is exceptionally exponential such that by the time they've finished a project (Bavar-373 in this case) they already have significant improvement potential based on their new-found tech, experience, and innovations.
> 
> This leads to me to think, in light of the above and mentions of a successor to B-373, the as of yet obscure "Arman" system, that B-373 will not necessarily be mass produced but will be a *solid* foundation to the next level up being "Arman". Why mass produce a system that is more capable than the S-300 yet beneath the S-400 when you now have the technology and industrial undertaking to produce a system equivalent to the S-400 or perhaps even better than - in light of what Iranian scientists and researchers learnt during the development and eventual production of B-373



My thinking is along the same lines.

I've been operating under the assumption that the BAVAR-373 AD system is a "rolling upgrade" platform with many tweaks and additions being added to the system as testing continues. So logically there isn't a "final" form of the BAVAR-373 yet that can be mass-produced outright. I'm assuming they're still working on it to find a version of BAVAR that they want to make a decent amount of like they did with 3rd-Khordad. But given just how many air-defense systems Iran produces (which is a lot). There might be some budget/supply issues where it's entirely possible that the BAVAR system isn't being produced in high-quantities due to lack of time/funds/supplies since their focus is spread across many different projects.

Another theory is that Iran might be producing BAVAR-373's in batches, sort of like the BLOCs of the PATRIOT SAM system with each respective batch having their own level of technology that is an incremental upgrade from the last batch (don't know if this is the case with PATRIOT, just making an uninformed guess).

Truth be told (lol), I have no idea what Iran is doing with BAVAR. What we can say with utter surety is that BAVAR is world-class high-end Air defense complex, utilizing advanced technologies that are not cheap whatsoever. I think we get too used to the "Iran will just make the same thing but cheaper" slogan, and apply it to all of Iran's defense projects. But in the case of BAVAR, there just isn't anyway this can be true. It's a system that requires massive investments in order to build and field due its complexity. Could just be a budget/resource issue, in that it's an expensive system that Iran can only build so many during a given time-frame.

Hopefully over the next 5 or so years we will see Iran make an appreciable amount but I don't think they'll be pumping them out like 3rd-Khordad or other Iranian SAM systems which are inherently cheaper to mass-produce.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Stryker1982

Blue In Green said:


> My thinking is along the same lines.
> 
> I've been operating under the assumption that the BAVAR-373 AD system is a "rolling upgrade" platform with many tweaks and additions being added to the system as testing continues. So logically there isn't a "final" form of the BAVAR-373 yet that can be mass-produced outright. I'm assuming they're still working on it to find a version of BAVAR that they want to make a decent amount of like they did with 3rd-Khordad. But given just how many air-defense systems Iran produces (which is a lot). There might be some budget/supply issues where it's entirely possible that the BAVAR system isn't being produced in high-quantities due to lack of time/funds/supplies since their focus is spread across many different projects.
> 
> Another theory is that Iran might be producing BAVAR-373's in batches, sort of like the BLOCs of the PATRIOT SAM system with each respective batch having their own level of technology that is an incremental upgrade from the last batch (don't know if this is the case with PATRIOT, just making an uninformed guess).
> 
> Truth be told (lol), I have no idea what Iran is doing with BAVAR. What we can say with utter surety is that BAVAR is world-class high-end Air defense complex, utilizing advanced technologies that are not cheap whatsoever. I think we get too used to the "Iran will just make the same thing but cheaper" slogan, and apply it to all of Iran's defense projects. But in the case of BAVAR, there just isn't anyway this can be true. It's a system that requires massive investments in order to build and field due its complexity. Could just be a budget/resource issue, in that it's an expensive system that Iran can only build so many during a given time-frame.
> 
> Hopefully over the next 5 or so years we will see Iran make an appreciable amount but I don't think they'll be pumping them out like 3rd-Khordad or other Iranian SAM systems which are inherently cheaper to mass-produce.


Bavar will certainly be a system of the future for Iran. Not like some other projects that disappear into the night.

No other system besides the S-300PMU2s are capable of high-altitude defense except for Bavar for Iran. Therefore, it's clear to me, they need this system completed and operational to remove reliance for the high-altitude sector off Russia. Before the S-300PMU2s that were delivered, their was really only the S-200 that could engage targets at the highest altitudes. Their would need to be a system that can be continously improve to compete with future threats in this altitude class, much like how Iran is constantly working to improve itself in the medium and short range class. Thankfully, this gap has/will be plugged.

Iran will also need self-sufficiency in dealing with ballistic missiles threat. Can you image during wartime, Russia refusing to deliver more S-300pmus missiles? I can... Can't afford such catastrophic scenario

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Stryker1982 said:


> Bavar will certainly be a system of the future for Iran. Not like some other projects that disappear into the night.
> 
> No other system besides the S-300PMU2s are capable of high-altitude defense except for Bavar for Iran. Therefore, it's clear to me, they need this system completed and operational to remove reliance for the high-altitude sector off Russia. Before the S-300PMU2s that were delivered, their was really only the S-200 that could engage targets at the highest altitudes. Their would need to be a system that can be continously improve to compete with future threats in this altitude class, much like how Iran is constantly working to improve itself in the medium and short range class. Thankfully, this gap has/will be plugged.
> 
> Iran will also need self-sufficiency in dealing with ballistic missiles threat. Can you image during wartime, Russia refusing to deliver more S-300pmus missiles? I can... Can't afford such catastrophic scenario



Fully agreed brother! 

BAVAR-373 represents a game-changing AD system for Iran that needs top priority. But then again, it's a really high-end complex. It's not easy to produce, nor is it cheap and it's resource/time intensive. 

Hopefully Iran is building them or at prioritizing their production over other systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mohsen

Watch Zinists' AD batteries intercepting each other's missiles, there are reports that no rocket has been fired from Qaza!









خبرگزاری فارس - خودزنی گنبد آهنین؛ شلیک ضدهوایی غزه پدافند اسرائیل را سردرگم کرد+ فیلم


رگبار سنگین و شلیک مداوم ضدهوایی نوار غزه به سمت جنگنده‌های صهیونیستی، سیستم پدافندی این رژیم را سردرگم کرده و باعث خودزنی سامانه‌های گنبدآهنین شد.



www.farsnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

mohsen said:


> Watch Zinists' AD batteries intercepting each other's missiles, there are reports that no rocket has been fired from Qaza!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> خبرگزاری فارس - خودزنی گنبد آهنین؛ شلیک ضدهوایی غزه پدافند اسرائیل را سردرگم کرد+ فیلم
> 
> 
> رگبار سنگین و شلیک مداوم ضدهوایی نوار غزه به سمت جنگنده‌های صهیونیستی، سیستم پدافندی این رژیم را سردرگم کرده و باعث خودزنی سامانه‌های گنبدآهنین شد.
> 
> 
> 
> www.farsnews.ir



It fired interceptors at machine gun fire....

What a waste of millions of dollars to intercept

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> It fired interceptors at machine gun fire....
> 
> What a waste of millions of dollars to intercept


if the system can detect machinegun and try to intercept it , the designers seriously need to reduce its sensitivity

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> if the system can detect machinegun and try to intercept it , the designers seriously need to reduce its sensitivity




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1517076792816898048


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Stryker1982

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 837464


Wondering whats the advantage over the 3rd Khordad here? Besides the sort of "American style" system


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Wondering whats the advantage over the 3rd Khordad here? Besides the sort of "American style" system


For starter look at the difference in Radar size. another thing that come to mind is the missiles , it can use Sayyad-3 , 3rd of khordad can use up to Sayyad-2 and guess those boxes help protect the missiles from environments, the system only need E/O on 3rd of khordad to surpass it in every aspect, well except size

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vizier

Diictodon said:


> Hopefully Bavar L will be unveiled soon. But the development of hypersonics is something that all modern SAMs are a problem dealing with.



If other vehicles of the system are mobile and change location periodically the most vulnurable part is the radar vehicle. Both search and tracking radars are vulnurable after their positions are revealed by elint.

One difficulty is detecting the arm launch but the longer range - faster variants are generally having higher signatures and can be detected easier. hypersonic air breathing missiles also generally fly high in a quasi ballistic trajectory and can be detected by radars as well. When an attack is detected best course of action rather than trying to take down all incoming missiles is to close the radar change location because of missile gps tracking and then disappear from iir,optical,radar as well because of secondary tracking on incoming anti radar missiles. Closing and going somewhere else is easy if the system is mobile enough. The problem of disappearing can be solved by using camouflage nets, folding down the radar and the vehicle hiding under the camouflage net in my opinion. It claims to cover both iir,rf,optical wavelengths. It is still a good option to change the position of the net periodically as well because of intel leaks or extensive search by spy satellites-sar systems etc. The net should be multispectral coverage of iir-rf bands since satellites operate in multispectral bands and compare the pictures on different frequencies to detect concealed targets.






A secondary radar vehicle far away can pop out from its camouflage net bunker fold up the radar and activate taking the hidden vehicles job and it can repeat the close-run-hide option giving its job to the other vehicle when attacked repeatedly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Iran - Tabas 1980​

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522943081976373255

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Stryker1982

Sineva said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522943081976373255


Fascinating infographics. Well presented.

Looks like the kind of thing you'd see for marketing material. I wonder if they will use these in expo's. All of these appear to be IRGC developments judging from the items, and the location it was pictured (IRGC Aerospace Museum/Expo)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PeeD

I saw a graphic on 3rd Khordad too, but not any more around

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

PeeD said:


> I saw a graphic on 3rd Khordad too, but not any more around

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Hack-Hook

PeeD said:


> I saw a graphic on 3rd Khordad too, but not any more around

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1523563935227867136

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1523566565232316416

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Muhammed45

IRGC's Dezful variant 





IRIADF's Dezful variant

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> IRGC's Dezful variant
> View attachment 842704
> 
> 
> IRIADF's Dezful variant
> View attachment 842705


IRIADF variant have is bigger and have more room wonder if they add more missile to it or it's just have roomier crew compartment? Or if they first built the irgc version but had problem with the truck performance and change it in the newer versions.


By the way one thing that come to mind by comparing it with Russian variants. The armored Russian variants are a lot more suitable for protecting deployed troop at battleground and our systems are more geared for protecting high valued assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

Muhammed45 said:


> IRGC's Dezful variant
> View attachment 842704
> 
> 
> IRIADF's Dezful variant
> View attachment 842705


I definitely think that the 4 axle tatra chassis was the way to go.
Hopefully we`ll get to see many more of these trucks in iranian service in the future,oh and of course the sam systems to go with them naturally.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522920880715796484

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

Taer missile warhead payload

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> Taer missile warhead payload


Who will volunteer to count the shrapnel?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> Taer missile warhead payload


According to one of reporters, name of the missile is "3rd khordad", it's the one which shot down the MQ4-C.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> According to one of reporters, name of the missile is "3rd khordad", it's the one which shot down the MQ4-C.


If it's Taer are you sure it has the range to do the shooting of rq-4?


----------



## mohsen

Hack-Hook said:


> If it's Taer are you sure it has the range to do the shooting of rq-4?


It's not Taer, yes, 105km


----------



## WudangMaster

It was a 3rd of Khordad system guiding a Sayyad 2, not taer, to the rq4 and the 3rd Khordad itself was not actively engaging with its own radar but getting data from more powerful radars farther out through the national air defense grid. I think the system might have had eo tracking too maybe. 
The systems typically carry a combination of taers and sayyads depending on how formidable the target might be.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Hack-Hook said:


> If it's Taer are you sure it has the range to do the shooting of rq-4?


Well the original post said taer otherwise if it's sayyad then yes it has far more than enough range. The question remain why we still produce Taer instead producing the same sized sayyad and for shorter range smaller missiles like the ones in 9th of day.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Well the original post said taer otherwise if it's sayyad then yes it has far more than enough range. The question remain why we still produce Taer instead producing the same sized sayyad and for shorter range smaller missiles like the ones in 9th of day.



Taer is cheaper to produce than Sayyad. So a mixture of cheap and expensive on same platform is the right path. Why waste a sayyad Missile on a target that can be brought down by a taer?

9th of Dey missiles cannot be put on 3rd Khordad without modification. Thus you would need two batteries (one 3rd Khordad and one 9th of Dev) to do the job of one 3rd Khordad equipped with Taer + Sayyad

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Taer is cheaper to produce than Sayyad. So a mixture of cheap and expensive on same platform is the right path. Why waste a sayyad Missile on a target that can be brought down by a taer?
> 
> 9th of Dey missiles cannot be put on 3rd Khordad without modification. Thus you would need two batteries (one 3rd Khordad and one 9th of Dev) to do the job of one 3rd Khordad equipped with Taer + Sayyad


taer still more expensive than missile used in 9th of dey and have the same range while is a lot larger and heavier, and wrong it can be put there as Sayyad 2 can be put on both 3rd of Khordad and 15th of khordad .
those missiles can be used both with canister and without canister


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> wrong it can be put there as Sayyad 2 can be put on both 3rd of Khordad and 15th of khordad .



Sayyad and Taer together






9 Dey missile






Completely different sizes.

Have yet to see a layout where a 9th Dey missile is sitting alongside a Sayyad or Sayyad-2

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> Sayyad and Taer together
> 
> View attachment 844288
> 
> 
> 9 Dey missile
> 
> View attachment 844289
> 
> 
> Completely different sizes.
> 
> Have yet to see a layout where a 9th Dey missile is sitting alongside a Sayyad or Sayyad-2


You see it's roughly the same shape only shorter . The posterior proration are nearly identical
And the missile can be easily put on the launcher of 3rd of Khordad instead of Taer for low altitude and lower range target. It really lower the operational costs and also if they opt to go for boxed launch system like BUK-M3 in future versions it allow to carry two missile instead of one .


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> You see it's roughly the same shape only shorter . The posterior proration are nearly identical
> And the missile can be easily put on the launcher of 3rd of Khordad instead of Taer for low altitude and lower range target. It really lower the operational costs and also if they opt to go for boxed launch system like BUK-M3 in future versions it allow to carry two missile instead of one .



Possibly in boxed launched format. I don’t think so right now personally in rail launched format.

3rd Khordad is medium range AD, doesn’t make sense to take one of its slots for short range.

Remember typically they launch two Sayyads at one target. Not sure why they didn’t in Global Hawk case, but with Bavar and most Russian based missile air defense two missiles are sent for higher kill probability.

Now If you have two Sayyads and one Dey missile. If you launch both Sayyads you now have no long range defense if those missiles miss or a new target appears coming at you for flaring up on radar. So during critical time of war you are now vulnerable and have to wait for a loader to come up alongside you and reload via crane assist. That could take 60+ mins.

To me cost benefit makes sense keeping a Taer over a Dey. Or 3 Sayyads. Or 2 Taer and 1 Sayyad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> 3rd Khordad is medium range AD, doesn’t make sense to take one of its slots for short range.


The problem is with Taer. It don't have that much of range compared to 9th of dey . Both around 40km give or take some km from it. Taer don't have the capabilities of our newer system and is a remnant of the time we were building Ra'ad project based on BUK systems. Keeping it there in light of our newer missile want make sense ,well at least to me.



TheImmortal said:


> Remember typically they launch two Sayyads at one target. Not sure why they didn’t in Global Hawk case, but with Bavar and most Russian based missile air defense two missiles are sent for higher kill probability.


To be honest while it make sense and it's not exclusive to Russian system I didn't see such necessity about sayyad missile in wargame and actual combat. And there is no documented use of bavar in actual combat scenario so I can't be sure about that but as bavar use sayyad missile I doubt it actually need two missile . Maybe it's the case of older Taer missile which is actually based on Russian design .



TheImmortal said:


> Now If you have two Sayyads and one Dey missile. If you launch both Sayyads you now have no long range defense if those missiles miss or a new target appears coming at you for flaring up on radar. So during critical time of war you are now vulnerable and have to wait for a loader to come up alongside you and reload via crane assist. That could take 60+ mins.


As I said taer is not long range


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> The problem is with Taer. It don't have that much of range compared to 9th of dey . Both around 40km give or take some km from it. Taer don't have the capabilities of our newer system and is a remnant of the time we were building Ra'ad project based on BUK systems. Keeping it there in light of our newer missile want make sense ,well at least to me.
> 
> 
> To be honest while it make sense and it's not exclusive to Russian system I didn't see such necessity about sayyad missile in wargame and actual combat. And there is no documented use of bavar in actual combat scenario so I can't be sure about that but as bavar use sayyad missile I doubt it actually need two missile . Maybe it's the case of older Taer missile which is actually based on Russian design .
> 
> 
> As I said taer is not long range


Taer-2C: ~ 90 km range (Tabas)
Taer-2B: ~ 105 km range (3rd Khordad)
9th Dey is short-to-medium-range

Taer and 9th Dey are clearly not in the same range class.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> Taer-2C: ~ 90 km range (Tabas)
> Taer-2B: ~ 105 km range (3rd Khordad)
> 9th Dey is short-to-medium-range
> 
> Taer and 9th Dey are clearly not in the same range class.


From where you get that nonsense data105 km on 3rd of Khordad is debatable and achieved by Sayyad 2c missiles not Taer missiles 
Tabas air defense also use both sayyad and Taer missiles and can achieve 75km with the help of sayyad and not to mention it evolved into 3rd of Khordad 

Taer 2 at most can achieve 40 to 45km depended on the model


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> From where you get that nonsense data105 km on 3rd of Khordad is debatable and achieved by Sayyad 2c missiles not Taer missiles
> Tabas air defense also use both sayyad and Taer missiles and can achieve 75km with the help of sayyad and not to mention it evolved into 3rd of Khordad
> 
> Taer 2 at most can achieve 40 to 45km depended on the model


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 844984
> View attachment 844985


your posters are totally wrong
the range on the system is for Sayyad-2c not Taer






Taer don't have that ranges its Sayyad that give them the range mentioned

you see this is Tabas with Taer





and this is Tabas with Sayyad




the missiles may look similar but taer based on russian design and what originaly used in Buk systems and Sayyad is based on Standard missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> your posters are totally wrong
> the range on the system is for Sayyad-2c not Taer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taer don't have that ranges its Sayyad that give them the range mentioned


The posters I posted can be found in the IRGC "Holy Defense" aerospace museum in Tehran unlike the one you just posted which is an unofficial infographic.






Sayyad-2 (AD-75) is known to have a maximum range of 75 km (see above). So it can't be Sayyad-2 missiles that bring Tabas' and 3rd Khordad's maximum engagement range to 90 and 105 km respectively. That leaves us with Taer-2 as the only possibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> The posters I posted can be found in the IRGC "Holy Defense" aerospace museum in Tehran unlike the one you just posted which is an unofficial infographic.
> 
> View attachment 844986
> 
> 
> Sayyad-2 (AD-75) is known to have a maximum range of 75 km (see above). So it can't be Sayyad-2 missiles that bring Tabas' and 3rd Khordad's maximum engagement range to 90 and 105 km respectively. That leaves us with Taer-2 as the only possibility.


well you guys can talk about Taer missiles as much as you like , the fact remain that it has far less range than Sayyad missiles and different sources claim different range for sayyad-2c

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

This one made me do a bit of a double take..




Not sure what its carrying tho`

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flotilla

Hack-Hook said:


> taer still more expensive than missile used in 9th of dey and have the same range while is a lot larger and heavier, and wrong it can be put there as Sayyad 2 can be put on both 3rd of Khordad and 15th of khordad .
> those missiles can be used both with canister and without canister



As far I remember 9th Dey probably has no seeker and it is RF directed by FCR of the system. Taer has SARH guidance and it has his own seeker. 9th Dey is better for anti-missile tasks, because it is lighter, cheaper and you can launch more to the incoming threat. Taer having is own active radar on on final approach is better against aircraft and better prepared agains ECM/ECCM techniques.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Existence of seeker is not of that advantage inshor range missile like Taer and 9th khordad 


Flotilla said:


> As far I remember 9th Dey probably has no seeker and it is RF directed by FCR of the system. Taer has SARH guidance and it has his own seeker. 9th Dey is better for anti-missile tasks, because it is lighter, cheaper and you can launch more to the incoming threat. Taer having is own active radar on on final approach is better against aircraft and better prepared agains ECM/ECCM techniques.


----------



## mohsen

Gen Sabahifard, chief commander of army air defenses announced the upcoming test for the increased range of Bavar-373 in the near future. he also stated that during the recent wargame, Bavar-373 successfully engaged with a target from 152km away.









خبرگزاری فارس - باور 373 عملیاتی شد


فرمانده نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش با بیان اینکه سامانه موشکی باور 373 به طور کامل به چرخه عملیاتی یگان‌های پدافندی پیوسته است، گفت: امروز افزایش توان رزم نیروی پدافند جهشی چند برابری را طی می‌کند.



www.farsnews.ir

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AmirPatriot

Hack-Hook said:


> your posters are totally wrong
> the range on the system is for Sayyad-2c not Taer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taer don't have that ranges its Sayyad that give them the range mentioned
> 
> you see this is Tabas with Taer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this is Tabas with Sayyad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the missiles may look similar but taer based on russian design and what originaly used in Buk systems and Sayyad is based on Standard missile


I know I'm late here but would like to clear this up
The 105km range missiles on 3rd Khordad are indeed Taer-2 variants. Please note differences below: No strakes in front of the front control surfaces, different rear control surface shape. (top: Sayyad-2C, below: late Taer-2 variant). Easy mistake to make as they are outwardly very similar and this Taer-2 model's white theme doesn't help.







See below, famous image of 3rd Khordad. You can see its missiles match the "White Taer-2" in all but colour





Just to clarify, 3rd Khordad CAN use Sayyad-2C but these "White Taer-2s" are not Sayyads



mohsen said:


> Gen Sabahifard, chief commander of army air defenses announced the upcoming test for the increased range of Bavar-373 in the near future. he also stated that during the recent wargame, Bavar-373 successfully engaged with a target from 152km away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> خبرگزاری فارس - باور 373 عملیاتی شد
> 
> 
> فرمانده نیروی پدافند هوایی ارتش با بیان اینکه سامانه موشکی باور 373 به طور کامل به چرخه عملیاتی یگان‌های پدافندی پیوسته است، گفت: امروز افزایش توان رزم نیروی پدافند جهشی چند برابری را طی می‌کند.
> 
> 
> 
> www.farsnews.ir


This is the second or third time they are saying it's operational. Hope it's for real this time.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## studyinmalaysia

I always found important information from you website. Thank you!



*Asia* *Pacific University Requirements*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

AmirPatriot said:


> I know I'm late here but would like to clear this up
> The 105km range missiles on 3rd Khordad are indeed Taer-2 variants. Please note differences below: No strakes in front of the front control surfaces, different rear control surface shape. (top: Sayyad-2C, below: late Taer-2 variant). Easy mistake to make as they are outwardly very similar and this Taer-2 model's white theme doesn't help.
> 
> View attachment 846917
> 
> 
> 
> See below, famous image of 3rd Khordad. You can see its missiles match the "White Taer-2" in all but colour
> View attachment 846918
> 
> 
> Just to clarify, 3rd Khordad CAN use Sayyad-2C but these "White Taer-2s" are not Sayyads


I'm not debating on the shape or color of Taer or Sayyad. And my poster didn't state any range for those missile.

If you have any evidence that Taer have any range more tan 40-45km please show it to us

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

AmirPatriot said:


> This is the second or third time they are saying it's operational. Hope it's for real this time.


Forget the title, some moron (usual among defense reporters) didn't know what to choose for title.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529107349163720704

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529107349163720704


Now it's understandable why Russia was insisted on offering us s400, we are building something in class of S500

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

AmirPatriot said:


> This is the second or third time they are saying it's operational. Hope it's for real this time.



What is the assumption based on that it wasn't operational before? Also the statement attributed to the military official in this latest news report is in composite tense ("peyvaste ast"), which could as well mean that Bavar-373 has been operational for quite some time. Indeed that is what the sum of all official declarations in this regard implies.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529107349163720704


Now it's understandable why Russia was insisted on offering us s400


SalarHaqq said:


> What is the assumption based on that it wasn't operational before? Also the statement attributed to the military official in this latest news report is in composite tense ("peyvaste ast"), which could as well mean that Bavar-373 has been operational for quite some time. Indeed that is what the sum of all official declarations in this regard implies.


about bavar , they previously said they are going to introduce a bavar-2 soon , maybe the first bavar was an unfinished work in progress after all we knew Sayyad 4 is part of Bavar Package but we saw a test of it. and also we never saw or see a report of it actually being deployed.

another matter is when iran announce a weapon usually we announce its deployment 1-2 year later and the weapon being deployed is having some modification with final product. we usually announce weapons when they are in working order but the final refined product is shown 1-2 year later

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> about bavar , they previously said they are going to introduce a bavar-2 soon , maybe the first bavar was an unfinished work in progress after all we knew Sayyad 4 is part of Bavar Package but we saw a test of it.



This is speculation, basically. Maybe, maybe not. The user I was responding to seemed to have drawn an unambiguous conclusion that Bavar-373 has not been operational to date, conclusion for which I see no compelling reason. Hence my question to the user.



Hack-Hook said:


> and also we never saw or see a report of it actually being deployed.



Its was declared operational several times, which is good enough to me.



Hack-Hook said:


> another matter is when iran announce a weapon usually we announce its deployment 1-2 year later and the weapon being deployed is having some modification with final product. we usually announce weapons when they are in working order but the final refined product is shown 1-2 year later



This isn't a systematic rule, is it? It's not as if it must necessarily apply to Bavar-373, a weapon the enemy is best kept in the dark about as much as possible.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> Now it's understandable why Russia was insisted on offering us s400



It’s because S-300 production line no longer existed. They weren’t going to restart a production line of an older generation product for a single order.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> It’s because S-300 production line no longer existed. They weren’t going to restart a production line of an older generation product for a single order.


not then , i mean 1 ir 1.5 years ago when they wanted to sell iran s400


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


> This is speculation, basically. Maybe, maybe not. The user I was responding to seemed to have drawn an unambiguous conclusion that Bavar-373 has not been operational to date, conclusion for which I see no compelling reason. Hence my question to the user.
> 
> 
> 
> Its was declared operational several times, which is good enough to me.
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't a systematic rule, is it? It's not as if it must necessarily apply to Bavar-373, a weapon the enemy is best kept in the dark about as much as possible.


for comparison let just look at shahed 129 , when was it first build , when was the time it was given to irgc , and when was the first you see it carry weapon and strike a target ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538936513756598273

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 855444
> View attachment 855448


You can see that they`ve altered the configuration of the front hydraulic stabilizers,the folding ones have been replaced with new fixed vertical ones behind the front wheels.



jauk said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1538936513756598273


God,I wish this had subtitles.


----------



## drmeson

Is this the complete list of our MED to LORAAD

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

drmeson said:


> Is this the complete list of our MED to LORAAD
> 
> 
> View attachment 855471
> 
> View attachment 855479
> 
> View attachment 855472
> View attachment 855473
> View attachment 855474
> 
> View attachment 855475
> 
> View attachment 855476
> 
> View attachment 855477
> View attachment 855478



missing Iranian S-200

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


>


just wanted to say the green and red lighting is added for the sake of the film, otherwise the actual product don't have that nonsense

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

TheImmortal said:


> missing Iranian S-200



Are they not being phased out ?


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

drmeson said:


> Are they not being phased out ?


No no no lol


----------



## Hack-Hook

drmeson said:


> Are they not being phased out ?


more like modified and integrated with other air-defense system , because of their long range no army is willing to depart from them and don't forget they may be useless against agile airplane but they are a viable threat to enemy airborne radars and transports

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1539687713678450696

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Iranian air defense unveils missiles with a range of 300 km The Deputy Commander of the Air Defense Force in the Iranian Army, Brigadier General Ali Reza Elhami, announced that this force will soon unveil missiles with a range of 300 km, stressing the need for the armed forces to reach the stage of self-sufficiency in various strategic areas and to raise the missile capacity of the army and the Revolutionary Guards as one of the factors in increasing The deterrent power of these forces. He said: Today, we are concerned about monitoring, identifying and chasing all planes, drones and fighters in our air borders, especially in the Persian Gulf region, where the Iranian people in the Iranian army’s air force have produced a locally made radar with a range of 3000 km, while our marches at a height of more than 47,000 feet supervise Our borders, and we will confront everyone who tempts himself to commit any mistake with all our strength and will respond to him.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1542066267489800193

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 858419
> View attachment 858420
> View attachment 858421
> View attachment 858422
> View attachment 858424


Sayyad , is what turned into 15th of Khordad , I think that's a defense ministry product

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> Sayyad , is what turned into 15th of Khordad , I think that's a defense ministry product


I think the IRGC version might be Talash, which directly led to the Sayyad series and the 15th Khordad.


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> Sayyad , is what turned into 15th of Khordad , I think that's a defense ministry product


Sayyad = IRGC-ASF
Talash, 15th Khordad = IRIADF

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> I think the IRGC version might be Talash, which directly led to the Sayyad series and the 15th Khordad.


no that's also defense ministry , that patriot like launcher is defense ministry Talash , sayyad (15th khordad) was defence ministry solution , irgc project was raad , 3rd of khordad and 9th of day. the ones that look like Buk



Messerschmitt said:


> Sayyad = IRGC-ASF
> Talash, 15th Khordad = IRIADF


the system rarely is called Sayyad , but there is a Tactical Sayyad which is also defense ministry





IRGC uses what resulted from RA'AD project .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> no that's also defense ministry , that patriot like launcher is defense ministry Talash , sayyad (15th khordad) was defence ministry solution , irgc project was raad , 3rd of khordad and 9th of day. the ones that look like Buk


So does that mean IRGC does not field the Sayyads 3 & 4 at all? 
What does IRGC have for higher altitudes and longer ranges? 
Does IRGC just get long range and high altitude protection from the Artesh Khatam Al Anbiya and the National Air Defense Grid? 
Does that also mean that Artesh only uses the Sayyad 2 in 15th Khordad and does not have access to the 3rd of Khordad or its derivatives? Is that why Kamin 2 and 9th of Dey are so similar but in used by Artesh vs Sepah?


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


> So does that mean IRGC does not field the Sayyads 3 & 4 at all?


right now I didn't see anything from them that use Sayyad - 3 and 4.
you must consider this that Sayyad-4 is only Bavar and I doubt if its operational and delivered.

by the way , I'm not aware about what IRGC have and don't have . but i knew something these equipment are defense ministry design so IRGC also can order them and use it. by the way in field of air defense it don't matter much , our air defense is integrated all data shared between IRGC and army and order to fire come from one place when it's about such long range system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> the system rarely is called Sayyad , but there is a Tactical Sayyad which is also defense ministry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRGC uses what resulted from RA'AD project .


That is because Sayyad (IRGC-ASF) and Talash (IRIADF) are two different systems. Talash is related to an effort by the IRIADF to upgrade Iranian S-200 sites and uses Kavosh (based on AN/MPQ-50) and X-Band Ofogh (possibly inspired by AN/SPG-62) radars while Sayyad is an IRGC-ASF system that uses a more powerful S-Band Najm-802 and/or Najm-802B radar. The Tactical Sayyad is yet another system that makes use of the Sayyad missile family. I think the confusion around Talash and Sayyad stems from the fact that the IRGC's Sayyad system has been given the same name as the missile (Sayyad-2) both systems (Talash + Sayyad) use and because both systems look very similar to each other. Whoever is responsible for choosing these names should be fired. Heck, there are even two Kavosh radars: IRIADF's Kavosh (AN/MPQ-50 copy) and IRGC-ASF's Kavosh (Kasta-2E2 copy).

For comparison:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> That is because Sayyad (IRGC-ASF) and Talash (IRIADF) are two different systems. Talash is related to an effort by the IRIADF to upgrade Iranian S-200 sites and uses Kavosh (based on AN/MPQ-50) and X-Band Ofogh (possibly inspired by AN/SPG-62) radars while Sayyad is an IRGC-ASF system that uses a more powerful S-Band Najm-802 and/or Najm-802B radar. The Tactical Sayyad is yet another system that makes use of the Sayyad missile family. I think the confusion around Talash and Sayyad stems from the fact that the IRGC's Sayyad system has been given the same name as the missile (Sayyad-2) both systems (Talash + Sayyad) use and because both systems look very similar to each other. Whoever is responsible for choosing these names should be fired. Heck, there are even two Kavosh radars: IRIADF's Kavosh (AN/MPQ-50 copy) and IRGC-ASF's Kavosh (Kasta-2E2 copy).
> 
> For comparison:
> View attachment 858623



the problem 
what you name as Sayyad to me looks 15th Khordad of Army which is what Talash project morphed into and use Najm-804 (the upgraded version of Najm-802)




by the way I yet to see any IRGC Air defense to use Sayyad-3

and this is Najm-802 as you see very different from what you posted in the system you call Sayyad

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> the problem
> what you name as Sayyad to me looks 15th Khordad of Army which is what Talash project morphed into and use Najm-804 (the upgraded version of Najm-802)


All we know is that the IRGC-ASF's Sayyad system has been seen in configurations with both the Najm-802 and Najm-802B. 15th Khordad is an IRIADF project that uses Najm-804 as you stated.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1144224123788439552




^ Najm-802





^ Najm-802B (the one in the picture I posted before)


Hack-Hook said:


> and this is Najm-802 as you see very different from what you posted in the system you call Sayyad


That's not Najm-802 but Bavar-373's Meraj-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Messerschmitt said:


> All we know is that the IRGC-ASF's Sayyad system has been seen in configurations with both the Najm-802 and Najm-802B. 15th Khordad is an IRIADF project that uses Najm-804 as you stated.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1144224123788439552
> View attachment 858876
> 
> ^ Najm-802
> 
> View attachment 858877
> 
> ^ Najm-802B (the one in the picture I posted before)
> 
> That's not Najm-802 but Bavar-373's Meraj-4.



If IRIAF plays its card right, we have at our hand a wide, layered integrated Air defense of Iran. The Air defense is getting stronger and stronger by days.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SalarHaqq



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> All we know is that the IRGC-ASF's Sayyad system has been seen in configurations with both the Najm-802 and Najm-802B. 15th Khordad is an IRIADF project that uses Najm-804 as you stated.


you talk about sayyad system , well please show it to us , provide some information about it.


----------



## Hack-Hook

SalarHaqq said:


>


only 96 but joke aside , do you have any photo of its TR units or the rest of electronic used in it , that would be a lot more interesting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SalarHaqq

Hack-Hook said:


> do you have any photo of its TR units or the rest of electronic used in it , that would be a lot more interesting



Sure, I have photos from multiple angles of every micro component, shared with me directly by the Iranian joint chief of staff who is a childhood buddy of mine, with whom I still play football every Thursday morning. But jokes aside, I think the picture is interesting enough to most of us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## drmeson

Hack-Hook said:


> only 96 but joke aside , do you have any photo of its TR units or the rest of electronic used in it , that would be a lot more interesting



Missile Seekers do not have lots of T/R elements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> you talk about sayyad system , well please show it to us , provide some information about it.


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1544631595038121989

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1545050782961045504

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

High definition pic of mersad 16 firing a sam

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## drmeson

Sayyad-4 TVC

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DoubleYouSee

hey guys;does anybody knows,which documentary showed this footages about Radar test rooms in Iran?
If anyone has the link of it,share it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WudangMaster

DoubleYouSee said:


> hey guys;does anybody knows,which documentary showed this footages about Radar test rooms in Iran?
> If anyone has the link of it,share it.
> View attachment 863049


I tried earlier today and will keep trying on and off. Persianboy or imamedia youtube channels might have it; I already went through Ali Javid's play list and didn't see it. 
It was a documentary about air defense systems evolution in the country from the first copies of a Chinese system in the 1980s to developing something like the Najm 804 today. 
On a related note, it is imperative that we start downloading these vids from youtube because they are even more important than individual pictures and are great reference and also very difficult to search for years after they have been uploaded.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DoubleYouSee

WudangMaster said:


> I tried earlier today and will keep trying on and off. Persianboy or imamedia youtube channels might have it; I already went through Ali Javid's play list and didn't see it.
> It was a documentary about air defense systems evolution in the country from the first copies of a Chinese system in the 1980s to developing something like the Najm 804 today.
> On a related note, it is imperative that we start downloading these vids from youtube because they are even more important than individual pictures and are great reference and also very difficult to search for years after they have been uploaded.


thank you bro.i have watched "battle of waves"but those anechoic chambers were not on that documentary at all.even i wattched some documentarie of "thurayya".i am looking for it in most of youtube channels you mentioned but couldn't find it so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558833756412252160

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

Interesting, seems Like missile for short to medium range for Sayyad

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sanel1412

Diictodon said:


> There was a post that said that air defence system is a upgraded Mersad. Basically what Joshan AD is to Khordad 15 or what Khordad 3 is to Tabas.


Yes but that Sayyad missile seems to be New version for VLS, it make sense since it is excpected New VLS AD to be developed for New ships

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva

Interesting looking small missile on display,looks more like an a2a missile than a sam.




The Sayyad missile on display also looks like it might be slightly different as well,the center body strakes look a lot shorter than the ones on the Sayyad 2.




We can see the video here

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561769574424625153

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sanel1412

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561786200125489154

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Abid123

Was Iran not going to buy S-400?


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> Yes but that Sayyad missile seems to be New version for VLS, it make sense since it is excpected New VLS AD to be developed for New ships


This was certainly a much needed development gap that is going to be filled.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This new system does not surprise me at all, I was going to write yesterday that we have to expect a most surprising burst of announcement in the next week. It is time to shake this forum which has been total drift for some time. It's awful what I see here and especially in the Iriaf section.

I made predictions here on forum and I call myself according to my intuitions and research that my prediction was the tip of the iceberg. It's even heavier than I thought. Finally, the false analyzes and conviction of some people in this forum will go up in smoke. Peed is missing on forum because this forum is agony

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

sanel1412 said:


> View attachment 872669
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561786200125489154


Wow this radar seems very successful and very sophisticated. Irannian engineers make giant steps with amazing configuration

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Mr Iran Eye said:


> This new system does not surprise me at all, I was going to write yesterday that we have to expect a most surprising burst of announcement in the next week. It is time to shake this forum which has been total drift for some time. It's awful what I see here and especially in the Iriaf section.
> 
> I made predictions here on forum and I call myself according to my intuitions and research that my prediction was the tip of the iceberg. It's even heavier than I thought. Finally, the false analyzes and conviction of some people in this forum will go up in smoke. Peed is missing on forum because this forum is agony


We already knew about a VLS system being developed. This was seen with the Bavar system. This is not a shocking surprise.

When are you going to do your write ups you always claim to write but never end up doing so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Sineva said:


> Interesting looking small missile on display,looks more like an a2a missile than a sam.
> View attachment 872666
> 
> The Sayyad missile on display also looks like it might be slightly different as well,the center body strakes look a lot shorter than the ones on the Sayyad 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can see the video here
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561769574424625153



Looks like a modified HQ-7/Crotale missile. Of which Iran was a owner of such a system.













Stryker1982 said:


> When are you going to do your write ups you always claim to write but never end up doing so.



Make 100’s of vauge claims then claim you always predicted this from the start. It’s called the Nostradamus effect

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Stryker1982 said:


> We already knew about a VLS system being developed. This was seen with the Bavar system. This is not a shocking surprise.
> 
> When are you going to do your write ups you always claim to write but never end up doing so.


Lol! There are people who know my statements here and I have always said that time will play my favors. Now I know more than ever that time really plays in my favors. A little patience again and there are people who will bring out my statements in desired time. Yes, it is high time to shake this sad agony forum. The Iriaf section is really mercy


----------



## Messerschmitt

sanel1412 said:


> Interesting, seems Like missile for short to medium range for Sayyad
> View attachment 872645
> View attachment 872646


A short-range SAM possibly for the "Tactical Sayyad" system. The Sayyad-3 SAM seems to also have a different fin layout.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

sanel1412 said:


> Interesting, seems Like missile for short to medium range for Sayyad
> View attachment 872645
> View attachment 872646





Diictodon said:


> There was a post that said that air defence system is a upgraded Mersad. Basically what Joshan AD is to Khordad 15 or what Khordad 3 is to Tabas.





sanel1412 said:


> Yes but that Sayyad missile seems to be New version for VLS, it make sense since it is excpected New VLS AD to be developed for New ships





Sineva said:


> Interesting looking small missile on display,looks more like an a2a missile than a sam.
> View attachment 872666
> 
> The Sayyad missile on display also looks like it might be slightly different as well,the center body strakes look a lot shorter than the ones on the Sayyad 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can see the video here
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561769574424625153



ُthats tactical sayyad , in short a far more mobile version of 15th of khordad for army




it uses sayyad 2 and 3 so you can exept a range about 100-120km
sayyad family of missiles were always capable of vertical launch . only we didn't have the system to launch them in that manner until recently.
the small missile looks a lot like missiles of umkhonto from south africa
so i say it must be missiles of Zoobin air defense missiles







Abid123 said:


> Was Iran not going to buy S-400?


never ever was the plan . we have our bavar 373 and they promised its next version will be far better than s-400 (it already have more advanced radar)



TheImmortal said:


> Looks like a modified HQ-7/Crotale missile. Of which Iran was a owner of such a system.
> 
> View attachment 872688
> 
> 
> View attachment 872689
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make 100’s of vauge claims then claim you always predicted this from the start. It’s called the Nostradamus effect


i believe that missile belong to zoobin air defense

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sha ah

The Sky Saber air defense system, fielded by the UK actually uses air to air fighter jet missiles to engage incoming targets. I believe it primarily uses the ASRAAM or AIM-132 missile. The whole point of doing something like this is to be more cost effective and simplify logistics. It makes sense.








Sineva said:


> Interesting looking small missile on display,looks more like an a2a missile than a sam.
> View attachment 872666
> 
> The Sayyad missile on display also looks like it might be slightly different as well,the center body strakes look a lot shorter than the ones on the Sayyad 2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can see the video here
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561769574424625153

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Geo29

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561991472697712642

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561767767136784391

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561778330231250945

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TheImmortal

Seems the consensus by OSINT community is sidewinder missile


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562124765183328258

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sanel1412

VLS Sayyad, Short range AD "Hajj Qasem" (Note CIWS between two short range missiles)

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## sanel1412

Seems we have first close look at Short range system Majid,also tagged as AD 08 for export

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## drmeson

I feel they are gonna use Azarakhsh missile in many domains

A2A for F-14AM, Kowsar-I/II, Karrar
A2G for UCAVs, Helis
SAM/SHORAD for naval and ambush ground systems

It has an Imaging CCD thermal IR seeker which gives it high resolution and impunity against Jamming. Pitch Yaw Roll function is controlled by 4 separate motors on Canards. Very similar to AIM-9X. Only if they can somehow extend its fuel section to enhance range and we will have our own AIM-9X Block III or DERBY IR equivalent light BVR missile pulling 30 G's in 60 KM.







Fattar program in the 90s to convert AIM-9J into local AIM-9P is one of the most successful projects of Iranian missile industry IMO. It gave birth to this family of Azarakhsh.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Better image of VLS Sayyad

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

This is one of my predictions of a few days that comes out for the artillery system but there is something more important. To be continued ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571029653393410

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571042224046081

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571050071203840

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563577060936675330

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571029653393410
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571042224046081
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563571050071203840
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1563577060936675330


It seems that idea came from south korea.








South Korea Installing Thermal Sights On Its Vulcan Anti-Aircraft Guns For Good Reason


Everything from throngs of low-flying North Korean AN-2 biplanes, to paragliders, and drones are a growing if not overwhelming threats to South Korea.




www.thedrive.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

TVC of Sayad-4 of Bavar-373

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1564252890587402241




Heres a comparison between the s300 tvc and the ad200/b373 tvc

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1564252890587402241
> View attachment 874838
> 
> Heres a comparison between the s300 tvc and the ad200/b373 tvc


exhaust vanes + control surface? well it will do the job and a tried and trusted technique since V2.
guess its too much to ask for a gimbaled thrust in a solid fuel missile. or something like salman

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Hack-Hook said:


> exhaust vanes + control surface? well it will do the job and a tried and trusted technique since V2.
> guess its too much to ask for a gimbaled thrust in a solid fuel missile. or something like salman


I thought it would be like that too, but that would make them way more expensive whereas this seems to work just as well with less cost. Good that they can do both as necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster




----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565627391325732865

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565749164407148549

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

On 15 April, it is reported that Yemen struck S. ARABIA Patriot position

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

sanel1412 said:


> On 15 April, it is reported that Yemen struck S. ARABIA Patriot position
> View attachment 876277
> View attachment 876279
> View attachment 876280


This explains why perimeter nets were built around Batteries in SA. Obviously things like this were kept deeply underwraps from getting to the public, likely done by suicide UAS so not filmed

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva

sanel1412 said:


> On 15 April, it is reported that Yemen struck S. ARABIA Patriot position
> View attachment 876277
> View attachment 876279
> View attachment 876280




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566508550951690241

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva

sanel1412 said:


> On 15 April, it is reported that Yemen struck S. ARABIA Patriot position
> View attachment 876277
> View attachment 876279
> View attachment 876280


This appears to be the first documented in combat loss of a patriot sam system.
Iranian [derived] weapons making military history folks.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sha ah

If the Houthis could do this on mass it would turn the tables on Saudi Arabia. They would be completely vulnerable to attacks.



Sineva said:


> This appears to be the first documented in combat loss of a patriot sam system.
> Iranian [derived] weapons making military history folks.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Sineva said:


> This appears to be the first documented in combat loss of a patriot sam system.
> Iranian [derived] weapons making military history folks.


not exactly On March 24, 2003, a USAF F-16CJ Fighting Falcon fired a HARM anti-radiation missile at a Patriot missile battery after the Patriot's radar had locked onto and prepared to fire at the aircraft, you may guess what happened next


----------



## lydian fall



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ich

Sardar330 said:


>



What is it talking about? Quantum-radar in Iran?


----------



## lydian fall

Ich said:


> What is it talking about? Quantum-radar in Iran?


Yes bro, however my English is not good to translate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drmeson

Only a fool will think iran is not working on Quantum and Photonic radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Just saw a video that was interview an air defence guy that said they are working to increase range of B-373 to 300km

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Stryker1982 said:


> Just saw a video that was interview an air defence guy that said they are working to increase range of B-373 to 300km


and here , still some people promoting Iran buying S-400

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> and here , still some people promoting Iran buying S-400



S-500 is a good purchase since it’s interceptors and radar tech can detect BM/Hypersonic CM interception and better suited for VLO interception. It’s a supplement to a standard system like S-300 or Bavar. Range is 600KM which completely dwarfs anything Iran can build at the moment and is capable of LEO satellite interception.

S-400 is debatable purchase, but Iran’s S-300 purchase was not adequate for the size of Iran’s territorial grounds and likely enemy (US/Israel) they didn’t purchase enough systems.

Rouhani promised us footage of Bavar intercepting a BM....then radio silence since then. Which leads me to believe Bavar is still in development and not mass production especially since they are looking to build Bavar Gen 2 already (forgot what they called it).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

TheImmortal said:


> S-500 is a good purchase since it’s interceptors and radar tech can detect BM/Hypersonic CM interception and better suited for VLO interception. It’s a supplement to a standard system like S-300 or Bavar. Range is 600KM which completely dwarfs anything Iran can build at the moment and is capable of LEO satellite interception.
> 
> S-400 is debatable purchase, but Iran’s S-300 purchase was not adequate for the size of Iran’s territorial grounds and likely enemy (US/Israel) they didn’t purchase enough systems.
> 
> Rouhani promised us footage of Bavar intercepting a BM....then radio silence since then. Which leads me to believe Bavar is still in development and not mass production especially since they are looking to build Bavar Gen 2 already (forgot what they called it).


Armand?


----------



## TheImmortal

WudangMaster said:


> Armand?



Yes, that’s the name. I don’t understand this internal naming system. They should stick to a method like the export name designation system they have for weapons.

But the fact Armand is being built before Bavar 373 has even entered mass production points to an ever changing system. Thus adding a S-500 or heavily upgraded S-400 variant is not a bad decision at all because Iran’s initial S-300 purchase wasn’t for a lot of systems. Better to oversaturate the air defense grid than underman it.

Even China one of the world leaders in domestic air defense production bought S-300 and S-400 and likely will be the first export S-500 country. So this excuse “we have Bavar” doesn’t make sense. China also has deep domestic production capability, yet it adds Russian systems to learn from and diversify.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

WudangMaster said:


> Armand?


Arman not Armand.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568125933453713409

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

TheImmortal said:


> S-500 is a good purchase since it’s interceptors and radar tech can detect BM/Hypersonic CM interception and better suited for VLO interception. It’s a supplement to a standard system like S-300 or Bavar. Range is 600KM which completely dwarfs anything Iran can build at the moment and is capable of LEO satellite interception.
> 
> S-400 is debatable purchase, but Iran’s S-300 purchase was not adequate for the size of Iran’s territorial grounds and likely enemy (US/Israel) they didn’t purchase enough systems.
> 
> Rouhani promised us footage of Bavar intercepting a BM....then radio silence since then. Which leads me to believe Bavar is still in development and not mass production especially since they are looking to build Bavar Gen 2 already (forgot what they called it).


you guys mistaken one thing and that is you think our other systems are inferior to s-300, they are not people see 3rd of khordad and see buk-M2 while in reality its capabilities are more comparable to S-300 than Buk , the same case is about 15th of khordad and Tactical Sayyad and nobody can argue about 3rd of khordad and 15th of khordad are mass produced and fielded . bavar was not mass produced (it could have been if they wanted) because they saw very soon they will be build a 2nd generation of it that make a lot more sense than 1st generation that its capabilities are very near to 15th of khordad or 3rd of khordad

and also you guys are in wrong assumption that export version of S-500 come with longest range missiles , it will not at the best it come with second tire of missiles that in that regard put it in class of s-400 . it will be superior to S-400 because of its more advanced Radars but missile range it will be in class of S-400.
and regarding the radar , already our bavar have better RADAR than s-400 . so any money spent on air defense is better be spent on our own system rather than buying export version of Russians air defenses.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568125933453713409


he meant that new type of missile for "bavar"!
i think bavar is still under development and not deployed.still have tests and new gen of missiles to cover it's weakness(against mid range threats).does anybody have any idea about the time we will see Bavar as part of our integrated air defence system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yavar

Iran Army Air Defense Force Chief Brigadier General Alireza Sabahifard: Spar (ballistic missile shield) System is advance version Bavar-373 with range of 320 km

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## lydian fall

yavar said:


> Iran Army Air Defense Force Chief Brigadier General Alireza Sabahifard: Spar (ballistic missile shield) System is advance version Bavar-373 with range of 320 km


Hello, welcome back after many years

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568479885357621248

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## drmeson

Sineva said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568479885357621248



It Covers Saudi BM/AF in the deep territory. I wonder if there is a track/Engagement radar nearby as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

wonder why people still say Ghadir is copy of Rezonans-NE , its not
their working frequency is different
Ghadir : 28 MHz,29.7 MHz
Rezonans : 3 MHz,24 MHz

they have different bandwith
Ghadir: 60 kHz,1000 kHz
Rezonans: 20 kHz,40 kHz

Working Mode
Ghadir: AM
Rezonans: USB

more importantly Modulation
Ghadir: Shaped Pulse
Rezonans: FMOD

ceiling
Ghadir:300km
Rezonans:100km


Ghadir Signature:





Rezonas Signature:





rezonas radar modules










Ghadir Radar









these radar are nothing alike , the only similarity is that they both are modular and you can add as much module as you like
here you can ever hear them on Radio , that's even complete difference . it is really become annoying people claim Iran Radar is copy of Russian ones

Ghadir Over The Horizon Radar

Rezonans Over the Horizon Radar

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Stryker1982

drmeson said:


> It Covers Saudi BM/AF in the deep territory. I wonder if there is a track/Engagement radar nearby as well.


Looks like it wants to see things coming from the direction of Diego Garcia as well. CM launches perhaps.

Doesn't OTH do tracking as well? Or Im guessing it is very crude, and can just give blimps of a presence.

Seems vulnerable to special forces sabotage considering its proximity to shore.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iran has managed to surpass global powers in air defense technology

The commander -in -chief of the corps of the Iranian Islamic Revolution (CGRI) praised the country's military and armament of the country, affirming that the Islamic Republic has exceeded the great world powers in the field of defense technology Aerial. Speaking during a ceremony on Tuesday, the general of division Hossein Salami praised Iran's significant progress in modern military technologies and the country's self -sufficiency in the manufacture of sophisticated military equipment, despite the sanctions in place against the country. “We occupy first place in many technologies. Even in the field of air defense, we have exceeded the largest powers in the world since certain superpowers buy our weapons and offer joint cooperation, "said Salami.

"Today, the construction of advanced systems is as simple for us as the manufacture of bicycles," said the head of the CGRI. "Today, the accuracy of our weapons for fixed and mobile targets is 100 %, and our drones can target any point using artificial intelligence." "The logic of the Islamic revolution is [the use] of power to establish justice," he said. Salami has said that the United States cannot implement any of their conspiracies in the region and that their plots will fail definitively. "The enemy has so far taken all possible measures against us. If we were not strong, they would attack, but because we have become strong, they avoid facing us and our strength increases in an exponential way every day "He said. Salami added:" Today's war is a war of convictions, beliefs and values, and if we are weak, we will be either destroyed or we will have to go, But we have become an important part of the world power without acquiescement to the tyrannical order.

"Iran does not count on the support of foreigners today," said the commander, adding that the country seeks to lift the sanctions not because it needs that they are lifted but because it considers the restrictions as cruel. “The problems caused by sanctions represent less than 10 % of [problems with which the country is confronted]. If we act properly, we have a lot of talents, capacities and installations that allow us to overcome all the problems, ”added Salami. In addition, the general of Division Hossein Salami made these remarks Thursday during an exhibition of the achievements of the Iranian defense industry in the fields of electronic war, air defense, drones and missiles cruise.

He said that the Iranian defense industry had succeeded in making great progress in accordance with two realities: global technological advances and efforts to make enemies helpless in the defense sector. It was imperative for Iran to promote its military equipment and defense systems and reduce the gap with advanced countries in the face of increasing capacities and the rapid rhythm of technological gains on the world scene, added the CGRI commander. "Fortunately, the armed forces have obtained determining successes in various fields of defense, including electronics as [advanced and high -level technology," said Salami.

He noted that Iran has developed a variety of products in different fields of defense based on its own youth despite all the restrictions, sanctions and acts of sabotage of foreign powers against the country. Salami added that some major powers in the world have bought military and defense equipment from Iran and use them now. Iranian military experts and technicians have made substantial progress in recent years in the manufacture of a wide range of native equipment, making the armed forces self -sufficient in the field of armaments.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## sanel1412

Stryker1982 said:


> Looks like it wants to see things coming from the direction of Diego Garcia as well. CM launches perhaps.
> 
> Doesn't OTH do tracking as well? Or Im guessing it is very crude, and can just give blimps of a presence.
> 
> Seems vulnerable to special forces sabotage considering its proximity to shore.


OTH minimal range is Like whole fucking country, so it is not about precision, ofcourse it can track and provide data, but you need normal radar to continue job, once target/s enter its minimal range

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

WudangMaster said:


>


there was no need for s-400 from years ago


----------



## shadihassan28

I don’t believe Iran needs any anti aircraft outside either they went from upgrading hawk systems to totally 100% made product like Bavar,they’re funding for air defense seems a lot higher than other parts of the military they seemed to have advanced a lot farther along, would love to see it in the future on one of their motherships be it vls or stationary

Perhaps a ships like Makran I mean they refurbish a ship like that into something pretty good why can’t they transform it into a large missile ship anti aircraft and cruise missile just a thought

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## drmeson

Stryker1982 said:


> Looks like it wants to see things coming from the direction of Diego Garcia as well. CM launches perhaps.
> 
> Doesn't OTH do tracking as well? Or Im guessing it is very crude, and can just give blimps of a presence.
> 
> Seems vulnerable to special forces sabotage considering its proximity to shore.



No its a search radar which gives which provides a clue to its cued track radars which further provide the pinpoint changing location information in form of d[x,y,z,]/dt of the target to the batteries/missiles. Iran has layered system fo long range search radars and both active and passive track radars. We also have 450 KM ranging AESA radar for Bavar-373 system. Saudi purchased DF-3or even non-MaRVed DF-17 can not escape this much layering.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572857839898529792

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sineva

Heres a good comparison series of pics,you can see how the Taer missile evolved from a shorad system to a medium ranged system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572833759661105157

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572907325379297281

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

It looks like the nose section tapers slightly,which is kind of funny as the original taer shorad missile also had a taper to it just like the russian buk which inspired its design.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mohsen

Sineva said:


> View attachment 881691
> 
> It looks like the nose section tapers slightly,which is kind of funny as the original taer shorad missile also had a taper to it just like the russian buk which inspired its design.


My only guess is a new composite body

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Sineva

You can see a slight difference in the turret,a new slightly raised section has been fitted along the side above the fans.




And heres the original...








It makes me wonder if the Tabbas sams are going to have the new 200km long range missiles as well.Possibly if its equipped with an [AESA] active seeker perhaps?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Atar god of the fire

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1573331980573446147

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1573323854134779906

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

**Higher definition image**

It looks like there are some differences with the Saqr-1 compared to the original iranian supplied "358".The laser proximity fuse is absent and there looks to be 2 different sizes of imaging seeker also,one is of the original diameter used in the "358",but there is also a noticeably larger diameter seeker variant as well.





Some specifications:
The Saqr-1 air defense cruise missile, formerly known as "358", has a length of 2700mm, a diameter of 150mm, a weight of 58kg, a warhead weight of 10kg, a diameter of 30m warhead impact, a maximum speed of 200m/s [720 kph], a maximum range of 100km, a maximum altitude of 8.5km, thermal guidance.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## mohsen

جانشین پدافند هوایی ارتش: رادار ماورای افق سپهر به‌زودی عملیاتی می‌شود | خبرگزاری فارس


Key points:
Iran's first OTH radar 'Sepehr' with 3000km range will become operation in near future.

Army air defense has developed drones with 47000 ft flight ceiling

New missile of Bavar373 air defense system with 300km range will become operational soon.

Tactical Sayyad air defense system will have a 120km range, an increase from earlier versions which had a range of 60 and 80 kilometers, plus decreasing the number of required crews and vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
14 | Love Love:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

mohsen said:


> جانشین پدافند هوایی ارتش: رادار ماورای افق سپهر به‌زودی عملیاتی می‌شود | خبرگزاری فارس
> 
> 
> Key points:
> Iran's first OTH radar 'Sepehr' with 3000km range will become operation in near future.
> 
> Army air defense has developed drones with 47000 ft flight ceiling
> 
> New missile of Bavar373 air defense system with 300km range will become operational soon.
> 
> Tactical Sayyad air defense system will have a 120km range, an increase from earlier versions which had a range of 60 and 80 kilometers, plus decreasing the number of required crews and vehicles.


Did you say OTH with *3000 km range*?? As in three thousand and not three hundred (300)?


----------



## sanel1412

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Did you say OTH with *3000 km range*?? As in three thousand and not three hundred (300)?


300km is not over the horizont,in fact OTH minimanl range is greater than 300km

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Did you say OTH with *3000 km range*?? As in three thousand and not three hundred (300)?


exactly as 3 thousands , and we already had at least 3x Ghadir with1000+km of range and the good part is all of them are built indigenously .
we usually use those 300km radars as part of air-defense battalion not as part of the backbone of our radar network system

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sanel1412

Nice graphical representation how OTH work. As it can be seen,unlike conventional radars,OTH radars transmit and recive signals with help of ionosphere. Unlike conventional radars,OTH radar signal is transmited in to ionosphere,bounced from ionosphere,it reaches the target,than use same route back to OTH anntena. So,as it is clear,when we talk about range of OTH radar,it is not simple as with conventional radars. Because if you want OTH radar that will cover range 1000km from P.Gulf,deep in to S.Arabia...that OTH will be probably placed in central Iran...

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

sanel1412 said:


> Nice graphical representation how OTH work. As it can be seen,unlike conventional radars,OTH radars transmit and recive signals with help of ionosphere. Unlike conventional radars,OTH radar signal is transmited in to ionosphere,bounced from ionosphere,it reaches the target,than use same route back to OTH anntena. So,as it is clear,when we talk about range of OTH radar,it is not simple as with conventional radars. Because if you want OTH radar that will cover range 1000km from P.Gulf,deep in to S.Arabia...that OTH will be probably placed in central Iran...
> View attachment 884104


Can it have a datalink to interceptor aircraft and feed them targeting data?


----------



## TheImmortal

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Can it have a datalink to interceptor aircraft and feed them targeting data?



OTH provide general location not specific enough to be classified as target data.

You cannot use it for targeting. They are more likely early early warning radars. Hard to jam and cover vast distances. Basically they will be the first targets of any attack on Iran, but by then Iran will get what it wanted from them—a crucial early warning that war has started.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

TheImmortal said:


> OTH provide general location not specific enough to be classified as target data.
> 
> You cannot use it for targeting. They are more likely early early warning radars. Hard to jam and cover vast distances. Basically they will be the first targets of any attack on Iran, but by then Iran will get what it wanted from them—a crucial early warning that war has started.


Once a specific threat has been identified, can't the smaller radars in that direction get to work to create a targeting picture and feed it to an interceptor over datalink? Methinks that would immediately strip invading bandits of cover.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Can it have a datalink to interceptor aircraft and feed them targeting dat





BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Can it have a datalink to interceptor aircraft and feed them targeting data?


Today datalink is something you can easily install every where,and it is part of every ground base and air borne communication system. Even original F14 have digital datalink,IRIAF F14 were delivered without datalink but that is very easily to install even 30 years ago IRIAF could do it,because F14 already have central digital integrated system,it can proces and share data by default,you just need datalink device installed,which is basicly modem+encription. On other aircrafts that could be something Iran can do easily today,and I think it is done on many aircrafts,at least those they upgrade. I saw Iranian made avionics for Kowsar and if you look specification,you can see that networking is available by default on every comunication device and computer managment devices..etc. Datalink was big deal 40 yrs ago,today you have modems on your smartphone..and it is not science fiction to feed that information in to existing system. Whole point of integrated air defense network is networking and data sharing,and just think about things we have access comercialy today...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## NaCon

🔴 The test of the missile system ⁧‫Bavar 373‬⁩ "with a range of 300 km" was carried out.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1581530731615965191

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## lydian fall



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583184485360640001

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Sineva said:


>


I gotta say something.

If you have hair nets for hair.

Don't you need something for the beards?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## BHAN85

sanel1412 said:


> Nice graphical representation how OTH work. As it can be seen,unlike conventional radars,OTH radars transmit and recive signals with help of ionosphere. Unlike conventional radars,OTH radar signal is transmited in to ionosphere,bounced from ionosphere,it reaches the target,than use same route back to OTH anntena. So,as it is clear,when we talk about range of OTH radar,it is not simple as with conventional radars. Because if you want OTH radar that will cover range 1000km from P.Gulf,deep in to S.Arabia...that OTH will be probably placed in central Iran...
> View attachment 884104


But ionosphere is changing all the time, every solar storm modify the ionosphere.

So that kind of radar wont work if there's a solar storm?



sanel1412 said:


> Today datalink is something you can easily install every where,and it is part of every ground base and air borne communication system. Even original F14 have digital datalink,IRIAF F14 were delivered without datalink but that is very easily to install even 30 years ago IRIAF could do it,because F14 already have central digital integrated system,it can proces and share data by default,you just need datalink device installed,which is basicly modem+encription. On other aircrafts that could be something Iran can do easily today,and I think it is done on many aircrafts,at least those they upgrade. I saw Iranian made avionics for Kowsar and if you look specification,you can see that networking is available by default on every comunication device and computer managment devices..etc. Datalink was big deal 40 yrs ago,today you have modems on your smartphone..and it is not science fiction to feed that information in to existing system. Whole point of integrated air defense network is networking and data sharing,and just think about things we have access comercialy today...



Maybe the science fiction is to have a weapon with datalink that it can't be hacked by the manufacturer of datalink.

Only God knows how many hardware backdoors must have all the telecom devices made by American and Chinese companies.

In a war against USA maybe it's safer no data link at all in every weapon 

e.g: https://threatpost.com/two-critical-vulnerabilities-found-in-inmarsats-satcom-systems/128632/


----------



## Sineva

Stryker1982 said:


> I gotta say something.
> 
> If you have hair nets for hair.
> 
> Don't you need something for the beards?


You make a valid point there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sanel1412

BHAN85 said:


> But ionosphere is changing all the time, every solar storm modify the ionosphere.
> 
> So that kind of radar wont work if there's a solar storm?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the science fiction is to have a weapon with datalink that it can't be hacked by the manufacturer of datalink.
> 
> Only God knows how many hardware backdoors must have all the telecom devices made by American and Chinese companies.
> 
> In a war against USA maybe it's safer no data link at all in every weapon
> 
> e.g: https://threatpost.com/two-critical-vulnerabilities-found-in-inmarsats-satcom-systems/128632/


When it comes to OTH radars,Ionosphere just serve as reflecting surface,it just bounce signal

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BHAN85

sanel1412 said:


> When it comes to OTH radars,Ionosphere just serve as reflecting surface,it just bounce signal


Yeah, but in the event of a solar storm it wont reflect uniformly the rf signals, I think.

So the best moment to start a nuclear first strike is when a great solar storm arrives to Earth. Because this kind of radars wont work well.

And because the effects of a EMP nuclear bomb can be confused with the solar storm effects.

And moreover in a hard solar storm the contact with early warning satellites can be lost (and if it's not lost, you can jammer with another satellites, and the operator will believe that is due to solar storm).

So no doubt the best moment to launch a nuclear first strike is when a solar storm comes to Earth.


----------



## WudangMaster

Stryker1982 said:


> I gotta say something.
> 
> If you have hair nets for hair.
> 
> Don't you need something for the beards?


If hair is really a concern, then they need to wear full face/hair nets along with a face mask that would cover all of it. I had to wear that combination when I worked a cake line as a temp job a long time ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## TheImmortal

BHAN85 said:


> Yeah, but in the event of a solar storm it wont reflect uniformly the rf signals, I think.
> 
> So the best moment to start a nuclear first strike is when a great solar storm arrives to Earth. Because this kind of radars wont work well.
> 
> And because the effects of a EMP nuclear bomb can be confused with the solar storm effects.
> 
> And moreover in a hard solar storm the contact with early warning satellites can be lost (and if it's not lost, you can jammer with another satellites, and the operator will believe that is due to solar storm).
> 
> So no doubt the best moment to launch a nuclear first strike is when a solar storm comes to Earth.



Nuclear first strike is done via ICBMs which OTH are useless against.

Also US/NATO uses space based satellites to detect BM launches so they will have a clear eye during your “solar storm” theory.


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1586027099080507392

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## BHAN85

TheImmortal said:


> Nuclear first strike is done via ICBMs which OTH are useless against.
> 
> Also US/NATO uses space based satellites to detect BM launches so they will have a clear eye during your “solar storm” theory.


You didnt read whole post, early warning satellites communication can be affected in the event of a solar storm.

When a solar storm arrives to Earth, sat communications are lost sometimes.

So a country must wait to a strong solar storm arrives to Earth (start a world nuclear war is not something than happens everyday) and then:

1) Jamming all satellites of the enemies, so they can't see nothing
2) Launch a continental EMP bomb over enemies, and they in the first moments would think that the effects are due to solar storm
3) Ionosphere will be fcked due to HEMP bomb and solar storm, so you can approach with your airplanes to finish the jobs bombing all the enemies, and OTH radar wont see a thing.
4) Enjoy new world order ruling the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

BHAN85 said:


> You didnt read whole post, early warning satellites communication can be affected in the event of a solar storm.
> 
> When a solar storm arrives to Earth, sat communications are lost sometimes.
> 
> So a country must wait to a strong solar storm arrives to Earth (start a world nuclear war is not something than happens everyday) and then:
> 
> 1) Jamming all satellites of the enemies, so they can't see nothing
> 2) Launch a continental EMP bomb over enemies, and they in the first moments would thinks that the effects are due to solar storm
> 3) Ionosphere will be fcked due to HEMP bomb and solar storm, so you can approach with your airplanes to finish the jobs bombing all the enemies, and OTH radar wont see a thing.
> 4) Enjoy new world order ruling the world.



Except predicting solar storms since they are based on Corona mass ejections. It is not an exact science, like trying to predict when a volcano will erupt. There are signs and periods of increased activity, but it doesn’t mean that you can pinpoint it like the weather. Nor will you know how exactly the storm affects everything until it arrives.

Plus military grade satellites have more shielding and while solar storms can certainly affect sats and earth communications, it is more rare to get that severity of being “blinded”. 

Hence why the theory isn’t anything a nuclear military power will base their first strike on as it’s not predictable enough. Don’t forget about all the nuclear subs Russia and US have. Second strike is still very real by both sides.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHAN85

TheImmortal said:


> Except predicting solar storms since they are based on Corona mass ejections. It is not an exact science, like trying to predict when a volcano will erupt. There are signs and periods of increased activity, but it doesn’t mean that you can pinpoint it like the weather. Nor will you know how exactly the storm affects everything until it arrives.
> 
> Plus military grade satellites have more shielding and while solar storms can certainly affect sats and earth communications, it is more rare to get that severity of being “blinded”.
> 
> Hence why the theory isn’t anything a nuclear military power will base their first strike on as it’s not predictable enough. Don’t forget about all the nuclear subs Russia and US have. Second strike is still very real by both sides.


Solar storm path to Earth is about 70 hours of duration.

You dont need to predict a real damaging solar storm, you just use a big solar flare when arrives to Earth to make the sat jamming and launch hemps, so the enemy will believe that is due to solar storm, it doesnt matter if the solar storm really disrupt communications or not, what it matters if the enemy can believe the jamming is due to that.

WWIII will start in the event of a solar storm, it's the best moment, it's something very simple.


----------



## BHAN85

All warfare is based on deception -Sun Tzu

Do you know when a lot of solar flares were arriving to Earth? In January 2012. In the Hormuz Strait tensions event https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011–2012_Strait_of_Hormuz_dispute

With all the western massmedia repeating (falsely) that those solar storms could be disastrous. https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...asn-t-nearly-destroyed-by-a-2012-solar-storm/

And then it happened this https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/17-die-when-boat-capsizes-in-iran-report-11985

21st January 2012

That could have been the date of the start of WWIII.

But Iran didnt answer provocations.

At the same time, few days before, USA closed megaupload.com from Kim Dot Com, and Anonymous was threating with attacks that it would "close internet" and communications.
Better scenario possible to make the enemy believe that any communication disrupt was not war related


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1586239275758141440

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1587387398597615618

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

B-373 version 2 Extended range, where is the pics? twitter says it was unveiled, as well as production line.


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589127556678053888

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589134272488951808

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## DoubleYouSee

موشک صیاد ۴Bرونمایی شد


آزمون تست سامانه ارتقایافته باور ۳۷۳ با موشک صیاد ۴B با موفقیت انجام شد.




www.mashreghnews.ir


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589134500063498240

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Sayyad-B-4

300+ KM Range.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Now Bavar become what it has envisioned to be 
intrestingly the missile despite 50% increase in range (because a new type of solid propellant) called Sayyad-4b not sayyad-5

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> Sayyad-B-4
> 
> 300+ KM Range.
> View attachment 893971


its 32km engagement altitude is intresting , no airplane in the world can fly above its engagement zone the highest altitude for F-15 if the pilot wear special clothes and and forgo all safety measure and probably destroy the engine in process is 31km (the record for an aircraft which is not rocket assisted is 31.5km).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

Hack-Hook said:


> its 32km engagement altitude is intresting , no airplane in the world can fly above its engagement zone the highest altitude for F-15 if the pilot wear special clothes and and forgo all safety measure and probably destroy the engine in process is 31km (the record for an aircraft which is not rocket assisted is 31.5km).


True, Israel and KSA operate those fighters. We needed a missile of this class to cover that altitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sanel1412

B373 is also ABM capable,even combat aircrafts and bombers will in 99% cases go max up to 18-20km in altitude,still some BM needs to be engaged at high altitude,tactical BM with quasi balistic trajectory,dont fly at high altitude,but other BM do,and any ABM capable system must have max altitude detection & engagment range higher,than normaly would...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Iran need s300v4/s500 ABM class system, s500 will be the best...

I was wishing for 350km coverage...That would replace the necessity of s400 permanently . I still wish for that,

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

وزیر دفاع: سامانه باور ۳۷۳ قابلیت مقابله با موشک‌های بالستیک را دارد​
Bavar-373 has capability to target BMs . (source Mr Ashtiani current defence minister)

*Bavar-373*

Improved detection range from 350 Km to *450* Km.
Improved targeting radar range (?)(برد رادار درگیری) from 260 Km to *400* Km.
Improved missile from 200 Km range to *300 *Km.
Improved height of targeting range from 27 Km to *32* Km.

IRNA Mr Ashtiani.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Muhammed45 said:


> Sayyad-B-4
> 
> 300+ KM Range.
> View attachment 893971



That is massive Missile in size. I wonder if it will be canister launched or TEL BM launched.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## yavar

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589285627845292032Iran Bavar-373 Air Defense System with Sayyad-4B missile range 300+KM, Radar detection of 450 KM, ABM (Short Range Ballistic Missile Capability interception ) the TEST Video

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589222203681165312

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Muhammed45 said:


> Sayyad-B-4
> 
> 300+ KM Range.
> View attachment 893971


how big it is

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Wheres the IRGC version?


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589266774507126784

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## tsunset

Is bavar a complete indigenous system? I mean made from scratch without something else as a base or sample, with full indigenous radar and missiles?

Also the same question but with 3rd khordad

asking these because i need arguments for people saying 3rd khordad is a BUK copy and that Bavar "has certainly been made with chinese or russian assistance" even they have no proof, but beside the look, is 3rd Khordad completely different than Buk M2E?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## WudangMaster



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiarash

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589338043273515010

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> Iran need s300v4/s500 ABM class system, s500 will be the best...
> 
> I was wishing for 350km coverage...That would replace the necessity of s400 permanently . I still wish for that,


export version of s-400 won't come with 400km range missile . and Bavar has a tracking range of 400km and detecting range of 450km , it means in future if they build sayyad-5 it can be a 400km engagement system

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Is bavar a complete indigenous system? I mean made from scratch without something else as a base or sample, with full indigenous radar and missiles?
> 
> Also the same question but with 3rd khordad
> 
> asking these because i need arguments for people saying 3rd khordad is a BUK copy and that Bavar "has certainly been made with chinese or russian assistance" even they have no proof, but beside the look, is 3rd Khordad completely different than Buk M2E?


they only say bavar is made with the help of russia or china because they are jealous . Bavar use two AESA radar while even S-400 don't use AESA radar and S-500 if I'm not wrong use one AESA and One PESA (I'm not sure on that)

about 3rd of Khordad , it start its origin from project Ra'ad which indeed was based on BUK but its many years it separated its way and benefit the research and development was made for 15th of Khordad and Bavar-373 right now 3rd of khordad have an engagement range of 200km and also it won't need its radar to engage targets up to 70km which make it fantastic for ambushing enemy aircrafts
by the way we only had access to buk-m1 and even buk-m3 have engagement range of 70km and needs its radar for that . and buk battalion have a detection of 160km while 3rd of Khordad battalion can detect target up to 400km away

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sineva

tsunset said:


> Is bavar a complete indigenous system? I mean made from scratch without something else as a base or sample, with full indigenous radar and missiles?
> 
> Also the same question but with 3rd khordad
> 
> asking these because i need arguments for people saying 3rd khordad is a BUK copy and that Bavar "has certainly been made with chinese or russian assistance" even they have no proof, but beside the look, is 3rd Khordad completely different than Buk M2E?


The 3rd of khordad was certainly conceptually based on the buk,at least originally,however during its development you saw its evolve from being a shorad to a medium ranged sam,likely due to the increasing performance of its aesa radar as it was developed during the program.
The most advanced russian buk is still only equipped with a pesa radar,the only aesa equipped buk variant is one built by belarus,and that came out in 2019.which was well after the debut of the third of khordad.





The third of khordad may have started out as basically an iranian buk clone,but it ultimately evolved into something that was far more impressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> Wheres the IRGC version?


Defence ministry project , IRGC is more interested in 3rd of Khordad. but in our air defence branch of our armed force there is very little parallel work , if IRGC manage an achievemnet , you see it soon in defence ministry systems , if defense ministry make an achievement you see its also used in IRGC systems , there is no reinventing the wheel there and the systems of army and irgc are connected and linked together , army air defense have access to IRGC radars and IRGC Air defense have access to army radars

while looking at this video , it come to my attention that they tested the sayyad-4b in hit to kill mode and they didn't use the proximity switch , it seems they are more confident in the missile as i recall they used proximity switch when they hit RQ-4

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 925boy

tsunset said:


> Is bavar a complete indigenous system? I mean made from scratch without something else as a base or sample, with full indigenous radar and missiles?
> 
> Also the same question but with 3rd khordad
> 
> asking these because i need arguments for people saying 3rd khordad is a BUK copy and that Bavar "has certainly been made with chinese or russian assistance" even they have no proof, but beside the look, is 3rd Khordad completely different than Buk M2E?


why you always ask such sensitive strategic questions consistently? it was "what is Iran getting for giving Russia drones, but what is Iran getting back", now its this. hmm.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> they only say bavar is made with the help of russia or china because they are jealous . Bavar use two AESA radar while even S-400 don't use AESA radar and S-500 if I'm not wrong use one AESA and One PESA (I'm not sure on that)
> 
> about 3rd of Khordad , it start its origin from project Ra'ad which indeed was based on BUK but its many years it separated its way and benefit the research and development was made for 15th of Khordad and Bavar-373 right now 3rd of khordad have an engagement range of 200km and also it won't need its radar to engage targets up to 70km which make it fantastic for ambushing enemy aircrafts
> by the way we only had access to buk-m1 and even buk-m3 have engagement range of 70km and needs its radar for that . and buk battalion have a detection of 160km while 3rd of Khordad battalion can detect target up to 400km away


Actually China has no long-range system in this class despite their advances in electronics and radar technologies. The only long range Chinese SAM system is the HQ-9 was developed with Russian assistance and benefits from Russian technology transfers. Also it uses missiles similar to those of the S-300. Interestingly some sources report that the HQ-9 also incorporates some electronic technologies of the US Patriot air defense system.
The second Chines system is the HQ-22 which has a range of up to 170 kilometres (110 mi) and can strike targets at altitudes from 50 metres (160 ft) to 27 kilometres (17 mi). The system's missiles are guided by semi-active radar guidance and can engage ballistic and cruise missiles.

Therefore, any claim that Chinese technologies were incorporated into BAVAR 375 is false and baseless. As to Russia's involvement, well, Russia refused to sell S-300 PMU1 when President Dmitry Medvedev canceled the supply agreement in 2010. Nonetheless, Iran sued Russia for $4 billion and won the lawsuit. Then Russia had to supply a much more advanced S-300 PMU2 with elements of S-400 technologies in on April 13th, 2015.

Did Iran benefit from Russian technologies during the R&D phase? Of course otherwise they would be foolish not to do so. Russia is the top producer of SAM systems in the world. But, Iran did not get any Russian/Chinese input nor any assistance in designing the BAVAR-373, it's 100% indigenous Iranian system from concept to production.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Joe_Adam said:


> Did Iran benefit from Russian technologies during the R&D phase? Of course otherwise they would be foolish not to do so. Russia is the top producer of SAM systems in the world. But, Iran did not get any Russian/Chinese input nor any assistance in designing the BAVAR-373, it's 100% indigenous Iranian system from concept to production.


the problem is that the only similarity between Bavar-373 and S-300 is that both use separate radar of detection and engagement , that's it , are you aware of any other similarity between them ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> the problem is that the only similarity between Bavar-373 and S-300 is that both use separate radar of detection and engagement , that's it , are you aware of any other similarity between them ?


In a nutshell, the only similarities are their intended functions as robust SAM systems. Bavar 375 is an Iranian concept derived from 30 years of observations, testing, and decades of research work incorporating both Russian and some Western technologies to make a uniquely indigenous system unlike any other in the world.

For example;
Both Search and Engagement Radars are AESA type capable to Track 300 Targets and Engage 6–60 Targets of them.

Designs of the the Iranian AESA Radars are similar "actually more advanced" to AN/TPY-2 used in THAAD more than 92H6E OF s-300/400 Family. Thus, for people to claim Russian or Chinese input is ludicrous, because it's false since neither China nor Russia ever transferred any worthwhile military tech to Iran.

The only exception would be anti-ship missiles purchased by Iran from China. The most important would be C-802 anti-ship cruise missile sold to Iran in 1990s. However, Iran re-designed this system completely as they increased its range many folds, changed it's engine, installed new radars, and upgraded its electronics and its ECM/ECCM, and made it a multi-platform system. It could be launched by Jet fighters, Helicopters, land based platforms or onboard surface ships or submarines.

Frankly, Iranian engineers portray incredible knowledge and technical talent than most western or Russian engineers. Iranian scientists & engineers have something to prove. They are hungry, driven, and determined to show that Iran takes no back seat to any nation on earth. That's why they achieved such brilliant results within a decade that would have taken any other nation many decades to accomplish.

That principle applies to every sector in Iran's ongoing industrial drive in both civil and military sectors.

Lastly, many members of this forum might think I am too impressed by Iran, or Iran's military tech, hence I must be exaggerating Iran's capabilities and trying to *evoke emotional response from readers. 

I am not an* Iranian national. I am also not a bot for the Iranian government or any other, thank God as I couldn't be that shallow nor that low. I am not impressed either by any human accomplishment since humans were created to do wonders if they stay the course through knowledge and strive to be noble and industrious. For Iranians to accomplish wondrous feats is very natural, and it fits their genetic makeup throughout history as pioneers in human knowledge and creative undertakings. 

I am simply stating what I know to be true & factual through my decades of reading and research, as well as my practical involvement in many aspects of design engineering and manufacturing since mid 1990s. 

However, I would be dishonest if I deny my love for Iran and Iranian as a civilized nation with brilliant history, and a bright future by grace of God.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## tsunset

925boy said:


> why you always ask such sensitive strategic questions consistently? it was what is Iran getting for giving Russia drones, but what is Iran getting back, now its this. hmm.


bro I'm just curious, i'm not working for the IDF to get coordinates to strike bavar sites and know exactly how it works by coming here

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sineva

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589227777508937728Images of the radar screen of the upgraded Bavar 373 system during the system test at a range of more than 300 km. The approaching target, which was locked on at a distance of 318 km and an altitude of 4,703 meters (15,430 feet), is finally shot down at a distance of 306 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

tsunset said:


> Is bavar a complete indigenous system? I mean made from scratch without something else as a base or sample, with full indigenous radar and missiles?
> 
> Also the same question but with 3rd khordad
> 
> asking these because i need arguments for people saying 3rd khordad is a BUK copy and that Bavar "has certainly been made with chinese or russian assistance" even they have no proof, but beside the look, is 3rd Khordad completely different than Buk M2E?


Please do your research . The answers are manifest in this forum. We cannot take the burden of that for you. Only you can.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

Sineva said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589227777508937728Images of the radar screen of the upgraded Bavar 373 system during the system test at a range of more than 300 km. The approaching target, which was locked on at a distance of 318 km and an altitude of 4,703 meters (15,430 feet), is finally shot down at a distance of 306 km.


The RCS value at 306 km is should be in consideration, -214748????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589589343974264832

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589589550313066497

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627260214337538

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Shams313 said:


> The RCS value at 306 km is should be in consideration, -214748????


RCS with minus - shoud be in DB (decibel),if you look carefuly,number look like 2 14748 (empty space between 2 and rest),so it would make sense 2,14789 db

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

GrandBotBoi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627260214337538


I was exactly looking for this, considering the RCS the engaged at 300+km what will be the possible range to lock on F22/35.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

GrandBotBoi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627260214337538


Great improvement, pretty sure now if there is a possible war, the reputation of the F-35 or F-22/B-2 will be destroyed like the F-117 was

I think as of now this system surpasses at least any export versions LR SAMs of any country in the world, and maybe surpasses domestic S-400, i imagine it coupled with the last SHORADs unveiled to protect it from JSOW-like standoff ammunitions and Tomahawks

The next thing is to see how much Iran will produce in a year, this is by far the best military system made by Iran in the past decade along with Shahed Soleimani corvette

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hi everyone
could we use sayyad 4,instead of s-200 missile in talash air defence?
does s-200 missile have any superiority against sayyad 4 missile!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> The RCS value at 306 km is should be in consideration, -214748????




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627277620322304

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

DoubleYouSee said:


> Hi everyone
> could we use sayyad 4,instead of s-200 missile in talash air defence?
> does s-200 missile have any superiority against sayyad 4 missile!


talash is what later turned into 15th of khordad as i' knew it uses Sayyad-2c and Sayyad-3

about s-200 well as far as I'm aware the system many times get upgraded , but for some reason it never performed that spectacular , the only thing that kept it relevant was its long range and its wide use at the time of Soviet Union and its high engagement ceiling (around 40km) . as I recall there was article in 2013n or 2014 that we actually made s200 sites compatible with Sayyad-3 and Sayyad-2

found it





Iran has equipped its S-200 air defense systems with new powerful Sayyad 3 surface-to-air missile 27 | April 2014 Global Defense Security news UK | Defense Security Global news Industry army 2014


Lieutenant Commander of Iranian Khatam ol-Anbia Air Defense Base General Shahrokh Shahram announced on Saturday, April 26, 2014, that Iran has equipped its long-range S-200 anti-aircraft system with a new powerful and high-precision missile dubbed 'Sayyad (Hunter) 3'.




www.armyrecognition.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

so,can't we say that,s-200 missile will still be in use because of it's long range and capability of targeting high to medium altitude targets!
as far as this system was designed to engage with strategic bombers,could it be completed by sayyad-4d missile,or no!
in the mission of targeting high altitude bombers and awacs and arial refueling aircrafts,could we replace s-200 by sayyad-4d or not?


----------



## Hack-Hook

DoubleYouSee said:


> so,can't we say that,s-200 missile will still be in use because of it's long range and capability of targeting high to medium altitude targets!


well there is no point to it , there is no threat above 30km that the missile can engage and sayyad-4b can deal with whatever we can see up to the altitude , the missile if had ABM capability was useful for that , but it has zero ABM capabilities , it tend to lock on targets you are not intended and is only good against target with very low maneuverability like tankers and transport airplane .
Sayyad family and the last Taer that we saw on on 3rd of Khordad are a lot more useful .


DoubleYouSee said:


> as far as this system was designed to engage with strategic bombers,could it be completed by sayyad-4d missile,or no!
> in the mission of targeting high altitude bombers and awacs and arial refueling aircrafts,could we replace s-200 by sayyad-4d or not?


if we use s-200 is only because we have them and the Bavar is not deployed yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aziqbal

TheImmortal said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627277620322304



although I agree its not about just detection and interception 

Western nations work very heavily on Suppression of enemy air defences, Electronic jamming, Electronic warfare, intelligence gathering, eavesdropping and even sabotage 

when they go to war they lay down the entire spectrum of capabilities and everything works so much better together, a fully integrated battlefield 

I know Iran cannot really match all of that together so its very important as part of the arms deals with Russia with Shahid 136 and other missiles Iran gets nukes from Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

aziqbal said:


> although I agree its not about just detection and interception
> 
> Western nations work very heavily on Suppression of enemy air defences, Electronic jamming, Electronic warfare, intelligence gathering, eavesdropping and even sabotage
> 
> when they go to war they lay down the entire spectrum of capabilities and everything works so much better together, a fully integrated battlefield
> 
> I know Iran cannot really match all of that together so its very important as part of the arms deals with Russia with Shahid 136 and other missiles Iran gets nukes from Russia


we have E-warfare systems of ours and many of them are drone base not ground base like other countries , so it would be harder for enemy to deal with them

















also the nature of the radars of Bavar-make it very hard to be jammed , somebody may say it even become easier for them to detect you if you try to jam them

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> we have E-warfare systems of ours and many of them are drone base not ground base like other countries , so it would be harder for enemy to deal with them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also the nature of the radars of Bavar-make it very hard to be jammed , somebody may say it even become easier for them to detect you if you try to jam them


Any news on airborne radar?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

raptor22 said:


> Any news on airborne radar?


Is there something similar suppose to be unveiled?? in near days??

Im very desperate to see radar manufacturing line in SEIRAN, Specially BAVAR 3xx

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

If we deploy new generation of Bavar-373B to Sirri island, this is what happens at the 300 KM range of its missiles :









Or if its deployed to Qeshm island :





In both cases UAE cannot fly its fighters without receiving our pre-shot warning or maybe warning shot lol.

I didn't mention its radar coverage.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589699105252442112

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> Any news on airborne radar?


for that first simorgh must be ready , then they most build a new version suitable for the task and at the same time we must build a radar like Swedish Erieye
it all take time specially with our limited budget , i say not in next 5 year

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Muhammed45 said:


> If we deploy new generation of Bavar-373B to Sirri island, this is what happens at the 300 KM range of its missiles :
> 
> 
> View attachment 894556
> 
> 
> 
> Or if its deployed to Qeshm island :
> View attachment 894557
> 
> 
> In both cases UAE cannot fly its fighters without receiving our pre-shot warning or maybe warning shot lol.
> 
> I didn't mention its radar coverage.


UAE already can't fly anything without us knowing it
Ghadir radar already make sure if that, and soon Sepehr make double sure of that








Ghadir has a range of 1100km and altitude of 300km
just think when Sepehr become integrated

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> for that first simorgh must be ready , then they most build a new version suitable for the task and at the same time we must build a radar like Swedish Erieye
> it all take time specially with our limited budget , i say not in next 5 year


Simorgh? you mean Iran 140? so hello to 1420.


----------



## tsunset

Iran should have the ability to cover and strike the Arabian Sea until bab-el-mandeb and the red sea, this is very important

I'm pretty sure in case of war US cruisers would launch tomahawks from the Arabian sea in mass, does Iran have the capability to strike there precisely?

Iran would need a 4000km range missile to strike Diego Garcia, probably where B-1 and B-2 bombers would come from

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> Simorgh? you mean Iran 140? so hello to 1420.


maybe later , all depends on how much funds they actually put aside for such project



tsunset said:


> Iran should have the ability to cover and strike the Arabian Sea until bab-el-mandeb and the red sea, this is very important
> 
> I'm pretty sure in case of war US cruisers would launch tomahawks from the Arabian sea in mass, does Iran have the capability to strike there precisely?
> 
> Iran would need a 4000km range missile to strike Diego Garcia, probably where B-1 and B-2 bombers would come from


b-1 and b-2 and b-52 will come from Guam not Diego Garcia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> maybe later , all depends on how much funds they actually put aside for such project
> 
> 
> b-1 and b-2 and b-52 will come from Guam not Diego Garcia


In what distance a ground station radar can not see the target anymore due to horizon? I mean no matter how Bavar radar could be extended but targets at low level would a problem.


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> In what distance a ground station radar can not see the target anymore due to horizon? I mean no matter how Bavar radar could be extended but targets at low level would a problem.


depend on the type of radar , and altitude of radar , ... but I'm not the person you must ask that , its not my field

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scimitar19

raptor22 said:


> In what distance a ground station radar can not see the target anymore due to horizon? I mean no matter how Bavar radar could be extended but targets at low level would a problem.


Depends on the topography. If you elevate system high enough on some mountain peaks you can negate earths curvature to great extend.


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 894937
> View attachment 894938
> View attachment 894939
> View attachment 894940




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1590279753168478208

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raptor22

scimitar19 said:


> Depends on the topography. If you elevate system high enough on some mountain peaks you can negate earths curvature to great extend.


Iran topography is this:



So no mater what you do on the ground there would be still loopholes, one of the reasons behind purchasing F-14 back in 70s was using it as mini awacs to cover all areas that stationary radars was blind.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

raptor22 said:


> Iran topography is this:
> 
> View attachment 895062
> 
> So no mater what you do on the ground there would be still loopholes, one of the reasons behind purchasing F-14 back in 70s was using it as mini awacs to cover all areas that stationary radars was blind.


you see radars like ghadir and sepehr overcome that problem but they can't be used for targeting enemy and there is no doubt that Iran need AWACS to overcome that problem

by the way i doubt before revolution Iran used F-14s as mini AWACS the gaps in Iran radars were more prominent in south of country not north and there was no threat in south


----------



## jauk

raptor22 said:


> Iran topography is this:
> 
> View attachment 895062
> 
> So no mater what you do on the ground there would be still loopholes, one of the reasons behind purchasing F-14 back in 70s was using it as mini awacs to cover all areas that stationary radars was blind.


Is that a correct statement? Loopholes imply some knowledge by the opponent. Since Iranian systems are currently mostly blind spots where are the loopholes? Isn't indigenous hardware by nature a fundamental challenge for opponents?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## raptor22

Hack-Hook said:


> you see radars like ghadir and sepehr overcome that problem but they can't be used for targeting enemy and there is no doubt that Iran need AWACS to overcome that problem
> 
> by the way i doubt before revolution Iran used F-14s as mini AWACS the gaps in Iran radars were more prominent in south of country not north and there was no threat in south


Yes OTH would do that but just are good for early warning and for sure are first targets.
As far as I know Iran ordered 3 AWACS that due to the revolution never got delivered and up until their delivery it was F14 task to cover northern part of Iran against Mig-25 and Soviet jets.


jauk said:


> Is that a correct statement? Loopholes imply some knowledge by the opponent. Since Iranian systems are currently mostly blind spots where are the loopholes? Isn't indigenous hardware by nature a fundamental challenge for opponents?


I meant you can not cover everywhere by ground radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jauk

raptor22 said:


> Yes OTH would do that but just are good for early warning and for sure are first targets.
> As far as I know Iran ordered 3 AWACS that due to the revolution never got delivered and up until their delivery it was F14 task to cover northern part of Iran against Mig-25 and Soviet jets.
> 
> I meant you can not cover everywhere by ground radar.



Understood. But is that a realistic intent?


----------



## Iraqi soldier

I do not know when Iran will clearly announce that it possesses the technology to manufacture AESA radars
Eagle eye on frigates
Radar system Bavar 373
And maybe radar-guided missiles
This is what I remember

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Iraqi soldier said:


> I do not know when Iran will clearly announce that it possesses the technology to manufacture AESA radars
> Eagle eye on frigates
> Radar system Bavar 373
> And maybe radar-guided missiles
> This is what I remember


are you serious ? Are you a new troll?


----------



## Hack-Hook

Iraqi soldier said:


> I do not know when Iran will clearly announce that it possesses the technology to manufacture AESA radars
> Eagle eye on frigates
> Radar system Bavar 373
> And maybe radar-guided missiles
> This is what I remember


Iran announced it when they introduced 3rd of Khordad in 2014


----------



## Cancerous Tumor



Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591376966913265664

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591378492415148033

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Shams313



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591499484265349120

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

thesaint said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591499484265349120



So what’s the difference between Arman and Bavar Gen 2.0 that was just shown?

We need mass production and numbers not 2 different systems doing the same thing. That would be like USA building two different systems like THAADs. Or Russia building 2 different systems like S-500’s

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> So what’s the difference between Arman and Bavar Gen 2.0 that was just shown?
> 
> We need mass production and numbers not 2 different systems doing the same thing. That would be like USA building two different systems like THAADs. Or Russia building 2 different systems like S-500’s


B373 will be in production, anyway, Arman which will adapt new technology, new missile & RADAR, maybe a bit of ABM capability.
Then b373 will be opened for sell.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Messerschmitt



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## TheImmortal

Shams313 said:


> B373 will be in production, anyway, Arman which will adapt new technology, new missile & RADAR, maybe a bit of ABM capability.
> Then b373 will be opened for sell.



The issue is Iran’s entire medium & long range air defense missile family is based on the shell of a SM-3 missile. Obviously internals are different. 

So Arman would need to be an entirely new missile family design to justify production. 

B-373 2.0 has a ABM capability and a new radar on the TEL itself for long range illumination and targeting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mohsen

More pictures of Bavar373:
آئین شکرگزاری ارتقای سامانه پدافند هوایی باور 373 | خبرگزاری فارس

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

mohsen said:


> More pictures of Bavar373:
> آئین شکرگزاری ارتقای سامانه پدافند هوایی باور 373 | خبرگزاری فارس


nobody taught to take a photo with new radar they even take a photo with power generators but none with RADARS


----------



## Flotilla

I see four canisters in a TEL truck. It is new launcher?. Two of them with the seeker out of the canister was not a quick firing capable launcher, but if they have achieved a launcher with four inmediately firing canisters would be really a great improvement. This system must be capable of compete with latest PMU-3 in international market!!!.


----------



## Shams313

TheImmortal said:


> The issue is Iran’s entire medium & long range air defense missile family is based on the shell of a SM-3 missile. Obviously internals are different.
> 
> So Arman would need to be an entirely new missile family design to justify production.
> 
> B-373 2.0 has a ABM capability and a new radar on the TEL itself for long range illumination and targeting.


Sayyad series, Mostly the air-frame looks similar to SM lineup, But Sayyad 4 is a bit tends to 48N6, with TVC, May be they referenced from Belarusian system they revived earlier.
Those Air frames aren't that much bad for such application, mostly proximity termination, even syaad4 has both control surface and TVC for achieving higher gain in maneuverability .

If they are gonna making any ABM missile that will be used for hit to kill termination or exo-atmospheric interception by any KKV (Kinetic Kill Vehicle) they may look for newer design, a design that has a steering system aside from atmospheric control surfaces. Arrow 3 and THHAD can be a reference to work on, for some reason i like 9M8x platform used in s300v4 model. Even the S500 uses similar looking missile.

I have good hope for Arman project (Bavar 473) but at least 5 batteries b373 v2 should be operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> Sayyad series, Mostly the air-frame looks similar to SM lineup, But Sayyad 4 is a bit tends to 48N6, with TVC, May be they referenced from Belarusian system they revived earlier.


48N6 only present in latest models of S-300 and have nothing to do with Belarusian s-300



Shams313 said:


> If they are gonna making any ABM missile that will be used for hit to kill termination or exo-atmospheric interception by any KKV (Kinetic Kill Vehicle) they may look for newer design


the last test of Bavar was a hit to kill at 306km against a karrar drone



Shams313 said:


> I have good hope for Arman project (Bavar 473) but at least 5 batteries b373 v2 should be operational.


i doubt it will be called Bavar-473 the 373 in the name of Bavar is Abjad number for holy prophet name .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591800552408682497

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shams313

Hack-Hook said:


> 48N6 only present in latest models of S-300 and have nothing to do with Belarusian s-300
> 
> 
> the last test of Bavar was a hit to kill at 306km against a karrar drone
> 
> 
> i doubt it will be called Bavar-473 the 373 in the name of Bavar is Abjad number for holy prophet name .


In case of Karrar , that was Endo- atmospheric interception, Control surfaces works fine, but exo-atomospharic interception against BM , u need to take theories in different lvl, just look at arrow3 KKV and steering thrusters.

Oh, i forgot Iran got S300p version from Belarus, Yet sayyad4 has close similarities with 4xNx missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DoubleYouSee

Hi dear friends
it seems that there is deference between debris of missile by what is inauguratwed as sayyad-4b
look at the tail fins that differs by sayyad-4b

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DoubleYouSee



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Shams313 said:


> In case of Karrar , that was Endo- atmospheric interception, Control surfaces works fine, but exo-atomospharic interception against BM , u need to take theories in different lvl, just look at arrow3 KKV and steering thrusters.
> 
> Oh, i forgot Iran got S300p version from Belarus, Yet sayyad4 has close similarities with 4xNx missiles.


the question is will sayad-4b have an exo-atmospheric flight or it's flight path is endo-atmospheric ? even if the system being used against ballistic missiles it would be terminal phase which is inside atmosphere 
If they build a system to engage missile outside atmosphere , the missile must have at least 100-150km flight altitude and the radar will be completely different and in class of AN/TPY-2 the current radar on bavar are not that Ideal for exo-atmospheric tracking of targets


----------



## Hack-Hook

DoubleYouSee said:


> View attachment 896339


the debries belong to the upper missile that on it , it's written Sayyad-4b , the lower missile is a different missile 
another photo of real Sayyad-4b 




honestly I don't knew what is that grey missile with different fin

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe_Adam

Flotilla said:


> I see four canisters in a TEL truck. It is new launcher?. Two of them with the seeker out of the canister was not a quick firing capable launcher, but if they have achieved a launcher with four inmediately firing canisters would be really a great improvement. This system must be capable of compete with latest PMU-3 in international market!!!.


Russia never made a system called PMU-3 and facts show that the S-300 PM series ended with S-300PMU2 after which Russia named their last upgrade S-400. Therefore, PMU-3 doesn't exist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591933393885073439

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sanel1412

Joe_Adam said:


> Russia never made a system called PMU-3 and facts show that the S-300 PM series ended with S-300PMU2 after which Russia named their last upgrade S-400. Therefore, PMU-3 doesn't exist.


Yes they did,PMU3 was renamed to S400. It is first been known as PMU3,after they develop it,it is renamed to S400

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hack-Hook

Joe_Adam said:


> Russia never made a system called PMU-3 and facts show that the S-300 PM series ended with S-300PMU2 after which Russia named their last upgrade S-400. Therefore, PMU-3 doesn't exist.


they made S300-PMU3 but for promotional reason they later changed the name to S400 just like T72-BU that they renamed to T90 or Su-27M they just renamed to Su-35

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> they made S300-PMU3 but for promotional reason they later changed the name to S400 just like T72-BU that they renamed to T90 or Su-27M they just renamed to Su-35



Delusional.


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Delusional.


go do your research on the matter first


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> go do your research on the matter first



I did many years ago, and to call an S-27 an Su-35 just shows you dont understand what you're talking about. Su-27M didnt have PESA nor the OLS-35, nor the same engines. Only the chassis are the same, thats it. The range of the s400 is longer than s-300pmu2, and the PMU2 was already lightyears ahead of the first s300s. Typical shill.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> I did many years ago, and to call an S-27 an Su-35 just shows you dont understand what you're talking about. Su-27M didnt have PESA nor the OLS-35, nor the same engines. Only the chassis are the same, thats it. The range of the s400 is longer than s-300pmu2, and the PMU2 was already lightyears ahead of the first s300s. Typical shill.


well who talk about pmu-2 the talk is about pmu-3 
and a question for you Su-35ub or Su-37 is Su-35 or Su-30 or Su-27 they also don't have ibris-E
in short the fact remain that Russia renamed Su-27m was test bed that at first supposed too be Su-35, they just didn't mass produced it , they removed the cannard and add ibris-E and called it Su-35bm and later into Su-35

even their codename T-10M is the same with the rest of Su35 the codename for the rest of Su-27s are T10P and T10K
also Su27-SM2/SM3 also have Ibris-E does it turn them into Su-35


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> well who talk about pmu-2 the talk is about pmu-3
> and a question for you Su-35ub or Su-37 is Su-35 or Su-30 or Su-27 they also don't have ibris-E
> in short the fact remain that Russia renamed Su-27m was test bed that at first supposed too be Su-35, they just didn't mass produced it , they removed the cannard and add ibris-E and called it Su-35bm and later into Su-35
> 
> even their codename T-10M is the same with the rest of Su35 the codename for the rest of Su-27s are T10P and T10K
> also Su27-SM2/SM3 also have Ibris-E does it turn them into Su-35



Pmu3 never came out, it was called s400 because the s400 is a natural progression from pmu2. But you make it out that s400 is merely a renamed s300 when the reality is that there is an ocean of difference between first gen s300 and pmu2. Its like saying an aston martin db9 is a renamed db5! This is either down to stupidity or down to pure disinformation as what one would expect from a shill.

Yes, the chassis of all those jets are smiliar, but that is where the similarities end. You said su-27m is the same as an S-35, this may have been more true if we were in the 80s, but the reality is that the S-35 that is available today has tonnes more upgrades than the S-27M. So it is more than just a renaming. You get so easily fooled by new shapes and designs, you're like an Arab dictator who gets easily woo'ed. The reality is the Russians got it right the first time with their chassis hence why there was no need to constantly redesign the chassis, as well as the fact US manufacturers compete like dogs to make their product look fancy and unique, when in reality it doesnt add any value.

No because they dont have the same engine, nor do they have OLS-35, as well as other things. An upgrade is not merely renaming something, it significantly improves what the jet could do before. Pretty simple stuff to understand if you weren't such a shill.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Pmu3 never came out, it was called s400 because the s400 is a natural progression from pmu2. But you make it out that s400 is merely a renamed s300 when the reality is that there is an ocean of difference between first gen s300 and pmu2. Its like saying an aston martin db9 is a renamed db5! This is either down to stupidity or down to pure disinformation as what one would expect from a shill.


when i said there is not much difference between s300-p and s300-pm2
or when i say there is no difference between s-300-Pm2 and S-400 there is difference but the fact remain s-400 in development phase was s-300-pmu3
later when they wanted to export it they changed its name into s400 , like what they did with su-27 and t-72


Daylamite Warrior said:


> This is either down to stupidity or down to pure disinformation as what one would expect from a shill.


no its down to your lack of ability to understand what other people say
there is difference between s300-pmu2 and s300-pmu3 but s-400 id the same with s300-pmu3


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yes, the chassis of all those jets are smiliar, but that is where the similarities end. You said su-27m is the same as an S-35, this may have been more true if we were in the 80s, but the reality is that the S-35 that is available today has tonnes more upgrades


su-35s get tons of upgrade su-35 upgrades over the original su-35 or su27m cant be called tons


Daylamite Warrior said:


> The reality is the Russians got it right the first time with their chassis hence why there was no need to constantly redesign the chassis, as well as the fact US manufacturers compete like dogs to make their product look fancy and unique, when in reality it doesnt add any value.


the fact is the video i post about the capability of the aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Hack-Hook said:


> we have E-warfare systems of ours and many of them are drone base not ground base like other countries , so it would be harder for enemy to deal with them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also the nature of the radars of Bavar-make it very hard to be jammed , somebody may say it even become easier for them to detect you if you try to jam them


How does it make it easy to jam? They're AESA


----------



## Hack-Hook

GrandBotBoi said:


> How does it make it easy to jam? They're AESA


it won't be easy to jam them , it will be easier for them to detect you if you try to jam them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesaint

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1592193138252210180

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Beny Karachun

GrandBotBoi said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627260214337538


It can face the F-35, and then blow up trying to.


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> when i said there is not much difference between s300-p and s300-pm2
> or when i say there is no difference between s-300-Pm2 and S-400 there is difference but the fact remain s-400 in development phase was s-300-pmu3
> later when they wanted to export it they changed its name into s400 , like what they did with su-27 and t-72
> 
> no its down to your lack of ability to understand what other people say
> there is difference between s300-pmu2 and s300-pmu3 but s-400 id the same with s300-pmu3
> 
> su-35s get tons of upgrade su-35 upgrades over the original su-35 or su27m cant be called tons
> 
> the fact is the video i post about the capability of the aircraft



The so called PMU-3 was never released as PMU-3, it was called S-400 from day one of release and naturally the naming suggests that it is a progression from the S-300. 200, 300, 400, 500, etc, do you see the pattern? That's not a big deal! The latest S-300 that was released was pmu-2 which is inferior to S400. PMU-3 might as well not exist as it was always called S-400.

Seeing as the only similarity is chassis, and engine, radar and optics are all different, it suggests that it is "tonnes" of differences, not a mere renaming as a shill like you is trying ram down our throats.

Your video means nothing to me and does not refute my comment you quoted, so I'll just put that down to your usual diversion tactic.



Beny Karachun said:


> It can face the F-35, and then blow up trying to.



Where is your data? Do you have a Bavar-373 and tested it or are you assuming things based on the shite that comes out of your guts?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Where is your data? Do you have a Bavar-373 and tested it or are you assuming things based on the shite that comes out of your guts?


We already fly all over the middle east with the F-35, we also had the Bavar 373 destroyed in the past. F-35s are stealthy and equipped with the best jamming technology available. You can't harm it, any other claim is coping.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> We already fly all over the middle east with the F-35, we also had the Bavar 373 destroyed in the past. F-35s are stealthy and equipped with the best jamming technology available. You can't harm it, any other claim is coping.



Share with us evidence where your smelly F-35s have come near a Bavar and evidence that your jets have touched a Bavar. As far as we know Bavar isnt even deployed yet nor can your jets reach Iran. So I'll put that down to your usual big nosed lie!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Beny Karachun said:


> We already fly all over the middle east with the F-35, we also had the Bavar 373 destroyed in the past. F-35s are stealthy and equipped with the best jamming technology available. You can't harm it, any other claim is coping.


No you haven't lmao what are you on about. Bavar-373 literally only entered mass production this year you delusional cuck

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

Beny Karachun said:


> we also had the Bavar 373 destroyed in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Share with us evidence where your smelly F-35s have come near a Bavar and evidence that your jets have touched a Bavar. As far as we know Bavar isnt even deployed yet nor can your jets reach Iran. So I'll put that down to your usual big nosed lie!


Your Iranian troops in Syria are supposed to be protected by something right? That something was the Bavar 373 and it was destroyed, among the countless of other systems we destroyed in Syria and Iraq. we didn't need any F-35 for it as well. 


Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 896578


Cope



GrandBotBoi said:


> No you haven't lmao what are you on about. Bavar-373 literally only entered mass production this year you delusional cuck


Lol it's in service since 2019

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Iranian troops in Syria are supposed to be protected by something right? That something was the Bavar 373 and it was destroyed, among the countless of other systems we destroyed in Syria and Iraq. we didn't need any F-35 for it as well.



Cope! You said your jets have taken out Bavars, now you're flip flopping and speaking about Syria lol! I asked you to show evidence that Bavar is in Syria, and you know you can't. All youve managed to destroy in syria are old S-300s and S-200s, old soviet tech lol! You even begged Putin to switch off the S-400s lol! Most of your empty warehouse runs have been with f-35s. Learn to swim, you organ snatching nazi!



Beny Karachun said:


> Lol it's in service since 2019



In service in Iran, not Syria! I think lying is in your dna, thats what all you people do.



Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 896578



All he could say was "cope" and he runs away like a coward.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Cope! You said your jets have taken out Bavars, now you're flip flopping and speaking about Syria lol! I asked you to show evidence that Bavar is in Syria, and you know you can't. All youve managed to destroy in syria are old S-300s and S-200s, old soviet tech lol! You even begged Putin to switch off the S-400s lol! Most of your empty warehouse runs have been with f-35s. Learn to swim, you organ snatching nazi!
> 
> 
> 
> In service in Iran, not Syria! I think lying is in your dna, thats what all you people do.
> 
> 
> 
> All he could say was "cope" and he runs away like a coward.


Lol, obviously I spoke about Syria, when did I say we used F-35s to target Bavar 373 in Iran?

Evidence😂 Israel doesn't work like that, we don't even admit attacking Iranian targets, evidence comes 15 years later when it doesn't matter anymore.






Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





Have a nice read!



Daylamite Warrior said:


> In service in Iran, not Syria! I think lying is in your dna, thats what all you people do.


Lol, didn't know that's how "in service" works. You have some thousands of IRGC members in Syria. You attempt to protect them with your air defenses, but that doesn't seem to work.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## shadihassan28

Messerschmitt said:


> View attachment 896578


Not lying or true at all but there was reports of IAF destroying anti aircraft systems in Syria that Iran brought in to strengthen Syrian defenses but nothing was reported to what or if any systems were destroyed,, the reports just state iaf attacked game changing anti aircraft systems, he just embellishing on the story without any facts.


----------



## Beny Karachun

shadihassan28 said:


> Not lying or true at all but there was reports of IAF destroying anti aircraft systems in Syria that Iran brought in to strengthen Syrian defenses but nothing was reported to what or if any systems were destroyed,, the reports just state iaf attacked game changing anti aircraft systems, he just embellishing on the story without any facts.


Iran isn't claiming casualties, Israel isn't claiming responsibility, and yet targets continue to be bombed, huge secondary explosions as well... 

You won't find any evidence when no one acknowledges anything. We just have to rely on reports. You could deny all you want, in the end, Israel isn't bombing sand dunes in Syria and Iraq 

Also, the reports stated those were Bavar 373s.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Blue In Green

I thought this cancerous waste of air user was banned from regular Iranian threads? 

😐… the brain on that troglodyte, my god. Wish he would just go away. 

Bavar is barely even being made in significant quantities, let alone enough to be considered sent to Syria. How his lying *** thinks Iran would move in a still “experimental” AD system to Syria when Iranian airspace is in dire need of it , is beyond me…

Just ignore him, for the love of GOD ignore him.



Blue In Green said:


> I thought this cancerous waste of air user was banned from regular Iranian threads?
> 
> 😐… the brain on that troglodyte, my god. Wish he would just go away.
> 
> Bavar is barely even being made in significant quantities, let alone enough to be considered sent to Syria. How his lying *** thinks Iran would move in a still “experimental” AD system to Syria when Iranian airspace is in dire need of it , is beyond me…
> 
> Just ignore him, for the love of GOD ignore him.



Shit reeks of “Iran has approved of Russia’s request to send Bavar to Ukraine” type of bullshit…

The absolute state of PDF lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beny Karachun

Blue In Green said:


> Bavar is barely even being made in significant quantities, let alone enough to be considered sent to Syria. How his lying *** thinks Iran would move in a still “experimental” AD system to Syria when Iranian airspace is in dire need of it , is beyond me…
> 
> Just ignore him, for the love of GOD ignore him.


Iran is in dire need? Hundreds of Iranians were killed in bombings of Israel in Syria, and Iran is obviously trying to surround Israel, it makes perfect sense for them to send air defenses to Syria.

Another evidence that disputes your BS argument would be the smuggling of long range Iranian air defenses like the Sayyad 2C to the Houthis in Yemen.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Lol, obviously I spoke about Syria, when did I say we used F-35s to target Bavar 373 in Iran?
> 
> Evidence😂 Israel doesn't work like that, we don't even admit attacking Iranian targets, evidence comes 15 years later when it doesn't matter anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have a nice read!
> 
> 
> Lol, didn't know that's how "in service" works. You have some thousands of IRGC members in Syria. You attempt to protect them with your air defenses, but that doesn't seem to work.



Yeah we know ziopigs dont use evidence and just rely on lying, thanks for admitting it. So if there is no evidence, then it simply didnt happen. There are no Bavars in Syria, and if they are anywhere they will be in Iran. You make this easy.

Nowhere does that wiki article mention bavars in Syria! Lol fail!

In service in Iran, dipshit, not in Syria! Lol I pray IDF are as dumb as you, honestly it's a poor show everytime you speak. I ask you again, show me evidence where they are being protected by Bavar. The evidence seems to point to Syrian AD which is old soviet systems. Are you that retarded? Lol



Beny Karachun said:


> Iran is in dire need? Hundreds of Iranians were killed in bombings of Israel in Syria, and Iran is obviously trying to surround Israel, it makes perfect sense for them to send air defenses to Syria.
> 
> Another evidence that disputes your BS argument would be the smuggling of long range Iranian air defenses like the Sayyad 2C to the Houthis in Yemen.



Hundrends? Lol you have barely killed a few dozen and most of them are either Syrians or civilians which you assume to be IRGC generals lol that's how desperate you organ snatching zionazis are. There is no evidence of Iranian AD inside Syria, you need to back your shit up otherwise your claims are rejected. Iran has encircled you and Hezbollah is armed to the teeth, wakey wakey! 

We're talking about Bavars, dumbass, not Sayyad or other systems. Stop squirming like a bitch!

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> Not lying or true at all but there was reports of IAF destroying anti aircraft systems in Syria that Iran brought in to strengthen Syrian defenses but nothing was reported to what or if any systems were destroyed,, the reports just state iaf attacked game changing anti aircraft systems, he just embellishing on the story without any facts.



Shimon, stop making shit up for your colleague Bjorn. There are no Iranian AD "which Iran brought in". All the AD in Syria is old soviet garbage which they always had, the Iranians are there to teach them how to use them. Stop making shit up, you halloween celebrating, wife parading dickhead!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Shimon, stop making shit up for your colleague Bjorn. There are no Iranian AD "which Iran brought in". All the AD in Syria is old soviet garbage which they always had, the Iranians are there to teach them how to use them. Stop making shit up, you halloween celebrating, wife parading dickhead!


You're suggesting Iran has 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria but no air defenses😂

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> You're suggesting Iran has 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria but no air defenses😂



Stop making numbers up you absolute wankspangle! There is no evidence of Iranians shipping massive AD to Syria, let alone Bavar. This would have been picked up by OSINT or US media! They are there to help Syria with whatever they have. Theyre fighting ziopig armed ISIS fighters, guerrilla style, so massive sophisticated AD is useless. Shit for brains! Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Stop making numbers up you absolute wankspangle! There is no evidence of Iranians shipping massive AD to Syria, let alone Bavar. This would have been picked up by OSINT or US media! They are there to help Syria with whatever they have. Theyre fighting ziopig armed ISIS fighters, guerrilla style, so massive sophisticated AD is useless. Shit for brains! Lol


Yeah no evidence, I wonder what's being blown up lol. It's almost as if Iran is trying to make it hard to detect their weapon smuggling into Iran! OSINT and American media don't have Mossad agents in Iran. There's plenty of footage of targets being blown up with massive secondary explosions.

They're not fighting ISIS fighters they're fighting Israel that bombs them every week for the last 10 years. Hundreds of dead Iranians, including generals, advanced weaponry, guidance kits for missiles, anti ship missiles and also hundreds of Syrians. Iran is attempting to militarize Syria to contain Israel but it doesn't seem to work lol.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Beny Karachun

Daylamite Warrior said:


> The evidence seems to point to Syrian AD which is old soviet systems. Are you that retarded? Lol


Syrians have their own air defenses, no one said the Syrians are being given air defenses, Iranians are trying to field their own. 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Hundrends? Lol you have barely killed a few dozen and most of them are either Syrians or civilians which you assume to be IRGC generals lol that's how desperate you organ snatching zionazis are. There is no evidence of Iranian AD inside Syria, you need to back your shit up otherwise your claims are rejected. Iran has encircled you and Hezbollah is armed to the teeth, wakey wakey!
> 
> We're talking about Bavars, dumbass, not Sayyad or other systems. Stop squirming like a bitch!


Hundreds lol. Probably more. Over 1000 bombing sorties. 

You expect me to believe you send air defenses to Yemen to defend some Houthi cavemen but not to defend 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria? Delusional.

Iran is the one encircled and infiltrated, not Israel. Israel has more than enough power to wipe out all Iranian proxies and send back all enemy states back to the stone age.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Stop making numbers up you absolute wankspangle! There is no evidence of Iranians shipping massive AD to Syria, let alone Bavar. This would have been picked up by OSINT or US media! They are there to help Syria with whatever they have. Theyre fighting ziopig armed ISIS fighters, guerrilla style, so massive sophisticated AD is useless. Shit for brains! Lol



I’ll give him one point (can’t believe I’m saying this) but some several odd years ago I believe Iran did indeed send AD units of a higher level (TOR-M1 complex, and some others i think) but they were indeed disabled/destroyed due to inadequate cover, superior IDF/NATO ISR and general lack of resolve against Israeli forces. 

However, given that the BAVAR isn’t even an IRGC project (It’s an Artesh one). The likely hood of there being any sizable force currrently is quite low due to the sheer costs of such a high-end AD complex. We know that Iran’s airspace has an urgent need for it so that niche would have to filled first. Any other explanation or reasoning or whatever to the contrary is abject ignorance on the matter. 

There aren’t that many units, it’s expensive, it’s not being sold or shipped abroad, domestic defense needs come first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shadihassan28

Blue In Green said:


> I’ll give him one point (can’t believe I’m saying this) but some several odd years ago I believe Iran did indeed send AD units of a higher level (TOR-M1 complex, and some others i think) but they were indeed disabled/destroyed due to inadequate cover, superior IDF/NATO ISR and general lack of resolve against Israeli forces.
> 
> However, given that the BAVAR isn’t even an IRGC project (It’s an Artesh one). The likely hood of there being any sizable force currrently is quite low due to the sheer costs of such a high-end AD complex. We know that Iran’s airspace has an urgent need for it so that niche would have to filled first. Any other explanation or reasoning or whatever to the contrary is abject ignorance on the matter.
> 
> There aren’t that many units, it’s expensive, it’s not being sold or shipped abroad, domestic defense needs come first.


That’s what I was referring to earlier but it was only theorized what weapons if any were destroyed, iaf leaked they attacked because of high air defense weapons were being brought in, the weapons that were supposedly hit weren’t operational yet, but no actual weapons were named and unlikely bavar in small numbers and still being upgraded would be sent to Syria, if Syria has any high end system there my bet khorad 13

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue In Green

shadihassan28 said:


> That’s what I was referring to earlier but it was only theorized what weapons if any were destroyed, iaf leaked they attacked because of high air defense weapons were being brought in, the weapons that were supposedly hit weren’t operational yet, but no actual weapons were named and unlikely bavar in small numbers and still being upgraded would be sent to Syria, if Syria has any high end system there my bet khorad 13



_Third of Khordad _would be a system that could have been sent thus far as it’s an IRGC project and more recent version of it have 100+km engagement capabilities and there would be units to spare since IRGC has a MASSIVE budget compared to Artesh.


----------



## shadihassan28

Blue In Green said:


> _Third of Khordad _would be a system that could have been sent thus far as it’s an IRGC project and more recent version of it have 100+km engagement capabilities and there would be units to spare since IRGC has a MASSIVE budget compared to Artesh.


My bad on the name but you got the message, bavar is to large of a system to brought in from out of the country even dissembled, hell even raad system or the likes, they’re easier to hide.


----------



## Beny Karachun

shadihassan28 said:


> My bad on the name but you got the message, bavar is to large of a system to brought in from out of the country even dissembled, hell even raad system or the likes, they’re easier to hide.


Honestly the type is irrelevant, the capability to destroy them is what's relevant. The reports I remember reading said Bavar 373. Might be a Khorad.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Beny Karachun said:


> Honestly the type is irrelevant, the capability to destroy them is what's relevant. The reports I remember reading said Bavar 373. Might be a Khorad.


No it was just theorized khorad system was being attacked again without any proof ie video of the attack from iaf like they have with destruction of pantisyr systems just a lot of talk and no show.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

shadihassan28 said:


> No it was just theorized khorad system was being attacked again without any proof ie video of the attack from iaf like they have with destruction of pantisyr systems just a lot of talk and no show.


2007 Syrian nuclear reactor was blown up, video was released only years after, was it all just a lot of talk and no show up until then? 

We might release a video, we might not, that's just how we work.


----------



## Joe_Adam

Beny Karachun said:


> It can face the F-35, and then blow up trying to.


This calls for a long essay in reality versus hallucination since drug abuse seems to be the case here: 

Typical arrogant little Askanazi who lives on US gravy wagon from housing subsidies to every single nut and bolt used in every single machine in Israel, and yet, claims that Israelis are making hi-tech systems, which they don't as they're not capable of such feat. For example the only part of Merkava MBT made by Israelis is the THERMAL SLEEVE for the 120 mm German main gun "made in Ashkelon", while the power pack is made (100%) by General Dynamics "land Division", the main Gun is a Rheinmetall/Kraussmaffei product, and the rest of the tank is purely US made product "read, 100%". The same is true for Iron Dome, David Sling, all of which are products made by US Raytheon Corp., as well as other US arms makers. They put phony Israeli names on these systems but in the last confrontation with Hamas in Gaza Israel was begging USA to send more missiles as they were out of munitions for the Iron Dome and they were begging for ceasefire? Israelis are world renowned pretenders, congenital liars, the constant cry-wolfs and nasty parasites that has been sucking USA blood by syphoning US taxpayers money since early 1960s. 

The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran. This gap is getting bigger, wider, and way beyond Israel's abilities to overcome even with 100% US support, it's hopeless and they know it.

In practical terms, three squadrons of light weight F-35 couldn't make a dent, nor scratch the surface of Iran's armor. Furthermore, if we pretend to believe in the term lucky-day for Israel, then Israelis will be in for a FATAL BLOW if they hallucinate about attacking Iran even with full US participation, it will be the end of their fantasy-party in the stolen land of Palestine.

Dogs that bark the loudest are jumpy little French-poodles that could be shredded to pieces in a rapid fashion by an average size pooch "Iran is a huge wolf". Hence, for a jumpy Ashkenazi "fake Jew" to talk so loudly, shout like a paranoid schizophrenic who is on high doses of Prozac, and then brag constantly about a US made aircraft is very funny.

Look at Iran's map (1.8 million sq Km), Population (87 million), check annual number of graduating scientist and engineers in Iran the numbers and the quality of those graduates surpass nations like Germany, France, and Italy combined "never mind Israel". That realty should show that Iran is a serious world power "going up" with robust foundations in highly trained/educated human resources and a fully self-reliant nation. Israel in comparison is a retrograde-dwarf third world mini-state void of any indigenous wealth or capabilities living in a barrowed time. Without USA/Western powers Israel could not last 72 hours against Iran even in wonderful sunny day with an airforce 10 folds greater in numbers than it posses currently.

Lastly the question arises for little Benny Karachun, why not have some self respect by talking your own size. Also for once leave USA alone as that empty yapping makes you look utterly foolish and out of touch with reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> This calls for a long essay in reality versus hallucination since drug abuse seems to be the case here:
> 
> Typical arrogant little Askanazi who lives on US gravy wagon from housing subsidies to every single nut and bolt used in every single machine in Israel, and yet, claims that Israelis are making hi-tech systems, which they don't as they're not capable of such feat. For example the only part of Merkava MBT made by Israelis is the THERMAL SLEEVE for the 120 mm German main gun "made in Ashkelon", while the power pack is made (100%) by General Dynamics "land Division", the main Gun is a Rheinmetall/Kraussmaffei product, and the rest of the tank is purely US made product "read, 100%". The same is true for Iron Dome, David Sling, all of which are products made by US Raytheon Corp., as well as other US arms makers. The put phony Israeli names these systems but in the last confrontation with Hamas in Gaza Israel was begging USA to send more missiles as they were out of munitions for the Iron Dome and they were begging for ceasefire? Israelis are world renowned pretenders, congenital liars, the constant cry-wolfs and nasty parasites that has been sucking USA blood by syphoning US taxpayers money since early 1960s.
> 
> The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran. This gap is getting bigger, wider, and way beyond Israel's abilities to overcome even with 100% US support, it's hopeless and they know it.
> 
> In practical terms, three squadrons of light weight F-35 couldn't make a dent, nor scratch the surface of Iran's armor. Furthermore, if we pretend to believe in the term lucky-day, then Israelis will be in for a FATAL BLOW if they hallucinate about attacking Iran even with full US participation, it will be the end of their fantasy-party in the stolen land of Palestine.
> 
> Dogs that bark the loudest are jumpy little French-poodles that could be shredded to pieces in rapid fashion by an average size pooch "Iran is a huge wolfdog". Hence, for a jumpy Ashkenazi "fake Jew" to talk so loudly, shout like a paranoid schizophrenic who is on high doses of Prozac, and then brag constantly about a US made aircraft is very funny.
> 
> Look at Iran's map (1.8 million sq Km), Population (87 million), check annual number of graduating scientist and engineers in Iran the numbers and the quality of those graduates surpass Germany, France, Italy "never mind Israel". That realty should show that Iran is a serious world power "going up" with robust foundations in highly trained/educated human resources and a fully self reliant nation. Israel in comparison is a retrograde-dwarf third world mini-state void of any indigenous wealth or capabilities living in a barrowed time. Without USA/Western powers Israel could not last 72 hours against Iran even in wonderful sunny day with an airforce 10 folds greater in numbers than it posses currently.
> 
> Lastly the question arises for little Benny Karachun, why not have some self respect by talking your own size, also for once leave USA alone as that empty yapping makes you look utterly foolish and out of touch with reality.


Okay retard


----------



## Joe_Adam

Beny Karachun said:


> Okay retard


An Ashkenazi retard cry-wolf with curly hair and big nose calling people nasty stuff. Typical Zionist full of hate and fully void of manners.


----------



## shadihassan28

Joe_Adam said:


> An Ashkenazi retard cry-wolf with curly hair and big nose calling people nasty stuff. Typical Zionist full of hate and fully void of manners.


The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran

Well you did start it first and I don’t even like beny I have him on ignore.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe_Adam

Hack-Hook said:


> they made S300-PMU3 but for promotional reason they later changed the name to S400 just like T72-BU that they renamed to T90 or Su-27M they just renamed to Su-35


Initially, the term S300-PMU 3 was used for S-400 while it was in development stage. When the system was finalized and became operational it was named S-400 according to published literature by Almaz Central Design Bureau. However, NATO kept using the designation S-300PMU 3 until Almaz named the system "TRIUMF"; translation: "Triumph" in English. Since then no one used the term S300-PMU 3.



shadihassan28 said:


> The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran
> 
> Well you did start it first and I don’t even like beny I have him on ignore.


Nothing personal. I stated facts and nothing I said is hidden or unknown about those people in the world. The problem with barking, it is an annoyance that must be stopped, so I tried to do just that. I hope S/He starts behaving like a normal human among humans.


----------



## Beny Karachun

shadihassan28 said:


> The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran
> 
> Well you did start it first and I don’t even like beny I have him on ignore.


Okay second retard


----------



## Joe_Adam

sanel1412 said:


> Yes they did,PMU3 was renamed to S400. It is first been known as PMU3,after they develop it,it is renamed to S400


You are correct and that's what I said


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> For example the only part of Merkava MBT made by Israelis is the THERMAL SLEEVE for the 120 mm German main gun "made in Ashkelon", while the power pack is made (100%) by General Dynamics "land Division", the main Gun is a Rheinmetall/Kraussmaffei product


Lol, Trophy APS, radars, all electronic systems, software, Battle Management Systems, ammunition, armor, ERA, tracks, suspension, fire control systems, encrypted communication devices all made in Israel. IMI MG253 is a licensed version of the German L44 just like the M256 the Americans use on the Abrams lol. Cope.


----------



## Iraqi soldier

I keep repeating
The missile industry has a range of 300 km
Iran has experience and knowledge of high-powered engines, quality of heat-resistant coatings, aerodynamic structures, etc

A long-range air-to-air missile is not far from the Iranians' reach


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> The fact remains; Israel is too small, too shallow, too dependent on US handouts and help, and too retarded to catch up with Iran. This gap is getting bigger, wider, and way beyond Israel's abilities to overcome even with 100% US support, it's hopeless and they know


We faced stronger enemies than Iran right at our border, your ballistic missiles, even with 100 percent accuracy, are not enough to destroy Israel. 

In reality the accuracy is going to be 0 because they all will be either blown up on the ground or shot down by laser systems for 5 dollars each. Who relies on US support lol? We can solo the entire middle east if we want.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Joe_Adam

Beny Karachun said:


> We faced stronger enemies than Iran right at our border, your ballistic missiles, even with 100 percent accuracy, are not enough to destroy Israel.
> 
> In reality the accuracy is going to be 0 because they all will be either blown up on the ground or shot down by laser systems for 5 dollars each. Who relies on US support lol? We can solo the entire middle east if we want.


Wow, a SOLO Ashkenazi conquering the world . . ! Again, a typical mouse pretending to be a lion, you are not and never will be. 

In 2019 your fake regime announced officially that all Iranian bases, and weapon systems in Syria are destroyed. Now in 2022 you are still at it and still claim Iran is building bases in Syria. For the fake claims there is ZERO evidence to show, and your leaders running on the double "almost" every few day to Washington DC begging for help . . 

Your brave pilots while over Lebanon shooting missiles from standoff ranges is merely a show to boost morale but never a real nor an effective military operation since none of those missiles hit anything but dirt, buildings, and other civilian structures all of which is void any military value while 95% of them are get blown up in the air.

Jews are cowardly folks, frightened from anything non Jewish. You're a collection of defects on arrival, strange and foreign to this region "any region beside eastern Europe", strange in character, and surrounded by so many nations that hate you with passion, people with no lost love nor a slightest commonality with you as Ashkenazy hordes come in so many varieties they look like a collection from a ZOO.

Based on reports in the past few years, 10s of thousand have left Israel for good, thus, it's essential for the Israeli regime to show resolve "imagine that" that they're tough and doing something in Syria. This whole thing is to stop the reverse migration trend of Jews to their original rat holes in eastern Europe since most of them are not related to Judaism at all.

That's what the show off against Syria is all about. It's a good training for your pilots, and a great propaganda for Zionism to get more money and constant help from the milking cow USA. 

In essence your rotten regime is acting as an ISIL/ Al-Qaeda air force but doing a very lousy job at that. Your regime along with Turkey, S. Arabia, UAE, UK, France, and USA failed in a pitiably miserable manner. You were defeated completely as ISIL is destroyed as whole of Syria is free of their Zionist filth albeit there is still a small pocket of them hiding among civilians in north-western Syria protected by Erdogan's regime. 

You are a HASBARA trying to show that your fake regime is relevant, it is not. You are attached to USA taxpayers rectums as a blood-sucking maggots. You're a burden on humanity with miserable existence that is about to end soon to world's delight. 

I am sure you're frothing as to why everyone in this world despises your crooked ways, your greed, and your inhumane cruelty. That is related to your DNA defects, it's part and parcel of being a Satan worshiping fake Hebro . . .

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> Wow, a SOLO Ashkenazi conquering the world . . ! Again, a typical mouse pretending to be a lion, you are not and never will be.
> 
> In 2019 your fake regime announced officially that all Iranian bases, and weapon systems in Syria are destroyed. Now in 2022 you are still at it and still claim Iran is building bases in Syria. For the fake claims there is ZERO evidence to show, and your leaders running on the double "almost" every few day to Washington DC begging for help . .
> 
> Your brave pilots while over Lebanon shooting missiles from standoff ranges is merely a show to boost morale but never a real nor an effective military operation since none of those missiles hit anything but dirt, buildings, and other civilian structures all of which is void any military value while 95% of them are get blown up in the air.
> 
> Jews are cowardly folks, frightened from anything non Jewish. You're a collection of defects on arrival, strange and foreign to this region "any region beside eastern Europe", strange in character, and surrounded by so many nations that hate you with passion, people with no lost love nor a slightest commonality with you as Ashkenazy hordes come in so many varieties they look like a collection from a ZOO.
> 
> Based on reports in the past few years, 10s of thousand have left Israel for good, thus, it's essential for the Israeli regime to show resolve "imagine that" that they're tough and doing something in Syria. This whole thing is to stop the reverse migration trend of Jews to their original rat holes in eastern Europe since most of them are not related to Judaism at all.
> 
> That's what the show off against Syria is all about. It's a good training for your pilots, and a great propaganda for Zionism to get more money and constant help from the milking cow USA.
> 
> In essence your rotten regime is acting as an ISIL/ Al-Qaeda air force but doing a very lousy job at that. Your regime along with Turkey, S. Arabia, UAE, UK, France, and USA failed in a pitiably miserable manner. You were defeated completely as ISIL is destroyed as whole of Syria is free of their Zionist filth albeit there is still a small pocket of them hiding among civilians in north-western Syria protected by Erdogan's regime.
> 
> You are a HASBARA trying to show that your fake regime is relevant, it is not. You are attached to USA taxpayers rectums as a blood-sucking maggots. You're a burden on humanity with miserable existence that is about to end soon to world's delight.
> 
> I am sure you're frothing as to why everyone in this world despises your crooked ways, your greed, and your inhumane cruelty. That is related to your DNA defects, it's part and parcel of being a Satan worshiping fake Hebro . . .


Okay, retard


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Blue In Green said:


> I’ll give him one point (can’t believe I’m saying this) but some several odd years ago I believe Iran did indeed send AD units of a higher level (TOR-M1 complex, and some others i think) but they were indeed disabled/destroyed due to inadequate cover, superior IDF/NATO ISR and general lack of resolve against Israeli forces.
> 
> However, given that the BAVAR isn’t even an IRGC project (It’s an Artesh one). The likely hood of there being any sizable force currrently is quite low due to the sheer costs of such a high-end AD complex. We know that Iran’s airspace has an urgent need for it so that niche would have to filled first. Any other explanation or reasoning or whatever to the contrary is abject ignorance on the matter.
> 
> There aren’t that many units, it’s expensive, it’s not being sold or shipped abroad, domestic defense needs come first.



He, or should I say it, raised the point of Bavar being taken out by IDF which is bollocks. And that the only AD that was there was old Russian tech. If you believe Iran took some Tor-1, then that is not even a point worth giving if im being frank, especially to an organ thieving nazi!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Yeah no evidence, I wonder what's being blown up lol. It's almost as if Iran is trying to make it hard to detect their weapon smuggling into Iran! OSINT and American media don't have Mossad agents in Iran. There's plenty of footage of targets being blown up with massive secondary explosions.
> 
> They're not fighting ISIS fighters they're fighting Israel that bombs them every week for the last 10 years. Hundreds of dead Iranians, including generals, advanced weaponry, guidance kits for missiles, anti ship missiles and also hundreds of Syrians. Iran is attempting to militarize Syria to contain Israel but it doesn't seem to work lol.



So if you have no evidence, shut your dirty lying mouth lol! Surely they have satellite images of what theyre blowing up lol and no evidence has been a Bavar. Just admit your basing all of this on an assumption with no evidence. Having Mossad agents in Iran would give you up to date information of what AD Iran has around the world and share that with US, but your wank Mossad doesnt seem to have that information because theyre too busy killing old scientists. Secondary explosions doesnt prove Israel has gotten near a Bavar, just means you blew up a gas pipe or something, what a dumbass you are lol

Iran is there to fight Israeli backed ISIS fighters, which it has won since Assad is now securely the leader of Syria. The Hypersonic missiles and underground nuclear program are whats really being prepared for you. All youve taken out are empty factories, decoys and civilians, with a few collatoral damage. Hezbollah are still working though, arent they? Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Beny Karachun said:


> Syrians have their own air defenses, no one said the Syrians are being given air defenses, Iranians are trying to field their own.
> 
> Hundreds lol. Probably more. Over 1000 bombing sorties.
> 
> You expect me to believe you send air defenses to Yemen to defend some Houthi cavemen but not to defend 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria? Delusional.
> 
> Iran is the one encircled and infiltrated, not Israel. Israel has more than enough power to wipe out all Iranian proxies and send back all enemy states back to the stone age.



Show me evidence of them being Bavars, or at least show me evidence of what these ADs are. OSINT would have picked at least one up. Stop squirming and show the evidence. The evidence thus far shows that Iran is working with what Syria already has.

1000s of sorties? How expensive! Iran's still there in huge numbers though lol! Them decoys got you spending Ps. 

There is evidence for Yemen, but nothing in Syria. You specifically made the claim of Bavar, and now you're looking for a way out. Think you can get away with it without showing evidence? Now that's delusional. Just like Israel living in peace lol never gonna happen.

Lol then why doesnt Israel do it? Instead it spends billions trying and failing to take out Iran backed Hamas and their rockets, is powerless against Hezbollah and knows it can't send a single jet to Iran. All you have are your Kurd buddies who are getting turned to dogfood, just like your tik tok rioters who will be swinging on the end of nooses very soon. There are countless Mossad agents and Israelis in jail for spying on Iran. We have presence in occupied Palestine long before you had presence in Iran. Hypersonic nukes coming your way very soon, learn to swim you European invader.


----------



## Messerschmitt

Beny Karachun said:


> Cope


I would argue that coming to Iranian threads over and over again not to share anything of value but rather to pollute them with your „Iran weak, Israel stronk“ narrative is pretty „cope“.


Beny Karachun said:


> Yeah no evidence, I wonder what's being blown up lol. It's almost as if Iran is trying to make it hard to detect their weapon smuggling into Iran! OSINT and American media don't have Mossad agents in Iran. There's plenty of footage of targets being blown up with massive secondary explosions.


Maybe something that might be related to Iran’s activities in Syria? Like missile production and smuggling?

Apart from the fact that at the time when those rumors about Bavar-373 systems in Syria first appeared Iran very unlikely reached a production level that justified sending some of those systems to Syria, Bavar-373 isn’t the most appropriate choice to protect Iran’s activities in Syria, which are mostly concentrated around Damascus area. Since Israel has the advantage of close proximity (short time frame for the defender to react) and geography (releasing weapons over Lebanon, being shielded by mountains) and Syria doesn’t particuarly have a strong IADS with reliable situational awareness, simply „slapping“ an isolated Bavar-373 somewhere won’t be a solution. If Israeli strikes on Iran-affiliated targets in Syria were deemed to be such a huge problem for Iranian decision makers that it would necessitate deploying ADSs to that country, then systems like 3rd Khordad and Sa’eer would be much more plausible solutions to deal with incoming CMs and GBs, especially since they are actually in use with the IRGC… I highly doubt Iran has deployed anything more than point-defense-systems to Syria though.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue In Green

Messerschmitt said:


> I would argue that coming to Iranian threads over and over again not to share anything of value but rather to pollute them with your „Iran weak, Israel stronk“ narrative is pretty „cope“.
> 
> Maybe something that might be related to Iran’s activities in Syria? Like missile production and smuggling?
> 
> Apart from the fact that at the time when those rumors about Bavar-373 systems in Syria first appeared Iran very unlikely reached a production level that justified sending some of those systems to Syria, Bavar-373 isn’t the most appropriate choice to protect Iran’s activities in Syria, which are mostly concentrated around Damascus area. Since Israel has the advantage of close proximity (short time frame for the defender to react) and geography (releasing weapons over Lebanon, being shielded by mountains) and Syria doesn’t particuarly have a strong IADS with reliable situational awareness, simply „slapping“ an isolated Bavar-373 somewhere won’t be a solution. If Israeli strikes on Iran-affiliated targets in Syria were deemed to be such a huge problem for Iranian decision makers that it would necessitate deploying ADSs to that country, then systems like 3rd Khordad and Sa’eer would be much more plausible solutions to deal with incoming CMs and GBs, especially since they are actually in use with the IRGC… I highly doubt Iran has deployed anything more than point-defense-systems to Syria though.



My friend… (as you know) he has a storied history of coming here spouting total nonsense for the hell of it knowing full well what our responses will be. 

Everything you said is objectively true yet he wants to continuously believe in unsubstantiated fantasies because that’s just what he does. 

Idk HOW the mods haven’t permanently banned him from this section of PDF, yet here we are nonetheless.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Seeing as the only similarity is chassis, and engine, radar and optics are all different, it suggests that it is "tonnes" of differences, not a mere renaming as a shill like you is trying ram down our throats.


let see f-14a vs F-14D
F15-A vs F-15E
F-16 block 10/15 vs F-16 block 72

are you consider the later variant more F-14, F-15 or F18

that is the case of various type of Su-35



Daylamite Warrior said:


> The so called PMU-3 was never released as PMU-3, it was called S-400 from day one of release and naturally the naming suggests that it is a progression from the S-300. 200, 300, 400, 500, etc, do you see the pattern? That's not a big deal! The latest S-300 that was released was pmu-2 which is inferior to S400. PMU-3 might as well not exist as it was always called S-400.


still remain the fact it was called S300-PMU3 untill they decided they want to export it


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Your video means nothing to me and does not refute my comment you quoted, so I'll just put that down to your usual diversion tactic.


in short facts don't concern you only, advertisement.


Beny Karachun said:


> we also had the Bavar 373 destroyed in the past.


that is something you must prove ,the system is not yet deployed wonder how you have destroyed it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1592425897587802113





^ Bavar-373 acquisition (left) and engagement radar (right)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Iranian troops in Syria are supposed to be protected by something right? That something was the Bavar 373 and it was destroyed, among the countless of other systems we destroyed in Syria and Iraq. we didn't need any F-35 for it as well.


no Iranian air defense in Syria , all there is there belong to Russia and Syria .
your post point the fact that you assumed , well it seems you assumed wrong.
Bavar is not deployed anywhere yet and till 1-2 week ago were in development.


Beny Karachun said:


> Lol it's in service since 2019


no it was in development in 2019 a partially active Bavar-373 unveiled and tested


shadihassan28 said:


> Not lying or true at all but there was reports of IAF destroying anti aircraft systems in Syria that Iran brought in to strengthen Syrian defenses but nothing was reported to what or if any systems were destroyed,, the reports just state iaf attacked game changing anti aircraft systems, he just embellishing on the story without any facts.


the photo they showed was a Syrian BUK not even a 3rd of khordad.


Beny Karachun said:


> Also, the reports stated those were Bavar 373s.


go read them again
the reports showed a destroyed BUK like TELAR


Beny Karachun said:


> Another evidence that disputes your BS argument would be the smuggling of long range Iranian air defenses like the Sayyad 2C to the Houthis in Yemen.


as it is said sayyad-2c is middlle range and is used in 3rd of khordad , 15th of khordad , Tactical sayyad and probably buk and Shahid Soleymani ship. while Bavar-373 can use Sayyad-2c as far as I'm aware we use Sayyad-3 and Sayyad-4 varriants in it and can you elaborate when we send sayyad-2c to Yemen


Beny Karachun said:


> You're suggesting Iran has 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria but no air defenses😂


show us 20000 irgc personnel in Syria ? we have some advisor there and some volunteer from , Pakistan , Afghanistan , Syria and ...


Blue In Green said:


> _Third of Khordad _would be a system that could have been sent thus far as it’s an IRGC project and more recent version of it have 100+km engagement capabilities and there would be units to spare since IRGC has a MASSIVE budget compared to Artesh.


the time he talk about the system had 90-105km of range and it was not even equipped with its E/O system right now it's a 200km range system.
but as i said when they made the claim they show a syrian buk


Beny Karachun said:


> 2007 Syrian nuclear reactor was blown up, video was released only years after, was it all just a lot of talk and no show up until then?
> 
> We might release a video, we might not, that's just how we work.


its years since the incident of that claim about iran airdefence


Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1592425897587802113
> View attachment 896653
> 
> ^ Bavar-373 acquisition (left) and engagement radar (right)


bavar also use a VHF radar which is not part of the system but part of the iran Radar network system

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WudangMaster

Why are you allowing some well known degenerate jabroni roach troll this thread with its nonsensical filth? 
Use the Ignore feature folks...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> let see f-14a vs F-14D
> F15-A vs F-15E
> F-16 block 10/15 vs F-16 block 72
> 
> are you consider the later variant more F-14, F-15 or F18
> 
> that is the case of various type of Su-35
> 
> 
> still remain the fact it was called S300-PMU3 untill they decided they want to export it
> 
> in short facts don't concern you only, advertisement.



Youre incapable of forming rational or coherent arguments or thought processess. Basically a full blown retard. We all know you're obsessed about US weapons, but try not to divert like a coward and stick to Russian Aircraft. In case you didnt know, F-14, F15, F16 and F18 are all made by DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS! which means they have different names, designs. Grumman could have chosen to name their new model F-14s something else, but other manufacturers had already taken other numbers. However Sukhoi doesnt have these same pressures hence why an engine, optics and radar change warranted a different number because these are significant changes. So you're a fat liar and no different to that organ snatching bastard who comes here, you are both cut from the same decietful cloth. 

There was no PMU3, it was always called S400 when rolled out for internal use not just export. Maybe in design phase they called it pmu3 but they changed it to S400 before internal use. So really you can only compare s400 to pmu2 which are different. 

I like accuracy and facts, it's you who likes to decieve people with lies like the shilltwat you really are. But I wont ever let you do that!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

Beny Karachun said:


> We faced stronger enemies than Iran right at our border, your ballistic missiles, even with 100 percent accuracy, are not enough to destroy Israel.
> 
> In reality the accuracy is going to be 0 because they all will be either blown up on the ground or shot down by laser systems for 5 dollars each. Who relies on US support lol? We can solo the entire middle east if we want.


Like Sun Tzu said

- A single warrior can win a war with just his courage and brain as a weapon

For example Israelis have bigger brains and also bigger muscles

Israeli bodybuilder 









Azerbaijani bodybuilder: 




Pakistani Bodybuilder: 





Iranian Bodybuilder:

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

tsunset said:


> Like Sun Tzu said
> 
> - A single warrior can win a war with just his courage and brain as a weapon
> 
> For example Israelis have bigger brains and also bigger muscles
> 
> Israeli bodybuilder
> View attachment 896807
> 
> View attachment 896808
> 
> 
> Azerbaijani bodybuilder:
> View attachment 896809
> 
> Pakistani Bodybuilder:
> View attachment 896810
> 
> 
> Iranian Bodybuilder:
> View attachment 896811



Yeah all those guys are on roids, probably have small penises, will have heart attacks in their late 40s and cry when they watch Bambi because of hormone imbalance.

That Iranian guy is natural, probably has a bigger dick than you and will probably outlive those stedheads. I dont get your point...

You turks dont know how to make analogies.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> let see f-14a vs F-14D
> F15-A vs F-15E
> F-16 block 10/15 vs F-16 block 72
> 
> are you consider the later variant more F-14, F-15 or F18
> 
> that is the case of various type of Su-35
> 
> 
> still remain the fact it was called S300-PMU3 untill they decided they want to export it
> 
> in short facts don't concern you only, advertisement.
> 
> that is something you must prove ,the system is not yet deployed wonder how you have destroyed it.


Honestly fighting over semantics, yes there was a 300pmu3 which they changed the name to s 400, same system just changed the designation because it evolved so much couldn’t be considered a derivative of s 300.


----------



## TheImmortal

Hack-Hook said:


> even if the system being used against ballistic missiles it would be terminal phase



Terminal phase is the worst phase to try to target a modern BM. Do not look at old Scuds that do no have separating warheads and travel with missile body. Those inflate the capability of an ABM.

Best phase to intercept is during the travel phase when the trajectory is predictable and speed is stable. That is why US/NATO have satellite based missile detection systems to track the launch of Iranian/Russian/North Korean missiles during launch and ascension.

This is also why HGVs now exist because it solves the BM’s vulnerability during the travel phase when it’s route is static and easy to predict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> Honestly fighting over semantics, yes there was a 300pmu3 which they changed the name to s 400, same system just changed the designation because it evolved so much couldn’t be considered a derivative of s 300.



False, the "pmu3" was never released as a pmu3, it was s400 from day one. Get your facts straight, Shimon


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Youre incapable of forming rational or coherent arguments or thought processess. Basically a full blown retard. We all know you're obsessed about US weapons, but try not to divert like a coward and stick to Russian Aircraft. In case you didnt know, F-14, F15, F16 and F18 are all made by DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS! which means they have different names, designs. Grumman could have chosen to name their new model F-14s something else, but other manufacturers had already taken other numbers. However Sukhoi doesnt have these same pressures hence why an engine, optics and radar change warranted a different number because these are significant changes. So you're a fat liar and no different to that organ snatching bastard who comes here, you are both cut from the same decietful cloth.
> 
> There was no PMU3, it was always called S400 when rolled out for internal use not just export. Maybe in design phase they called it pmu3 but they changed it to S400 before internal use. So really you can only compare s400 to pmu2 which are different.
> 
> I like accuracy and facts, it's you who likes to decieve people with lies like the shilltwat you really are. But I wont ever let you do that!


who care they are build in different manufacturer , all f-16 are build in one manufacturer , they have different design and internal but all considred F16 . the same is the case for F-14 and F15 . you consider all the same but when it come to flanker specially the case of Du-27 and Su-30 and Su-35 you consider them different why.

and what it had to do with west and east . its well known here the only western aircraft I like is Grippen . and I like J10-c as much but I always made it clear that we must learn from the ideology behind those fighters and develop kowsar according to that ideology .
wonder how you come to the conclusion I'm fan of western aircraft. every single post I made I said we must build our aircraft. and when you guys killed yourself on the idea that we must buy s-400 I said no we must work o our Bavar and guess whose Idea on which direction Iran military must go is closer to reality, let see whose idea about future of Iran air force is closer to the reality . you guys think we are working on heavy turbofan engine so we can go and buy outdated Su-35



TheImmortal said:


> Terminal phase is the worst phase to try to target a modern BM. Do not look at old Scuds that do no have separating warheads and travel with missile body. Those inflate the capability of an ABM.
> 
> Best phase to intercept is during the travel phase when the trajectory is predictable and speed is stable. That is why US/NATO have satellite based missile detection systems to track the launch of Iranian/Russian/North Korean missiles during launch and ascension.
> 
> This is also why HGVs now exist because it solves the BM’s vulnerability during the travel phase when it’s route is static and easy to predict.


i said bavar , bavar radar and missiles are not suited for exoatmospheric interception . for that we need new launcher and new radars

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> who care they are build in different manufacturer , all f-16 are build in one manufacturer , they have different design and internal but all considred F16 . the same is the case for F-14 and F15 . you consider all the same but when it come to flanker specially the case of Du-27 and Su-30 and Su-35 you consider them different why.
> 
> and what it had to do with west and east . its well known here the only western aircraft I like is Grippen . and I like J10-c as much but I always made it clear that we must learn from the ideology behind those fighters and develop kowsar according to that ideology .
> wonder how you come to the conclusion I'm fan of western aircraft. every single post I made I said we must build our aircraft. and when you guys killed yourself on the idea that we must buy s-400 I said no we must work o our Bavar and guess whose Idea on which direction Iran military must go is closer to reality, let see whose idea about future of Iran air force is closer to the reality . you guys think we are working on heavy turbofan engine so we can go and buy outdated Su-35



Who cares? Someone with a brain. It matters because Grumman couldn't just rename every variant a different number because other competitors were developing other jets. Pretty simple stuff. When the hell did I say they are all the same? I'm just saying you're the one who is fooled by their different chassis designs. Having the same chassis, but different everything else it too much of a difference to have the same name. Sukhoi therefore decided to rename it because the differences were so stark. You are pulling the wool over people's eyes that s-35 is the exact same as Su-27 but with different name which is bullshit!

No you love western tech to the point that you want Iran to capitulate so it gets taken over by them. In your dreams! So you are a western shill and want Kowsar to be taken over by western technology. What a hypocrite you are! How dare you complain when I say Iran should buy Russian, when in reality you are doing the same with western tech. And when we say you're a shill for the west, you get all defensive lol! How pathetic you are!

Lol Iran's indegenous aircraft industry is lightyears away from being on level with Russia so yes Iran should have a hybrid strategy of both Russian and internally produced jets. SU-35 is lightyears ahead of modded F-5s, you halfwit.


----------



## Hack-Hook

shadihassan28 said:


> Honestly fighting over semantics, yes there was a 300pmu3 which they changed the name to s 400, same system just changed the designation because it evolved so much couldn’t be considered a derivative of s 300.


sometimes the name change is just for marketing .
S300-PMU2 and S-400 both use many compatible component,, they are so close that you can call S-400 and upgrade over S300-PMU2
in reality S-500 must be called S-400 as it use different component but Current S400 must be called S300-PMU3 as many component are the same and the rest just upgrade over S300-PMU2 component

just the case of T-72, T-90 and Armata . in reality T-90 is an upgrade over T-72 . they must at best called it T-74 or T-72bu as originally planned and call Armata, T90 but the reality is they need new tank to be able to sell it to India and save their tank industry and that's how t-90 was build (after Iraq war nobody was touching t-72 with even a 3m long pole)



Daylamite Warrior said:


> How dare you complain when I say Iran should buy Russian, when in reality you are doing the same with western tech. And when we say you're a shill for the west, you get all defensive lol! How pathetic you are!


show a single post I said Iran must buy western weapon , on other hand i can easily show hundreds of post that you said Iran must buy Russians weapon , even when it pointed out to you that Iranian system that being produced or is in development is in fact on par or better than the Russians one which is offered .
that clearly show who is a shill and who has inferiority complex against western and eastern masters



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Lol Iran's indegenous aircraft industry is lightyears away from being on level with Russia so yes Iran should have a hybrid strategy of both Russian and internally produced jets. SU-35 is lightyears ahead of modded F-5s, you halfwit.


you said the same against Iranian air defense system and said iran must buy s-400

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> just the case of T-72, T-90 and Armata . in reality T-90 is an upgrade over T-72 . they must at best called it T-74 or T-72bu as originally planned and call Armata, T90 but the reality is they need new tank to be able to sell it to India and save their tank industry and that's how t-90 was build (after Iraq war nobody was touching t-72 with even a 3m long pole)
> 
> 
> show a single post I said Iran must buy western weapon , on other hand i can easily show hundreds of post that you said Iran must buy Russians weapon , even when it pointed out to you that Iranian system that being produced or is in development is in fact on par or better than the Russians one which is offered .
> that clearly show who is a shill and who has inferiority complex against western and eastern masters
> 
> 
> you said the same against Iranian air defense system and said iran must buy s-400



S400 is not pmu2! Stop lying! It's not just component changes. The information is readily available so I dont know why you have to lie, you just make an arse our of yourself. You literally said Iran should model itself on western jets, which is impossible, and you always bring up western jets as some imaginary alternative. We've been through this, and so have other users. The only cretin that has said Kowsar is on par with Su-35 is YOU! And your evidence is well US jets will shoot them down, without any evidence, and when we ask you how a modded F5 would fair, you change the subject and use your usual pathetic infantile diversion tactics. Yes Iran should buy Russian jets because that is what's available and our indegenous jets are nowhere to be seen and not on par. Denying this makes you an Iran hater and no different to a zionist! The shill here is you! 

Show me a post where Iran should buy S400? But if Iran brought it, it wouldn't be a bad thing because it will make Iran stronger. But you obviously hate the thought, doshman!


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> sometimes the name change is just for marketing .
> S300-PMU2 and S-400 both use many compatible component,, they are so close that you can call S-400 and upgrade over S300-PMU2
> in reality S-500 must be called S-400 as it use different component but Current S400 must be called S300-PMU3 as many component are the same and the rest just upgrade over S300-PMU2 component
> 
> just the case of T-72, T-90 and Armata . in reality T-90 is an upgrade over T-72 . they must at best called it T-74 or T-72bu as originally planned and call Armata, T90 but the reality is they need new tank to be able to sell it to India and save their tank industry and that's how t-90 was build (after Iraq war nobody was touching t-72 with even a 3m long pole)
> 
> 
> show a single post I said Iran must buy western weapon , on other hand i can easily show hundreds of post that you said Iran must buy Russians weapon , even when it pointed out to you that Iranian system that being produced or is in development is in fact on par or better than the Russians one which is offered .
> that clearly show who is a shill and who has inferiority complex against western and eastern masters
> 
> 
> you said the same against Iranian air defense system and said iran must buy s-400


I do want to go down this road again but I heard you were a Zionist lover planted here to cause trouble over a name of a Russian system, you darn shill sorry it’s been awhile since I’ve teased He Who Shall Not Be Named, honestly he is funny with his old time slander, you got to keep it up to date i will let him go on a rant from this, honestly only fair daylomite I don’t ever respond to you keep up with the emojis I honestly don’t mind.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> I do want to go down this road again but I heard you were a Zionist lover planted here to cause trouble over a name of a Russian system, you darn shill sorry it’s been awhile since I’ve teased He Who Shall Not Be Named, honestly he is funny with his old time slander, you got to keep it up to date i will let him go on a rant from this, honestly only fair daylomite I don’t ever respond to you keep up with the emojis I honestly don’t mind.



Shimonhassidic666, the zionist plant here is you. You literally add nothing to this thread or forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You literally said Iran should model itself on western jets,


if you go back and read the post you see I said the philosophy behind that jet .
but that is something i expect from you , you have a very long history of having problem understand what is said 


Daylamite Warrior said:


> The only cretin that has said Kowsar is on par with Su-35 is YOU!


if you go and read those comments you see I said the next generation of kowsar , i never said current generation , in fact if you go back, you see when I asked directly I said no its not on par and then I explained why its not , but as you tends not to understand exactly what is being said , you probably taught there I said kowsar is on par with Su-35


Daylamite Warrior said:


> And your evidence is well US jets will shoot them down, without any evidence,


i clearly explained why they will be shootdown by rafale and F16 block 72 and F15-SA


Daylamite Warrior said:


> es Iran should buy Russian jets because that is what's available and our indegenous jets are nowhere to be seen and not on par. Denying this makes you an Iran hater and no different to a zionist! The shill here is you!


well sadly for you , we wont buy what we are working on and we are working on our indigenous jet and kowsar is here to stay as Bavar-373 was here to stay and each day it becoming better
better get used to it future Iran air-force will be based on an indigenous design not an outdated Russians airplane that nobody wants



Daylamite Warrior said:


> Show me a post where Iran should buy S400? But if Iran brought it, it wouldn't be a bad thing because it will make Iran stronger. But you obviously hate the thought, doshman!


no it make iran weaker and make us reliant on another country .
doshman is the one who can't see our advances and try to make us weak by undermining domestic product .
s400 radars are inferior to Bavar-373

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Shimonhassidic666, the zionist plant here is you. You literally add nothing to this thread or forum.


Mordecaihassan666 I told you before I find that name funnier. Okay I’m done honestly can’t stop messing with the Ancient One you are funny at least and over the top.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> if you go back and read the post you see I said the philosophy behind that jet .
> but that is something i expect from you , you have a very long history of having problem understand what is said
> 
> if you go and read those comments you see I said the next generation of kowsar , i never said current generation , in fact if you go back, you see when I asked directly I said no its not on par and then I explained why its not , but as you tends not to understand exactly what is being said , you probably taught there I said kowsar is on par with Su-35
> 
> i clearly explained why they will be shootdown by rafale and F16 block 72 and F15-SA
> 
> well sadly for you , we wont buy what we are working on and we are working on our indigenous jet and kowsar is here to stay as Bavar-373 was here to stay and each day it becoming better
> better get used to it future Iran air-force will be based on an indigenous design not an outdated Russians airplane that nobody wants
> 
> 
> no it make iran weaker and make us reliant on another country .
> doshman is the one who can't see our advances and try to make us weak by undermining domestic product .
> s400 radars are inferior to Bavar-373



You're just playing with semantics. How would Iran get the philosophy when it doesnt have access to the technoloy and never will unless it became dependent on western tech? Your word play is very see-through because you want Iran to be dependent on the west, and if it can't it should stick it out with modded F5s which would be total failure. You have a habit of playing with words and trying to deceive.

This is what you said:



Hack-Hook said:


> Iran must buy Russians weapon , even when it pointed out to you that Iranian system that being produced or is in development is in fact on par or better than the Russians one which is offered



So you seem to think that Kowsar, and the non-existent Kowsar II, newly revealed and untested Bavar are better than Su-35, S400 and S500! You are a laughing stock and now you're trying to deny it. Next time be clear in what you're saying. I may have to put it down to your firing from the hip style mixed with your crappy English skills.

And I, and many others here, have questioned you how a bunch of modded F-5s would do any better and you NEVER answer. So far there is no evidence of direct conflict between western jets and Russian jets so all your doubts come from thin air and hatred for Russia. But it is certain that Kowsar 5 would suck against Western jets a lot worse. 

Indegenous is good, but I will always welcome foreign weapons from friendly nations. But make no mistake, Su-35 will improve our airforce more than kowsar.

No it would make us wiser and stronger, since even your beloved western nations have hybrid strategy of indegenous and US weapons. But you will never say they are weak for doing it, mozdoor e doshman.



shadihassan28 said:


> Mordecaihassan666 I told you before I find that name funnier. Okay I’m done honestly can’t stop messing with the Ancient One you are funny at least and over the top.



Either way, you're a zionist mole using a fake Palestinian person. Shimon is what I prefer to call you today, cope with it. Try to add something worthwhile to this thread. I can see your colleague Bjorn Karakooni is observing you every time your troll these threads.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You're just playing with semantics. How would Iran get the philosophy when it doesnt have access to the technoloy and never will unless it became dependent on western tech? Your word play is very see-through because you want Iran to be dependent on the west, and if it can't it should stick it out with modded F5s which would be total failure. You have a habit of playing with words and trying to deceive.
> 
> This is what you said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you seem to think that Kowsar, and the non-existent Kowsar II, newly revealed and untested Bavar are better than Su-35, S400 and S500! You are a laughing stock and now you're trying to deny it. Next time be clear in what you're saying. I may have to put it down to your firing from the hip style mixed with your crappy English skills.
> 
> And I, and many others here, have questioned you how a bunch of modded F-5s would do any better and you NEVER answer. So far there is no evidence of direct conflict between western jets and Russian jets so all your doubts come from thin air and hatred for Russia. But it is certain that Kowsar 5 would suck against Western jets a lot worse.
> 
> Indegenous is good, but I will always welcome foreign weapons from friendly nations. But make no mistake, Su-35 will improve our airforce more than kowsar.
> 
> No it would make us wiser and stronger, since even your beloved western nations have hybrid strategy of indegenous and US weapons. But you will never say they are weak for doing it, mozdoor e doshman.
> 
> 
> 
> Either way, you're a zionist mole using a fake Palestinian person. Shimon is what I prefer to call you today, cope with it. Try to add something worthwhile to this thread. I can see your colleague Bjorn Karakoon is observing you every time your troll these threads.


Lol beny lmaooooo yeah I don’t think he’s my colleague I actually make fun of him more than you, honestly idk what your nationality is but I make fun of him and his bigotry and racists remarks honestly your two sides of the same coin. Nighhhhhhhtttt

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> Lol beny lmaooooo yeah I don’t think he’s my colleague I actually make fun of him more than you, honestly idk what your nationality is but I make fun of him and his bigotry and racists remarks honestly your two sides of the same coin. Nighhhhhhhtttt



No you dont! You literally come in when he's muck spreading and you defend what he's saying and play devil's advocate. It's pretty obvious where I'm from, especially when I speak Farsi, but comparing me to him just shows you lack brain cells. Typical reddit troll!


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> You're just playing with semantics. How would Iran get the philosophy when it doesnt have access to the technoloy and never will unless it became dependent on western tech? Your word play is very see-through because you want Iran to be dependent on the west, and if it can't it should stick it out with modded F5s which would be total failure. You have a habit of playing with words and trying to deceive.


when you learned that then come here and talkn . how i knew the philosophy behind that airplane , do you suggest i have access to it?


Daylamite Warrior said:


> This is what you said:
> 
> 
> So you seem to think that Kowsar, and the non-existent Kowsar II, newly revealed and untested Bavar are better than Su-35, S400 and S500! You are a laughing stock and now you're trying to deny it. Next time be clear in what you're saying. I may have to put it down to your firing from the hip style mixed with your crappy English skills.


very dishonest of you to cut beginning of my sentence and change the meaning completely
this is what I said be brave and quote it completely


Hack-Hook said:


> show a single post I said Iran must buy western weapon , on other hand *i can easily show hundreds of post that you said Iran must buy Russians weapon , even when it pointed out to you that Iranian system that being produced or is in development is in fact on par or better than the Russians one which is offered .*
> that clearly show who is a shill and who has inferiority complex against western and eastern masters





Daylamite Warrior said:


> So you seem to think that Kowsar, and the non-existent Kowsar II, newly revealed and untested Bavar are better than Su-35, S400 and S500! You are a laughing stock and now you're trying to deny it. Next time be clear in what you're saying. I may have to put it down to your firing from the hip style mixed with your crappy English skills.


iran military made their decision , Tactical Sayyad and 3rd of khordad will be Iran middle Range SAM and Bavar-373 will be long range (well those middle range sams actually have more range than many countries even NATO countries long range SAMS
there is no more discussion there if you can't see why Bavar-373 is better than any S-300 and have better Radar than any S-400


Daylamite Warrior said:


> And I, and many others here, have questioned you how a bunch of modded F-5s would do any better and you NEVER answer. So far there is no evidence of direct conflict between western jets and Russian jets so all your doubts come from thin air and hatred for Russia. But it is certain that Kowsar 5 would suck against Western jets a lot worse.


that is something me and another member clearly answered many time but you guys decided not to hear , you can go read Iran air force threads and see our answers on that


Daylamite Warrior said:


> Indegenous is good, but I will always welcome foreign weapons from friendly nations. But make no mistake, Su-35 will improve our airforce more than kowsar.


wrong , Su-35 give us a platform that wont change in next 40 year , kowsar is ours and improve each year . it will be like J-10 for China or Grippen for Sweden or F-16 for USA


Daylamite Warrior said:


> mozdoor e doshman.


its clear who is that , salesman for *Rosoboronexport *

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

Hack-Hook said:


> when you learned that then come here and talkn . how i knew the philosophy behind that airplane , do you suggest i have access to it?
> 
> very dishonest of you to cut beginning of my sentence and change the meaning completely
> this is what I said be brave and quote it completely
> 
> 
> iran military made their decision , Tactical Sayyad and 3rd of khordad will be Iran middle Range SAM and Bavar-373 will be long range (well those middle range sams actually have more range than many countries even NATO countries long range SAMS
> there is no more discussion there if you can't see why Bavar-373 is better than any S-300 and have better Radar than any S-400
> 
> that is something me and another member clearly answered many time but you guys decided not to hear , you can go read Iran air force threads and see our answers on that
> 
> wrong , Su-35 give us a platform that wont change in next 40 year , kowsar is ours and improve each year . it will be like J-10 for China or Grippen for Sweden or F-16 for USA
> 
> its clear who is that , salesman for *Rosoboronexport *



Ahmagh, when you cant comprehend basic English how can anyone have an intelligent discussion with you? You dont know shit, what you said was Iran should have western philosophy which is IMPOSSIBLE without cooperation with western firms, OR Iran reverse engineers some western tech which is again very unlikely, despite rumours that Russia has given Iran captured western weapons. 

The quotes are clearly there and youre saying everything that Iran has or is being developed is better or on par with Russian tech, which is bollocks! Kowsaw I or II are not better or on par with Su-35! You're the only cretin that says this because YOU are the salesman of CIA!

There is no evidence that Bavar, which hasnt seen the light of day, is better than S400! Simply saying it has AESA doesnt mean shit, because you're assuming Russian AESA technology is inferior to Iranian which again you pulled out of your own kheshtak! Why should we assumed Iranian AESA is better?

There is no "our", these delusions have all come from YOU! own it!

LOL Kowsar is not ours! It is a bloody AMERICAN F-5 which has been pimped up! The SU-35 or even Mig-29 platform is lightyears better! In 40 years time F-5 platform will be 100 years old, ahmagh!

It's obvious you're the salesman of the white westerner, except you dont have a braincell to save your life.


----------



## shadihassan28

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ahmagh, when you cant comprehend basic English how can anyone have an intelligent discussion with you? You dont know shit, what you said was Iran should have western philosophy which is IMPOSSIBLE without cooperation with western firms, OR Iran reverse engineers some western tech which is again very unlikely, despite rumours that Russia has given Iran captured western weapons.
> 
> The quotes are clearly there and youre saying everything that Iran has or is being developed is better or on par with Russian tech, which is bollocks! Kowsaw I or II are not better or on par with Su-35! You're the only cretin that says this because YOU are the salesman of CIA!
> 
> There is no evidence that Bavar, which hasnt seen the light of day, is better than S400! Simply saying it has AESA doesnt mean shit, because you're assuming Russian AESA technology is inferior to Iranian which again you pulled out of your own kheshtak! Why should we assumed Iranian AESA is better?
> 
> There is no "our", these delusions have all come from YOU! own it!
> 
> LOL Kowsar is not ours! It is a bloody AMERICAN F-5 which has been pimped up! The SU-35 or even Mig-29 platform is lightyears better! In 40 years time F-5 platform will be 100 years old, ahmagh!
> 
> It's obvious you're the salesman of the white westerner, except you dont have a braincell to save your life.


I think for someone whose not from an English speaking country is pretty good, honestly English was not my best subject hence my commas and periods don’t end properly, but he’s pretty good even if my grammar sucks I can still speak 4 languages English, Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese. His English language skills are definitely intermediate skill level, I mean it doesn’t seem like your Farsi is good as his.ok I just wanted to stick up for hack on that part now Goodnite

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Daylamite Warrior

shadihassan28 said:


> I think for someone whose not from an English speaking country is pretty good, honestly English was not my best subject hence my commas and periods don’t end properly, but he’s pretty good even if my grammar sucks I can still speak 4 languages English, Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese. His English language skills are definitely intermediate skill level, I mean it doesn’t seem like your Farsi is good as his.ok I just wanted to stick up for hack on that part now Goodnite



I can assure you as someone who speaks English better than the pair of you, his English is garbage and like I'm talking to a chewing gum seller in downtown Tehran. Yes his Farsi is better because he was educated and lives there. Who gives a toss how many languages you speak? You did forget Yiddish, though. The bottom line is that this is an English speaking forum and neither of you are any good at writing. Stop saying goodnight as though I won't reply. If you want to stop then simply don't reply lol This isn't a conversation that has anything to do with you, but here you are butting your big nose into it...yes the two western arse lickers are sticking up for each other. How gay!

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ahmagh, when you cant comprehend basic English how can anyone have an intelligent discussion with you? You dont know shit, what you said was Iran should have western philosophy which is IMPOSSIBLE without cooperation with western firms, OR Iran reverse engineers some western tech which is again very unlikely, despite rumours that Russia has given Iran captured western weapons.
> 
> The quotes are clearly there and youre saying everything that Iran has or is being developed is better or on par with Russian tech, which is bollocks! Kowsaw I or II are not better or on par with Su-35! You're the only cretin that says this because YOU are the salesman of CIA!
> 
> There is no evidence that Bavar, which hasnt seen the light of day, is better than S400! Simply saying it has AESA doesnt mean shit, because you're assuming Russian AESA technology is inferior to Iranian which again you pulled out of your own kheshtak! Why should we assumed Iranian AESA is better?
> 
> There is no "our", these delusions have all come from YOU! own it!
> 
> LOL Kowsar is not ours! It is a bloody AMERICAN F-5 which has been pimped up! The SU-35 or even Mig-29 platform is lightyears better! In 40 years time F-5 platform will be 100 years old, ahmagh!
> 
> It's obvious you're the salesman of the white westerner, except you dont have a braincell to save your life.


Politely inform you what insult you put in your post actually describe you .
if you were man enough you would have post your insults in English , not finglish
no you are afraid , couldn't expect anything else from *Rosoboronexport *sale rep

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> Politely inform you what insult you put in your post actually describe you .
> if you were man enough you would have post your insults in English , not finglish
> no you are afraid , couldn't expect anything else from *Rosoboronexport *sale rep


Still trying to figure why he deleted a post confirming he’s not an Iranian national but a poser, at least I admit where I’m from


----------



## Hack-Hook

shadihassan28 said:


> Still trying to figure why he deleted a post confirming he’s not an Iranian national but a poser, at least I admit where I’m from


didn't see what he said this time , previously he was saying , he is from Iranian ancestry who born and raised under the flag of the Queen , emm sorry King and never been to Iran


----------



## shadihassan28

Hack-Hook said:


> didn't see what he said this time , previously he was saying , he is from Iranian ancestry who born and raised under the flag of the Queen , emm sorry King and never been to Iran


No he was insulting your English but I’ve noticed he doesn’t understand Farsi and needs translating, you being from Iran honestly gives you more right than some poser and me as well but at least I acknowledge where I’m from instead of hiding it, so honestly if he like’s using the word shill aptly describes who he is by the definition he uses. Also for a true hardcore Iranian ancestry you would think he would know how to read write and speak Farsi ,at least I can do arabic in all 3 I was born in Ohio lmaooo,I’m sorry I really don’t want to derail this thread but someone who pretends to instill Iranian values should at least know the language.


----------



## jauk

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Ahmagh <CLIP>


Please stop being inappropriate. You can make jabs but outright disrespect is not cool. This goes for others as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

> yes su-25, no but I'm not Rosoboronexport sale representative





> i swear i'm not a Rosoboronexport representant or shareholder





> Are you an HESA shareholder or what





> our domestic aircraft production program show you are a tool and sale person for Rosoboronexport



How many Rosobonexport representatives and HESA shareholders are on this forum? 😂


----------



## shadihassan28

jauk said:


> Please stop being inappropriate. You can make jabs but outright disrespect is not cool. This goes for others as well.


Well he got banned for awhile so at least it will be quiet for the time being if he comes back maybe he will behave longer than a week.


----------



## Joe_Adam

Daylamite Warrior said:


> Yeah all those guys are on roids, probably have small penises, will have heart attacks in their late 40s and cry when they watch Bambi because of hormone imbalance.
> 
> That Iranian guy is natural, probably has a bigger dick than you and will probably outlive those stedheads. I dont get your point...
> 
> You turks dont know how to make analogies.


Turk = Ishak = خر / حمير / وحشى = thick skull = genetically feeble = not known for sports or fitness = highly insecure = all enjoy inferiority complex as a national trait, and most important of all they enjoy an IQ count of 1.09, which for them; it makes life is a bliss.


----------



## Joe_Adam

Beny Karachun said:


> Lol, Trophy APS, radars, all electronic systems, software, Battle Management Systems, ammunition, armor, ERA, tracks, suspension, fire control systems, encrypted communication devices all made in Israel. IMI MG253 is a licensed version of the German L44 just like the M256 the Americans use on the Abrams lol. Cope.



I worked in this field for many years, so if I am not intimately familiar I wouldn't utter a word. Merkava and Abrams both are German concepts and German systems with few secondary subsystems added to them to spice up the final product and make it look "non-German". Any major system/weapons platform is identified by its main armements as clearly show who made the platform, it's a German made despite the rosy looking lipsticks.

Additionally, the Trophy APS is based on the old USSR _Drozd_ made in 1970s, which later redesigned in 1993 and fielded in 1997 as an a new Active Protection System with millimeter-wave radar antennae, multi-function Doppler radar, and a digital computer scans an arc around the tank for threats, then the system became "Arena APS", which was then the only practical system in the world. Unfortunately, The Russian Jewish spies stole the system design details from "Kolomna-based Engineering Design Bureau (KBM)" during the presidency of drunken Boris Yeltsin in 1998 when the Russian Federation going thru a free fall. Still, it took Israel 10 additional years to learn, test, and replicate the system which has been in production in Russia since 1997. The rest of your list is irrelevant since none in that list of Israeli origin "I could prove each single one through detailed documentation". 

All components, every sub-system, every devise, and every thing used or marketed by the Israelis as Israeli-made are 100% American, West European, or Russian made.

Among 6 million number of your people almost half are illiterate as they live outside the Israeli system and totally detached, and then 75% of your atheists population are Polish and east European hobos who are not known for innovations nor known for great minds "ask any US expert or any American Joe Doe to get the same answer".

The irreligious Zionists are mostly Mafia "called Russian Mafia for cover up" they are mainly from Russia, Ukraine, and some from the Balkan states & the Baltics too. Not a mixture that could be associated with science or engineering.

Regardless, you can keep listing the following Ashkenazi food recipes:
Bagels, latkes, matzo ball soup, tzimmes, gribenes, and latkes. That list is real, and genuine so you could claim it.
Your claims about anything else designed or made in Israel is 100% fabricated fantasies since Israelis make nothing of real value as they aren't capable to do so, plus handouts from USA keeps pouring in constantly 24/7 365 days a year, thus, the very rare few who could be of any use have no incentive to do jack.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> I worked in this field for many years, so if I am not intimately familiar I wouldn't utter a word. Merkava and Abrams both are German concepts and German systems with few secondary subsystems added to them to spice up the final product and make it look "non-German". Any major system/weapons platform is identified by its main armements as clearly show who made the platform, it's a German made despite the rosy looking lipsticks.
> 
> Additionally, the Trophy APS is based on the old USSR _Drozd_ made in 1970s, which later redesigned in 1993 and fielded in 1997 as an a new Active Protection System with millimeter-wave radar antennae, multi-function Doppler radar, and a digital computer scans an arc around the tank for threats, then the system became "Arena APS", which was then the only practical system in the world. Unfortunately, The Russian Jewish spies stole the system design details from "Kolomna-based Engineering Design Bureau (KBM)" during the presidency of drunken Boris Yeltsin in 1998 when the Russian Federation going thru a free fall. Still, it took Israel 10 additional years to learn, test, and replicate the system which has been in production in Russia since 1997. The rest of your list is irrelevant since none in that list of Israeli origin "I could prove each single one through detailed documentation".
> 
> All components, every sub-system, every devise, and every thing used or marketed by the Israelis as Israeli-made are 100% American, West European, or Russian made.
> 
> Among 6 million number of your people almost half are illiterate as they live outside the Israeli system and totally detached, and then 75% of your atheists population are Polish and east European hobos who are not known for innovations nor known for great minds "ask any US expert or any American Joe Doe to get the same answer".
> 
> The irreligious Zionists are mostly Mafia "called Russian Mafia for cover up" they are mainly from Russia, Ukraine, and some from the Balkan states & the Baltics too. Not a mixture that could be associated with science or engineering.
> 
> Regardless, you can keep listing the following Ashkenazi food recipes:
> Bagels, latkes, matzo ball soup, tzimmes, gribenes, and latkes. That list is real, and genuine so you could claim it.
> Your claims about anything else designed or made in Israel is 100% fabricated fantasies since Israelis make nothing of real value as they aren't capable to do so, plus handouts from USA keeps pouring in constantly 24/7 365 days a year, thus, the very rare few who could be of any use have no incentive to do jack.


You worked in shit, you don't know anything lol

L44 cannon and engine are the only German thing about Merkava and Abrams. The rest are Israeli in the Merkava.

About the Drozd, it was garbage, same about Russian Arena, same about Shtroa, none of them ever worked, evidently Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine.

Trophy on the other hand has over 200 interceptions in combat situation, that's 100 percent success rate, the system also tells you where the enemy is.

Anyways, cope, Jews create superior weapons, you can cry lol

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe_Adam

Beny Karachun said:


> You worked in shit, you don't know anything lol


Trust me; I could teach the entire population of Ashkenazi / Kazara hordes. Since you're derived from Mongols, your brains capable only of cruelty, bloodshed, and Satanic deeds, and the world testifies to that. 


Beny Karachun said:


> L44 cannon and engine are the only German thing about Merkava and Abrams. The rest are Israeli in the Merkava.


General Dynamics / Land Division makes the power pack. You only make the thermal sleeve for the 120 mm gun, period.


Beny Karachun said:


> About the Drozd, it was garbage, same about Russian Arena, same about Shtroa, none of them ever worked, evidently Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine.


Please do not compare punny Israeli dirtbags to anything Russians, the actual garbage is you. It's just hilarious to pretend to be something you're not. The Russian defeated many empires throughout history including your Nazi friends in 1945.


Beny Karachun said:


> Trophy on the other hand has over 200 interceptions in combat situation, that's 100 percent success rate, the system also tells you where the enemy is.
> 
> Anyways, cope, Jews create superior


Delusional. You can't and you won't make anything even close to the Russians.


Beny Karachun said:


> weapons, you can cry lol


Let me quote your crooked nosed dude who wrote the book: 
*We Were Caught Unprepared: * 
*The 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli War 
By: Matt M. Matthews* 

An Israeli military expert talking about Israeli defeat in Lebanon by few hundred Hezbollah fighters in 2006.

Don't be a fool, but you can cry. Just read your own "Israeli expert" (Citation needed) and learn humility:

Quoted from pages 1 through page 2:

"Without question, the Israeli ground campaign revealed an army confused by its new doctrine. Soldiers were 
deficient in training and equipment, and senior officers seemed woefully unprepared to fight a “real war.” By the time the United Nations (UN) cease-fire went into effect on 14 August 2006, many military analysts were convinced the IDF had suffered a significant defeat. 
One source held that Hezbollah’s military and political victory was absolute and irrefutable.

Even more revealing were the comments by Mossad Chief, Meir Degan, and the head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, during a meeting with Prime Minister Olmert in the immediate aftermath of the war. Both men pointedly told Olmert “the war was a national catastrophe and Israel suffered a critical blow.” 

No conflict in recent past provides a more illuminating study for the US Army than the 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli war. After years of conducting successful counterinsurgency operations against the Palestinians, the Israeli military encountered substantial problems in shifting its focus to major combat operations against Hezbollah. As with the IDF prior to the 2006 war, the US Army, at least for the last three years, has focused almost exclusively on irregular warfare.

For the IDF, these operations seriously dulled ground maneuver combat skills, particularly among tank crewmen. The IDF’s steadfast acceptance of a new doctrine inspired by Effects-Based Operations (EBO), Systemic Operational Design (SOD), and standoff firepower-based operations also proved problematic. Implications for the US Army in this arena should prove enlightening." End of quote.

Enough said by your own "Israeli Expert" (Citation needed).

Why your Trophy didn't function? It still doesn't, so could you ask your boss "the old Hasbara" as how to make up an answer when you keep making up lies through your crooked teeth?

Iran trained those boys who kicked the crap out of your best armed military, now imagine messing around with the real deal. 

Are you still planning to take over the whole region "SOLO" by this rag-tag bunch of baby killers?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

Joe_Adam said:


> Trust me; I could teach the entire population of Ashkenazi / Kazara hordes. Since you're derived from Mongols, your brains capable only of cruelty, bloodshed, and Satanic deeds, and the world testifies to that.
> 
> General Dynamics / Land Division makes the power pack. You only make the thermal sleeve for the 120 mm gun, period.
> 
> Please do not compare punny Israeli dirtbags to anything Russians, the actual garbage is you. It's just hilarious to pretend to be something you're not. The Russian defeated many empires throughout history including your Nazi friends in 1945.
> 
> Delusional. You can't and you won't make anything even close to the Russians.
> 
> Let me quote your crooked nosed dude who wrote the book:
> *We Were Caught Unprepared:
> The 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli War
> By: Matt M. Matthews*
> 
> An Israeli military expert talking about Israeli defeat in Lebanon by few hundred Hezbollah fighters in 2006.
> 
> Don't be a fool, but you can cry. Just read your own "Israeli expert" (Citation needed) and learn humility:
> 
> Quoted from pages 1 through page 2:
> 
> "Without question, the Israeli ground campaign revealed an army confused by its new doctrine. Soldiers were
> deficient in training and equipment, and senior officers seemed woefully unprepared to fight a “real war.” By the time the United Nations (UN) cease-fire went into effect on 14 August 2006, many military analysts were convinced the IDF had suffered a significant defeat.
> One source held that Hezbollah’s military and political victory was absolute and irrefutable.
> 
> Even more revealing were the comments by Mossad Chief, Meir Degan, and the head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, during a meeting with Prime Minister Olmert in the immediate aftermath of the war. Both men pointedly told Olmert “the war was a national catastrophe and Israel suffered a critical blow.”
> 
> No conflict in recent past provides a more illuminating study for the US Army than the 2006 Hezbollah-Israeli war. After years of conducting successful counterinsurgency operations against the Palestinians, the Israeli military encountered substantial problems in shifting its focus to major combat operations against Hezbollah. As with the IDF prior to the 2006 war, the US Army, at least for the last three years, has focused almost exclusively on irregular warfare.
> 
> For the IDF, these operations seriously dulled ground maneuver combat skills, particularly among tank crewmen. The IDF’s steadfast acceptance of a new doctrine inspired by Effects-Based Operations (EBO), Systemic Operational Design (SOD), and standoff firepower-based operations also proved problematic. Implications for the US Army in this arena should prove enlightening." End of quote.
> 
> Enough said by your own "Israeli Expert" (Citation needed).
> 
> Why your Trophy didn't function? It still doesn't, so could you ask your boss "the old Hasbara" as how to make up an answer when you keep making up lies through your crooked teeth?
> 
> Iran trained those boys who kicked the crap out of your best armed military, now imagine messing around with the real deal.
> 
> Are you still planning to take over the whole region "SOLO" by this rag-tag bunch of baby killers?


Our brains are the most capable. Just search for the highest IQ ethnic group lol.

In 2006, Israel killed 6 terrorists for every 1 soldier it lost. And it only lost 121 soldiers, this is merely a skirmish, a war only by name. Israel had Olmert as the prime minister, a complete idiot that was the replacement of Sharon, not an elected PM, since Sharon fell into a coma. He gave the military contradicting orders and was afraid of civilian casualties.

Trophy "didn't function" because it didn't exist in 2006 lol.

The thing is, Israel negated every threat Hezbollah posses. ATGMs and RPGs are nullified thanks to the Trophy. Rockets are nullified thanks to the Iron Dome and Iron Beam. New cyber, intelligence, recon capabilities triumph Hezbollah.

Israel shaped reshaped its military successfully, to the point Nasrallah is afraid of leaving his rat hole he lives in below the ground, and Hezbollah and Iran don't dare to attack Israel even after Israel is killing its generals , factories and advanced weapon systems.

How has Hezbollah and Iran reshaped their forces? Same garbage, drones and rockets. Their advanced missiles and drones will be blown up in the first hours of the war and all they will have left are a bunch of short range garbage rockets that will be hunted like ducks with our Iron Beam.

You are just a subhuman, incapable of doing anything significant, too cowardice to even respond to your generals, officers, soldiers, factories, weapon shipments being blown up every week.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## hadi1990

Beny Karachun said:


> Our brains are the most capable. Just search for the highest IQ ethnic group lol.
> 
> In 2006, Israel killed 6 terrorists for every 1 soldier it lost. And it only lost 121 soldiers, this is merely a skirmish, a war only by name. Israel had Olmert as the prime minister, a complete idiot that was the replacement of Sharon, not an elected PM, since Sharon fell into a coma. He gave the military contradicting orders and was afraid of civilian casualties.
> 
> Trophy "didn't function" because it didn't exist in 2006 lol.
> 
> The thing is, Israel negated every threat Hezbollah posses. ATGMs and RPGs are nullified thanks to the Trophy. Rockets are nullified thanks to the Iron Dome and Iron Beam. New cyber, intelligence, recon capabilities triumph Hezbollah.
> 
> Israel shaped reshaped its military successfully, to the point Nasrallah is afraid of leaving his rat hole he lives in below the ground, and Hezbollah and Iran don't dare to attack Israel even after Israel is killing its generals , factories and advanced weapon systems.
> 
> How has Hezbollah and Iran reshaped their forces? Same garbage, drones and rockets. Their advanced missiles and drones will be blown up in the first hours of the war and all they will have left are a bunch of short range garbage rockets that will be hunted like ducks with our Iron Beam.
> 
> You are just a subhuman, incapable of doing anything significant, too cowardice to even respond to your generals, officers, soldiers, factories, weapon shipments being blown up every week.


man... ur calculations remind me of candy girl wishes.... wake up... occupied palestine or where the so called israel nation exists is a grave in the strategic situation in the middle east...
i will make u think few meters further than the candy wish ... two years ago several days of clashes with gaza home made rockets with paramilitary gaza organizations hamas and jihad ...etc..
with israel not sparing a milli gram of force do u remeber what happened, the israeli officers were driving in Nakab and some cities without uniforms... few days and iron dome ammo started depleting, and 60n to 70% of israel went to shelter... can u tell me the economic cost of that war...
what if ur enemies hit ur electricity and water desalination...
Israel only choice is to seek piece by returning some of the rights to the palestinian and neighboring middle east countries
or ur digging ur grave by ur own hands... or had already done that

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

hadi1990 said:


> man... ur calculations remind me of candy girl wishes.... wake up... occupied palestine or where the so called israel nation exists is a grave in the strategic situation in the middle east...
> i will make u think few meters further than the candy wish ... two years ago several days of clashes with gaza home made rockets with paramilitary gaza organizations hamas and jihad ...etc..
> with israel not sparing a milli gram of force do u remeber what happened, the israeli officers were driving in Nakab and some cities without uniforms... few days and iron dome ammo started depleting, and 60n to 70% of israel went to shelter... can u tell me the economic cost of that war...
> what if ur enemies hit ur electricity and water desalination...
> Israel only choice is to seek piece by returning some of the rights to the palestinian and neighboring middle east countries
> or ur digging ur grave by ur own hands... or had already done that


Not sparing force? LOL, Israel has a 1000kg bomb for every floor in every building in Gaza. 

Iron Dome was not even close to being depleted. Look what happened a few months ago, 0 Israeli deaths, all of Islamic Jihad leadership was killed within 11 days.

Economic cost of that is acceptable, Israeli economy is very strong and rises quickly despite such events.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## lydian fall

Beny Karachun said:


> Not sparing force? LOL, Israel has a 1000kg bomb for every floor in every building in Gaza.
> 
> Iron Dome was not even close to being depleted. Look what happened a few months ago, 0 Israeli deaths, all of Islamic Jihad leadership was killed within 11 days.
> 
> Economic cost of that is acceptable, Israeli economy is very strong and rises quickly despite such events.


We need idiots like u just for laughing


----------



## LeGenD

On topic please.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DoubleYouSee



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Abu Shaleh Rumi

Beny Karachun said:


> Our brains are the most capable.


No wonder your kind becomes sacrificial lamb every now and then. BTW, how is Zyklon B? Does it smell nice?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1594108205243981824

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1594222909668691969


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1594247255795671041

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1594601112002301952


----------



## husseinibnali

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1594601112002301952


Most probably it would be a short range system and it could be the Majid system as its already been shown few weeks ago in an Artesh ground forces exhibition.

Although a big step forward,medium range air defense systems is needed too for independent ground forces protection.

Iranian armed forces are on the right track.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Shams313

Iranian def engineers need to have an Phd. under me, Bcz i can imagine and dream for such things but they can't..😒





Type625E with FB10 missile

Chinese stuff, A awesome platform for convoy AD support and Intelligence gathering.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Shams313

Any of those Platform can be used.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## tsunset

Shams313 said:


> Iranian def engineers need to have an Phd. under me, Bcz i can imagine and dreame for such things but they can't..😒
> View attachment 899210
> 
> 
> Chinese stuff, A awesome platform for convoy AD support and Intelligence gathering.


What is its name? 

I like how China put efforts into design and good looking wheels... Looks like a crotale on steroids with an AK-630 as a ground mobile ciws, ingenious

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shams313

tsunset said:


> What is its name?
> 
> I like how China put efforts into design and good looking wheels... Looks like a crotale on steroids with an AK-630 as a ground mobile ciws, ingenious


Sorry I missed the details, i updated , Type 625E with FB10 missile.


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Shams313 said:


> Iranian def engineers need to have an Phd. under me, Bcz i can imagine and dream for such things but they can't..😒
> View attachment 899210
> 
> Type625E with FB10 missile
> 
> Chinese stuff, A awesome platform for convoy AD support and Intelligence gathering.
> View attachment 899256


Wait until the Iranian pantsir come out before you pronounce too quickly


----------



## tsunset

Shams313 said:


> Sorry I missed the details, i updated , Type 625E with FB10 missile.


Do you know the name or the specs of the wheels and pneumatic? I notice everytime China systems wheels looks so clean and good suspensions, solid wheels

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1596791912911888384

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## sahureka2

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1596791912911888384


It could also be an option for some naval units of the Iranian navy

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## hadi1990

i hope ur humans and have the minimal judging that fire burns!!


Beny Karachun said:


> Not sparing force? LOL, Israel has a 1000kg bomb for every floor in every building in Gaza.
> 
> Iron Dome was not even close to being depleted. Look what happened a few months ago, 0 Israeli deaths, all of Islamic Jihad leadership was killed within 11 days.
> 
> Economic cost of that is acceptable, Israeli economy is very strong and rises quickly despite such events.


man its real as Holly Bible and Qoraan state that there are eyes that cannot see and ears that cannot hear... am stating this cause i live in a multi ethnic and cultural community and i know the devil of history and how it shapes the ideas and bad thinking of small minded people!!! and for mercy for children and elderly in the so called state of Israel... you are a minority that decided by force to create a life by stealing others rights land future fortune and every thing!!! this is explained by how people who are not Iranian not even close to iran or its allies and militias or its axes and allies in one of the most universal world wide ceramonies rejected Israeli people.... cannt u feel ur real picture in a human eye an occupier .... even Saudies westerns south americans.... every one rejected u... cannt u see ... arent u watching the World cup!!!! any media or tv station from Iceland to Antartica is noticing this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
though u pay billioins to make up ur picture, the zionist organizations own every thing i media... but look at the magic evry one love Palastine and Palastinians more...
wake up... moderate ur people and go to real peace...
though i expect Nataniahu and his goverment to destroy the regIOn mainly israel in the few months to come .. but its wise to urge people to wake up



DoubleYouSee said:


>


man can u please understand that all the great media and defence clips are not reaching the public cause of language... i cannot understand why without translation!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iraqi soldier

Messerschmitt said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1596791912911888384


I always see similarities and synchronicities in the defense industry of China and Iran


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1600489094127271943

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1600489104638099459

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1600489115350433794

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601293152735793153

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Beny Karachun said:


> Your Iranian troops in Syria are supposed to be protected by something right? That something was the Bavar 373 and it was destroyed, among the countless of other systems we destroyed in Syria and Iraq. we didn't need any F-35 for it as well.
> 
> Cope
> 
> 
> Lol it's in service since 2019


Good Lord you're delusional



Beny Karachun said:


> Iran isn't claiming casualties, Israel isn't claiming responsibility, and yet targets continue to be bombed, huge secondary explosions as well...
> 
> You won't find any evidence when no one acknowledges anything. We just have to rely on reports. You could deny all you want, in the end, Israel isn't bombing sand dunes in Syria and Iraq
> 
> Also, the reports stated those were Bavar 373s.


Reports from extremely unreliable media. They look at Wikipedia, see the name of an Iranian system, and claim they're in Syria and were destroyed. Israeli journalists have admitted to doing this

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Beny Karachun said:


> You're suggesting Iran has 20,000 IRGC soldiers in Syria but no air defenses😂


Yes, and it's not 20,000 unless your including Fatemiyoun & Zainiyboun


----------



## tsunset

GrandBotBoi said:


> Good Lord you're delusional
> 
> 
> Reports from extremely unreliable media. They look at Wikipedia, see the name of an Iranian system, and claim they're in Syria and were destroyed. Israeli journalists have admitted to doing this


I agree with you, i freaking hate Wikipedia for learning military of countries specially Iran, China, Russia, Pakistan and India, because they are ALL biased and contains things that have strictly nothing to do with the subject

There is not even one satellite imagery by OSINTs showing Bavar inside Iran, how could it be inside Syria?? It is visibly slowly or not yet mass produced, and we know that Iran OSINTs are very good and showed us a lot of emplacements of Iran 3rd Khordad/others and missile silos, underground entrances, they would have no difficulty finding such a big system 

And for Israel yeah, I'm not even Iranian neither have origins, neither from the region neither an expert in military systems and i notice directly Israeli propaganda, the main component of Israel's propaganda campaign is fearmongering:

-Fearmongering about any of their enemy, Iran's nuclear bomb hoax originally came from them and is pushed by them directly from their medias or the US, also corruption of notable nuclear scientists or IAEA members to make them falsely claim that Iran is close to a bomb or got it, or corruption of high rank figures in the US to try to make it pass and more credible

-Overly exaggerating about their military prowess in their past wars and their military capability, in order to make people believe they are invincible, more intelligent, and bring fear again, we have the example with the Bavar in Syria or the F-35 that stood 2 hours in Iran airspace and doing acrobatics on top of Tehran while dropping a bomb without being detected

And be reassured people even here in the west are aware of that, when you cry wolf too much time, people are not idiots to believe such things coming from people that cried the wolf for decades

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beny Karachun

GrandBotBoi said:


> Yes, and it's not 20,000 unless your including Fatemiyoun & Zainiyboun


It is 80,000 when you're including Shia militias



tsunset said:


> I agree with you, i freaking hate Wikipedia for learning military of countries specially Iran, China, Russia, Pakistan and India, because they are ALL biased and contains things that have strictly nothing to do with the subject
> 
> There is not even one satellite imagery by OSINTs showing Bavar inside Iran, how could it be inside Syria?? It is visibly slowly or not yet mass produced, and we know that Iran OSINTs are very good and showed us a lot of emplacements of Iran 3rd Khordad/others and missile silos, underground entrances, they would have no difficulty finding such a big system
> 
> And for Israel yeah, I'm not even Iranian neither have origins, neither from the region neither an expert in military systems and i notice directly Israeli propaganda, the main component of Israel's propaganda campaign is fearmongering:
> 
> -Fearmongering about any of their enemy, Iran's nuclear bomb hoax originally came from them and is pushed by them directly from their medias or the US, also corruption of notable nuclear scientists or IAEA members to make them falsely claim that Iran is close to a bomb or got it, or corruption of high rank figures in the US to try to make it pass and more credible
> 
> -Overly exaggerating about their military prowess in their past wars and their military capability, in order to make people believe they are invincible, more intelligent, and bring fear again, we have the example with the Bavar in Syria or the F-35 that stood 2 hours in Iran airspace and doing acrobatics on top of Tehran while dropping a bomb without being detected
> 
> And be reassured people even here in the west are aware of that, when you cry wolf too much time, people are not idiots to believe such things coming from people that cried the wolf for decades


Cope lol



GrandBotBoi said:


> Reports from extremely unreliable media. They look at Wikipedia, see the name of an Iranian system, and claim they're in Syria and were destroyed. Israeli journalists have admitted to doing this


It's okay, we're gonna keep bombing Syria and you're going to continue having funerals while simultaneously denying any casualties

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## tsunset

Beny Karachun said:


> It is 80,000 when you're including Shia militias
> 
> 
> Cope lol
> 
> 
> It's okay, we're gonna keep bombing Syria and you're going to continue having funerals while simultaneously denying any casualties


Cope about what?
Dude just remind that France literally gave you what is protecting your country for 70 years from total destruction or invasion and without any involvement of France, Dimona would not exist right now and neither Israel

Say that you excuse yourself and that France protected your state from an invasion and gave you nuclear weapon technology as well as full assistance and infrastructure to make them, you would not even be here if it didn't happened, don't try to tell me or make people believe that Israel would have been capable of making all alone with only samples of left weapons or missiles or reversing anything for systems and weapons, you can thank us for your plane you called "Kfir" and Mystères you actually used against your own allies, and your warships back then

Again who saved you in the 6 day war?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601991020400742400

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601991075543109632

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601991147886608384

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

tsunset said:


> Cope about what?
> Dude just remind that France literally gave you what is protecting your country for 70 years from total destruction or invasion and without any involvement of France, Dimona would not exist right now and neither Israel
> 
> Say that you excuse yourself and that France protected your state from an invasion and gave you nuclear weapon technology as well as full assistance and infrastructure to make them, you would not even be here if it didn't happened, don't try to tell me or make people believe that Israel would have been capable of making all alone with only samples of left weapons or missiles or reversing anything for systems and weapons, you can thank us for your plane you called "Kfir" and Mystères you actually used against your own allies, and your warships back then
> 
> Again who saved you in the 6 day war?


Cope about Israel "fearmongering", Iran is literally pushing for nukes, anyone that doesn't see it is retarded, we literally stole tons of documents, part of which show a nuclear bomb design integrated on the Shahab 3, coincidentally , a ballistic missile with exactly enough range to hit Israel.




Of course some Iranians will say "oh those were old documents we are not pushing for it now" and people with down syndrome in the west would believe their lies.


Thank you so much for the services we paid you for and France has profited from.

Oh man, thank you so much for the Kfir, a plane which is the result of the French embargo on Israel during Israel's attrition war, since the Mirage V we ordered never arrived and the money for them was never returned to Israel we had to steal the blueprints of the Mirage V and build it all by ourselves and strap an American jet engine and Israeli avionics on it.

Gave us nuclear weapon technology? Oppenheimer was a Jew, and majority of the scientists working on the nuclear bomb were Jews as well, maybe you should thank us for giving you the bomb. Israel would have gotten a nuclear bomb one way or another, but yeah, thanks for shortening our acquisition of nukes.

In the 6 day war? who saved us? It was a war Israel made a pre-emptive strike in and absolutely crushed its enemies in. Don't take credit because of French aircraft used in those attacks, you sold it to Israel, it's your interest to sell it just as it's our interest to buy it.


----------



## Ich

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601991147886608384
i would more concentrate on ionisize big volume areas in atmosphere through electromagnetic beams/waves. This will limit the electronic capabillity of an enemy airplane in this volume area and its radars while at the same time this enemy airplane would shine like a christmastree on any radar, even the simplest.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## tsunset

Beny Karachun said:


> Cope about Israel "fearmongering", Iran is literally pushing for nukes, anyone that doesn't see it is retarded, we literally stole tons of documents, part of which show a nuclear bomb design integrated on the Shahab 3, coincidentally , a ballistic missile with exactly enough range to hit Israel.
> View attachment 905112
> 
> Of course some Iranians will say "oh those were old documents we are not pushing for it now" and people with down syndrome in the west would believe their lies.
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for the services we paid you for and France has profited from.
> 
> Oh man, thank you so much for the Kfir, a plane which is the result of the French embargo on Israel during Israel's attrition war, since the Mirage V we ordered never arrived and the money for them was never returned to Israel we had to steal the blueprints of the Mirage V and build it all by ourselves and strap an American jet engine and Israeli avionics on it.
> 
> Gave us nuclear weapon technology? Oppenheimer was a Jew, and majority of the scientists working on the nuclear bomb were Jews as well, maybe you should thank us for giving you the bomb. Israel would have gotten a nuclear bomb one way or another, but yeah, thanks for shortening our acquisition of nukes.
> 
> In the 6 day war? who saved us? It was a war Israel made a pre-emptive strike in and absolutely crushed its enemies in. Don't take credit because of French aircraft used in those attacks, you sold it to Israel, it's your interest to sell it just as it's our interest to buy it.


Yeah i cope so much about a Shahab 3 warhead that is going to explode the galaxy in two weeks and Israeli shinobis that stole two tons of documents showing the plot of blowing up the earth and making a second holocaust

That whole drama isn't even my problem, i don't trust it, cool I'm retarded good for you



> Gave us nuclear weapon technology? Oppenheimer was a Jew, and majority of the scientists working on the nuclear bomb were Jews as well, maybe you should thank us for giving you the bomb. Israel would have gotten a nuclear bomb one way or another, but yeah, thanks for shortening our acquisition of nukes.


You are dodging blatantly the most important thing that allowed your state to obtain nuclear weapons so rapidly and easily as you say, strictly don't care of Oppenheimer and whatever Jew scientist

Where did Israel got all that uranium fuel, materials, knowledge, the tons of uranium? It came out of the *** of Oppenheimer and delivered to Israel? You surely know what is the protocole of Sèvre right?

While Dimona was being built, Israeli nuclear scientists were invited in nuclear search center in France as VIPs so they can be independent after, it was mentioned in the deal

Ffs Dimona was a copycat of the G1 reactor from Marcoule and in general fully made, designed, installed by France, from walls to plutonium and uranium sources to the first device https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/israel-nuclear/ 



> Gave us nuclear weapon technology?


Yes, totally, from the first wall made to the device, you're going to tell that Oppenheimer or whatever Poland Jew scientist was brought back to life by 900 IQ Jews using secret technology and suddenly made all the plans, the exact process and was peeing the Uranium and everything?



> maybe you should thank us for giving you the bomb


You seem to have a problem making a difference between Israel and Jews, Curie Family were not even Jews at all but whatever even if they were, the researches in France debuted 60 years before "Israel" was "made"



> Don't take credit because of French aircraft used in those attacks, you sold it to Israel, it's your interest to sell it just as it's our interest to buy it.


Ooooh yes suddenly the narrative changes, these were the most successful aircrafts in all conflicts at the time brutalizing any foreign aircrafts in combat, not only Israel was making a massacre with them, and why did Israel chose them? Going to tell me that it was a Jew again that made the Mirages?

So, you are going to bow down right now in front of your computer and thank Moses that you are still there because of France, even if your state is still killing children etc etc in total impunity and colonizing everything, and even, i don't accept or buy any words from weirdo Israeli trolls like you

Also remind that the only people that persecuted Jews, killed them in mass and were antisemite, are whites from Europe or the United States.

Maybe at the end I regret what i said first about the Shahab warhead, they will maybe be useful in the future who knows

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## jauk

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1602007809398276097


Beny Karachun said:


> Retarded Iranians <CLIP!>


Why does anyone in their right mind interact with this shill?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GrandBotBoi

Beny Karachun said:


> Retarded Iranians thinking Su-35s stand a chance against F-35s, and thinking their garbage radars can detect the F-35, let alone from 700km
> 
> Lmfao, what a joke


Israelis discover that OTH radars exist:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 925boy

Beny Karachun said:


> Retarded Iranians thinking Su-35s stand a chance against F-35s,


Retarded Israelis like you think Iran has to use an Su-35 against UNRELIABLE big-for-nothing F-35 that its users are still scared to use in war. Iran doesnt have to fight the F-35 - it'll just drop out the sky by itself, or US will have beef with the buyer and not send parts, which will keep F35s grounded- no need to fight them! if its F-22 ur talking about, different story. F35 is useless- ISrael and US have 100s of them, so why no attack on IRanian nuclear facilities yet? BEcause some of your F-35s and their pilots wont return back to ISrael.

bro what happened to you though- you used to be coherent but now youre a borderline racist jerk

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Beny Karachun said:


> Retarded Iranians thinking Su-35s stand a chance against F-35s, and thinking their garbage radars can detect the F-35, let alone from 700km
> 
> Lmfao, what a joke


It seems like that tweet struck a nerve with you. Your rhetoric reminds me a lot of when Trump tried to explain how the F-35 is basically invisible and will win every fight. 






Well, physics over marketing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beny Karachun

Messerschmitt said:


> It seems like that tweet struck a nerve with you. Your rhetoric reminds me a lot of when Trump tried to explain how the F-35 is basically invisible and will win every fight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, physics over marketing.


Yeah man, if Lockheed Martin says it, and if the president of the US says it, and if Israel already used the F-35 over various countries and probably over Iran as well, you can't see it on radar.

Iran and China can claim their radars can see it but we all know they can't.



925boy said:


> Retarded Israelis like you think Iran has to use an Su-35 against UNRELIABLE big-for-nothing F-35 that its users are still scared to use in war. Iran doesnt have to fight the F-35 - it'll just drop out the sky by itself, or US will have beef with the buyer and not send parts, which will keep F35s grounded- no need to fight them! if its F-22 ur talking about, different story. F35 is useless- ISrael and US have 100s of them, so why no attack on IRanian nuclear facilities yet? BEcause some of your F-35s and their pilots wont return back to ISrael.
> 
> bro what happened to you though- you used to be coherent but now youre a borderline racist jerk


Lol an F-35 can fly right above Teheran and bomb Iran's dirty president like they did to Soleimani.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

Beny Karachun said:


> Lol an F-35 can fly right above Teheran and bomb Iran's dirty president like they did to Soleimani.


Camel dream of cotton seed , sometime eat it by mouthful and sometimes seed by seed.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beny Karachun

tsunset said:


> Yeah i cope so much about a Shahab 3 warhead that is going to explode the galaxy in two weeks and Israeli shinobis that stole two tons of documents showing the plot of blowing up the earth and making a second holocaust
> 
> That whole drama isn't even my problem, i don't trust it, cool I'm retarded good for you


Lol nice autistic irony for a very real threat.



tsunset said:


> You are dodging blatantly the most important thing that allowed your state to obtain nuclear weapons so rapidly and easily as you say, strictly don't care of Oppenheimer and whatever Jew scientist
> 
> Where did Israel got all that uranium fuel, materials, knowledge, the tons of uranium? It came out of the *** of Oppenheimer and delivered to Israel? You surely know what is the protocole of Sèvre right?
> 
> While Dimona was being built, Israeli nuclear scientists were invited in nuclear search center in France as VIPs so they can be independent after, it was mentioned in the deal
> 
> Ffs Dimona was a copycat of the G1 reactor from Marcoule and in general fully made, designed, installed by France, from walls to plutonium and uranium sources to the first device https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/israel-nuclear/


Something that France was given money for, thank you for your kindness of making a profit.
Should I also thank the gas station for selling gas to the people of my city? Maybe thank the insurance company for the money I received after years of paying them in case I have a car accident?

France also offered the same service to Saddam Hussain and we had to bomb that nuclear reactor with French scientists inside and France went mad and called it a "violation of another country's sovereignty", if it wasn't for Israel in 10 more years the Iraq war would have been against a nuclear Iraq . France stated that the sole purpose of the reactor was scientific research, just as they said the Israeli nuclear reactor was for scientific research, so according to France Israel's nuclear weapons had nothing to do with the fact we developed a bomb because the nuclear reactor wasn't built for military purposes.






Bertrand Goldschmidt - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




Bertrand Goldschmidt, a Jew, was the one that contributed the most to the development of a French nuclear weapon among many other Jews, and was the one that was responsible for the Israeli-French nuclear reactor deal, very nice of you to ride on the success of Jews and profit off of their work.


You barely gave us any Uranium and you stopped giving us Uranium after the 1967 embargo and we had to resort to other ways of getting Uranium





Operation Plumbat - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org









The Apollo Affair - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org







tsunset said:


> Yes, totally, from the first wall made to the device, you're going to tell that Oppenheimer or whatever Poland Jew scientist was brought back to life by 900 IQ Jews using secret technology and suddenly made all the plans, the exact process and was peeing the Uranium and everything?


Nope, a Jewish French man called Bertrand Goldschmidt did that.



tsunset said:


> You seem to have a problem making a difference between Israel and Jews, Curie Family were not even Jews at all but whatever even if they were, the researches in France debuted 60 years before "Israel" was "made"


There is no difference between Israelis and Jews, they are both Jews, all Jews can come to live in Israel, same people same minds.

Curie wasn't the inventor of nuclear weapons, she discovered radiation in chemical substances like Radium. The research you started 60 years before Israel's existence had nothing to do with splitting the atom. This was the work of Jews.



tsunset said:


> Ooooh yes suddenly the narrative changes, these were the most successful aircrafts in all conflicts at the time brutalizing any foreign aircrafts in combat, not only Israel was making a massacre with them, and why did Israel chose them? Going to tell me that it was a Jew again that made the Mirages?
> 
> So, you are going to bow down right now in front of your computer and thank Moses that you are still there because of France, even if your state is still killing children etc etc in total impunity and colonizing everything, and even, i don't accept or buy any words from weirdo Israeli trolls like you
> 
> Also remind that the only people that persecuted Jews, killed them in mass and were antisemite, are whites from Europe or the United States.
> 
> Maybe at the end I regret what i said first about the Shahab warhead, they will maybe be useful in the future who knows


They were most successful because their pilots were most successful, it didn't matter if it was an Israeli pilot in an F-4, an A-4, a Mystere, a Spitfire, a Bf109, the Israeli pilots were always better, even when facing Soviet pilots. In reality the Mirage 3 was comparable to the MiG-21, that's what our test pilots said when we captured the MiG-21 from an Iraqi pilot.

So thank you for the plane you sold us and made a profit with that didn't really have an advantage over the enemy anyways, and thank you so much for the embargo of 1967 and the lack of spare parts to your jets as a result, and for the Mirage-Vs we helped design that we paid for and weren't given to us so we stole the blueprints of those aircraft and built them from scratch here in Israel, and for the ship we paid for but weren't given so we had to hijack the ships from France and sail them over here.








Cherbourg Project - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## tsunset

Beny Karachun said:


> Lol nice autistic irony for a very real threat.
> 
> 
> Something that France was given money for, thank you for your kindness of making a profit.
> Should I also thank the gas station for selling gas to the people of my city? Maybe thank the insurance company for the money I received after years of paying them in case I have a car accident?
> 
> France also offered the same service to Saddam Hussain and we had to bomb that nuclear reactor with French scientists inside and France went mad and called it a "violation of another country's sovereignty", if it wasn't for Israel in 10 more years the Iraq war would have been against a nuclear Iraq . France stated that the sole purpose of the reactor was scientific research, just as they said the Israeli nuclear reactor was for scientific research, so according to France Israel's nuclear weapons had nothing to do with the fact we developed a bomb because the nuclear reactor wasn't built for military purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bertrand Goldschmidt - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bertrand Goldschmidt, a Jew, was the one that contributed the most to the development of a French nuclear weapon among many other Jews, and was the one that was responsible for the Israeli-French nuclear reactor deal, very nice of you to ride on the success of Jews and profit off of their work.
> 
> 
> You barely gave us any Uranium and you stopped giving us Uranium after the 1967 embargo and we had to resort to other ways of getting Uranium
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Operation Plumbat - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Apollo Affair - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, a Jewish French man called Bertrand Goldschmidt did that.
> 
> 
> There is no difference between Israelis and Jews, they are both Jews, all Jews can come to live in Israel, same people same minds.
> 
> Curie wasn't the inventor of nuclear weapons, she discovered radiation in chemical substances like Radium. The research you started 60 years before Israel's existence had nothing to do with splitting the atom. This was the work of Jews.
> 
> 
> They were most successful because their pilots were most successful, it didn't matter if it was an Israeli pilot in an F-4, an A-4, a Mystere, a Spitfire, a Bf109, the Israeli pilots were always better, even when facing Soviet pilots. In reality the Mirage 3 was comparable to the MiG-21, that's what our test pilots said when we captured the MiG-21 from an Iraqi pilot.
> 
> So thank you for the plane you sold us and made a profit with that didn't really have an advantage over the enemy anyways, and thank you so much for the embargo of 1967 and the lack of spare parts to your jets as a result, and for the Mirage-Vs we helped design that we paid for and weren't given to us so we stole the blueprints of those aircraft and built them from scratch here in Israel, and for the ship we paid for but weren't given so we had to hijack the ships from France and sail them over here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cherbourg Project - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Cope lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Messerschmitt

Beny Karachun said:


> Yeah man, if Lockheed Martin says it, and if the president of the US says it, and if Israel already used the F-35 over various countries and probably over Iran as well, you can't see it on radar.





Beny Karachun said:


> Lol an F-35 can fly right above Teheran and bomb Iran's dirty president like they did to Soleimani.


Sure, and Captain Maverick was sitting in that F-35 flying over Iran just for fun. Imagine believing a F-35 could enter Iranian airspace undetected and even fly over Tehran. Amazing how the F-35 is able to defy the laws of physics.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## tsunset

Messerschmitt said:


> Sure, and Captain Maverick was sitting in that F-35 flying over Iran just for fun. Imagine believing a F-35 could enter Iranian airspace undetected and even fly over Tehran. Amazing how the F-35 is able to defy the laws of physics.


He was also doing acrobatics according to anonymous Iranian sources and threw a random invisible bomb to troll Iran, proof is that people heard a firework-like sound this day

Also the F-35 was not an F-35 but an *F-35i*, an ultra-advanced version made by 950IQ Israeli Jews that sent shinobi spies to another galaxy to steal documents of an Alien army and make the F-35i just completely invincible and invisible to anything, one of them could invade the earth in just the time to travel from Israel back to Israel, all of this is actually proven

Israel just don't do it because they have pity for human beings and wants equality in the earth and humanity

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Messerschmitt

Interesting open-source F-35A radar scattering simulation: https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsanda...2022/09/23/f-35a-radar-scattering-simulation/

Summary (excerpt):
"From the simulation result, it can be concluded that F-35A is a very good stealth design, it is capable of retaining very low RCS as long as the pilot can keep his adversary inside the 40° frontal arcs. Even without the RAM on outer skin surface, and without leading edge and trailing edge treatment, the F-35 model is able to achieve the median RCS value of only 0.06 m2 in X-band, increased only to 0.13 m2 in L-band. The external AIM-9X along with pylon seem to have negligible effect on the total overall RCS of F-35, in fact, in some case, the destructive interference effect actually help reduce the RCS value in some direction It is however, important to note that, F-35 has very strong reflection spike located at around 34-35° boresight which could be critical weakness in certain situation. Furthermore, it can’t be denied that the *resonance effect of VHF frequency increase RCS of the aircraft significantly from most direction except directly ahead*. Hence, *a group of connected VHF radars could be very useful to provide early warning against stealth fighters* such as F-35A."

... which is exactly Iran's approach (e.g. Ghadir, Matla-ol-Fajr series, "Iranian Nebo", Sepehr OTHR). Captain Maverick should better fly very very low. This would however significantly reduce his mission payload capacity and/or operational range and make him more vulnerable to EO/IIR-guided AAA and SAM systems which Iran also happens to have a large quantity of.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mr Iran Eye

Messerschmitt said:


> Interesting open-source F-35A radar scattering simulation: https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsanda...2022/09/23/f-35a-radar-scattering-simulation/
> 
> Summary (excerpt):
> "From the simulation result, it can be concluded that F-35A is a very good stealth design, it is capable of retaining very low RCS as long as the pilot can keep his adversary inside the 40° frontal arcs. Even without the RAM on outer skin surface, and without leading edge and trailing edge treatment, the F-35 model is able to achieve the median RCS value of only 0.06 m2 in X-band, increased only to 0.13 m2 in L-band. The external AIM-9X along with pylon seem to have negligible effect on the total overall RCS of F-35, in fact, in some case, the destructive interference effect actually help reduce the RCS value in some direction It is however, important to note that, F-35 has very strong reflection spike located at around 34-35° boresight which could be critical weakness in certain situation. Furthermore, it can’t be denied that the *resonance effect of VHF frequency increase RCS of the aircraft significantly from most direction except directly ahead*. Hence, *a group of connected VHF radars could be very useful to provide early warning against stealth fighters* such as F-35A."
> 
> ... which is exactly Iran's approach (e.g. Ghadir, Matla-ol-Fajr series, "Iranian Nebo", Sepehr OTHR). Captain Maverick should better fly very very low. This would however significantly reduce his mission payload capacity and/or operational range and make him more vulnerable to EO/IIR-guided AAA and SAM systems which Iran also happens to have a large quantity of.


For Iran's powerful optical optical camera system, the F 35 will be easily detected and even for smaller radars. An aircraft far too overestimated

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beny Karachun

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> SHEMA SHITSKIN YISROEL, SISSY CUCKMANDER ELOHEINU
> TISHA MONKEY B'AV, PINDICKED CUCKOLD HEBREWS
> 
> Shitskin Shimon (@Beny Karachun the sand nigger aka Limp Dick Beny) says, "DURKA DURKA HASHEM MONKEY HEBREW, MUH IRANIAN SU-35 NO CHANCE AGAINST F-35 ADIR (sand nigger pig fucking shitskin hebrew paedophile language word), MUH JEW A-S-S AIDS (read "americuckwa") SAY F-35 FLY OVER THE (W)HOLE WORLD AND GUF! WE BOMB PRESIDENT AND KING AND EVEN TITUS <insert shitskincel dune coon kikeroach language kvetching>!"
> 
> Says I to Shitskin Shimon (@Beny Karachun the sand nigger aka Limp Dick Beny), "Shitskin incel hebrew, your retarded desert baboon dune coon brain is soft and useless like your turd brown kikeropenis ("kike micropenis"), but the F-35 is a dogshit aircraft which lights up a modern AESA like a Christmas tree. It's maneuverability is as good as a kike sow after being jussy-raped in a pogrom and a 4++ generation modified Flanker with an AESA mounted on with BVR missiles will snap off the mongrel dicklet of whichever shitskin hebrew pilot is monkeying around in your sand nigger adir's seat.
> 
> Fly them right into Iran, you sandy-faced desert dune coon. It would be the biggest gift for Iran since the RQ-170 - a pilot to join shitskin hebrew ron arad and a whole slew of technology for Iran to study.
> 
> Oh and by the way, speaking of head-of-state assassinations, it was a few months ago when your shitskin prime monkey minister naftali sand nigger bennet was sent a threatening letter to his home and an identical message to his phone threatening to stretch him out on a funeral bier ahead of his time (same thing happened to his son as well). Your own durka-durka shitskin hebrew media reported about it and your shitskintelligence chiefs were left tugging their tiny cucksticks of dicklets in terror. F-u-c-k around and your future prime shitskin ministers will be dragged out of a ditch with their decapitated heads stuffed with their own severed shitskin hebrew kikeropenises ("kike micropenises"). By the way, your sand nigger shitskintelligence agencies have been had their sand monkey boijussies raped in cyberspace by both Moses Staff and Open Hands. Nice going, you inbred shitskins.
> 
> Back to your sand, Limp Dick. Back to your sand."


@waz

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## waz

@Beny Karachun this section isn't for this type of debate. Stick to the Middle East section.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Ich

F-35 is shit. Even dumb german politicians say it off the record.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Flotilla

Yeah, germans are probably buying amerika suport. And I am afraid after germans, spaniards will do... damn fighter mafia.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Ich said:


> F-35 is shit. Even dumb german politicians say it off the record.





Flotilla said:


> Yeah, germans are probably buying amerika suport. And I am afraid after germans, spaniards will do... damn fighter mafia.


Aren't Germany, Spain and France collaborating on a 6th generation fighter jet program?


----------



## Ich

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> Aren't Germany, Spain and France collaborating on a 6th generation fighter jet program?



As far as i know it is canceled.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## BlessedKingOfLonging

Ich said:


> As far as i know it is canceled.


What exactly happened?


----------



## Ich

BlessedKingOfLonging said:


> What exactly happened?



Well, "exactly" happened i cant say cause "they" dont say. But the official status is "There is no alternative; it must work!". Well, thats the old phrase for "its over". It is all about money and the pointless "Who is the Boss of the old Franken-Brothers?" (you know east-Franken and west-Franken? Well since then...). Normally the tandem would work cause of "throw in the money!", as it was with Airbus. But at the moment the EU-Countries loose about 1 trillion Dollar in 2022 and more in the next years cause of "russia-sanctions" and the energy-crises...Bloomberg wrote it some days ago after calculation. So it is cancelled cause of lack of money.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hack-Hook

Ich said:


> Well, "exactly" happened i cant say cause "they" dont say. But the official status is "There is no alternative; it must work!". Well, thats the old phrase for "its over". It is all about money and the pointless "Who is the Boss of the old Franken-Brothers?" (you know east-Franken and west-Franken? Well since then...). Normally the tandem would work cause of "throw in the money!", as it was with Airbus. But at the moment the EU-Countries loose about 1 trillion Dollar in 2022 and more in the next years cause of "russia-sanctions" and the energy-crises...Bloomberg wrote it some days ago after calculation. So it is cancelled cause of lack of money.


my guess is aside from money the exact problem that resulted France to pull out of Eurofighter happened here . France requirement for the aircraft is probably different from the others and its probably nearly impossible to build something that satisfy everyone.


----------



## Horse_Rider

Ich said:


> F-35 is shit. Even dumb german politicians say it off the record.



Yet you are buying it? It seems majority of big countries in NATO will have it. I don't understand, you guys have a very large collective defense budget, where it a 5th gen EU platform?


----------



## gambit

Messerschmitt said:


> Sure, and Captain Maverick was sitting in that F-35 flying over Iran just for fun. Imagine believing a F-35 could enter Iranian airspace undetected and even fly over Tehran. Amazing how the F-35 is able to defy the laws of physics.


Actually, the F-35 would be obeying the laws of physics. Remember when an F-22 flew with the Iranian F-4s and surprised them? The reality is that the F-22 surprised Iranian ground radars, not the Iranian F-4s.

Aside from AWACS, airborne radars are limited to frontal view, simply because the array is mounted in the front end of the jet. It means that for air defense, the ground control intercept (GCI) method is the best.






NORAD Control Center - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





*NORAD Control Center*s (NCCs) were Cold War "joint direction centers"[2] for command, control, and coordination of *ground-controlled interception* by both USAF Air Defense Command (ADC) and Army Air Defense Command (ARADCOM).​
Iranian air defense is no different. I used NORAD to remove any suspicious of deception.

What GCI does is direct interceptors to the air location of suspicious targets, then the interceptors make *VISUAL* identification of whatever they see. So when Iranian ground radars detected the US drone, they directed Iranian F-4s to intercept. What Iranian GCI controllers saw were three targets when there was a fourth body -- the F-22. In other words, Iranian air defense radars saw three bodies when there were *PHYSICALLY* four. If the F-22 flew close enough to check out the armaments carried by the Iranian F-4s, the F-22 was definitely inside the Iranian GCI radar beam.

Even if the platform is 'stealth', it does not mean the pilot have a license to be careless about radar nets. When I was active duty and on the F-111 stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, our squadrons, along with F-111S from RAF Lakenheath, often trained to avoid radar detection. Once, I was in the WSO seat over the Channel at 50 ft altitude in TFR hard ride. From the WSO seat, I tuned the TFR so that it would pick up even the waves. It was a hard flight because our two-ship flight were flying the waves as if they were land terrain features. We successfully 'attacked' France when they requested our assistance in testing their new air defense radar.

The B-2, F-117, F-22, and F-35 pilots are no different. Their mission plannings would include avoidance of radar nets as much as possible. Being low radar observable means that if you have to be in a radar beam, you would have enough time to exit the situation without being tagged as a target. It does not mean you can fly as if nothing happened. But in this particular situation, the F-22 pilot did not cared. The fact that he flew close enough to the Iranian F-4s means he knew he would be inside the Iranian GCI radar beam, but he also knew that being that close to the F-4s, he would be essentially invisible to the Iranian ground radars. Keep in mind that the American drone was physically smaller than the F-22 but the Iranian GCI radar saw only three, not four, targets, when all of them were flying in a *STEADY STATE FORMATION*.

If an Israeli F-35 was inside Iranian airspace, most likely the Iranians would not know it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

gambit said:


> Actually, the F-35 would be obeying the laws of physics. Remember when an F-22 flew with the Iranian F-4s and surprised them? The reality is that the F-22 surprised Iranian ground radars, not the Iranian F-4s.
> 
> Aside from AWACS, airborne radars are limited to frontal view, simply because the array is mounted in the front end of the jet. It means that for air defense, the ground control intercept (GCI) method is the best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NORAD Control Center - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *NORAD Control Center*s (NCCs) were Cold War "joint direction centers"[2] for command, control, and coordination of *ground-controlled interception* by both USAF Air Defense Command (ADC) and Army Air Defense Command (ARADCOM).​
> Iranian air defense is no different. I used NORAD to remove any suspicious of deception.
> 
> What GCI does is direct interceptors to the air location of suspicious targets, then the interceptors make *VISUAL* identification of whatever they see. So when Iranian ground radars detected the US drone, they directed Iranian F-4s to intercept. What Iranian GCI controllers saw were three targets when there was a fourth body -- the F-22. In other words, Iranian air defense radars saw three bodies when there were *PHYSICALLY* four. If the F-22 flew close enough to check out the armaments carried by the Iranian F-4s, the F-22 was definitely inside the Iranian GCI radar beam.
> 
> Even if the platform is 'stealth', it does not mean the pilot have a license to be careless about radar nets. When I was active duty and on the F-111 stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, our squadrons, along with F-111S from RAF Lakenheath, often trained to avoid radar detection. Once, I was in the WSO seat over the Channel at 50 ft altitude in TFR hard ride. From the WSO seat, I tuned the TFR so that it would pick up even the waves. It was a hard flight because our two-ship flight were flying the waves as if they were land terrain features. We successfully 'attacked' France when they requested our assistance in testing their new air defense radar.
> 
> The B-2, F-117, F-22, and F-35 pilots are no different. Their mission plannings would include avoidance of radar nets as much as possible. Being low radar observable means that if you have to be in a radar beam, you would have enough time to exit the situation without being tagged as a target. It does not mean you can fly as if nothing happened. But in this particular situation, the F-22 pilot did not cared. The fact that he flew close enough to the Iranian F-4s means he knew he would be inside the Iranian GCI radar beam, but he also knew that being that close to the F-4s, he would be essentially invisible to the Iranian ground radars. Keep in mind that the American drone was physically smaller than the F-22 but the Iranian GCI radar saw only three, not four, targets, when all of them were flying in a *STEADY STATE FORMATION*.
> 
> If an Israeli F-35 was inside Iranian airspace, most likely the Iranians would not know it.


Based on reports from 2013 and USAF claims, which can't be verified. Even if the story were true, Iran's AD posture has improved significantly since the 2010s. The country is flooded with long-wavelength LR EW radars now and has capable ADS close to the border with powerful EO/IIR sensors (e.g. 3rd Khordad). A F-22 or F-35 attempting to enter Iranian airspace would likely be exposed to emissions by these lower band radars from multiple angles. Since "stealth" fighters are not optimized against longer wavelength radars and the fighters wouldn't face most radars from an optimal angle (large country, radars spread all over the place), they won't be invisible to Iran's IADS, as shown in this open-source model. The point wasn't that "stealth" is "crap" or doesn't play a role but that a F-35 entering Iranian airspace undetected and carrying out strikes on HVTs undisturbed before returning home will only work in Hollywood.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ich

Horse_Rider said:


> Yet you are buying it? It seems majority of big countries in NATO will have it. I don't understand, you guys have a very large collective defense budget, where it a 5th gen EU platform?


I do not buying. I would prefer that all german politicians get a shot in the head.  No one in Germany is buying the F-35. The US ordered Germany to buy them. Ordered in the same way they explode Nordstream 1+2 and over the decades lots of other things.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Muhammed45

gambit said:


> Actually, the F-35 would be obeying the laws of physics. Remember when an F-22 flew with the Iranian F-4s and surprised them? The reality is that the F-22 surprised Iranian ground radars, not the Iranian F-4s.
> 
> Aside from AWACS, airborne radars are limited to frontal view, simply because the array is mounted in the front end of the jet. It means that for air defense, the ground control intercept (GCI) method is the best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NORAD Control Center - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *NORAD Control Center*s (NCCs) were Cold War "joint direction centers"[2] for command, control, and coordination of *ground-controlled interception* by both USAF Air Defense Command (ADC) and Army Air Defense Command (ARADCOM).​
> Iranian air defense is no different. I used NORAD to remove any suspicious of deception.
> 
> What GCI does is direct interceptors to the air location of suspicious targets, then the interceptors make *VISUAL* identification of whatever they see. So when Iranian ground radars detected the US drone, they directed Iranian F-4s to intercept. What Iranian GCI controllers saw were three targets when there was a fourth body -- the F-22. In other words, Iranian air defense radars saw three bodies when there were *PHYSICALLY* four. If the F-22 flew close enough to check out the armaments carried by the Iranian F-4s, the F-22 was definitely inside the Iranian GCI radar beam.
> 
> Even if the platform is 'stealth', it does not mean the pilot have a license to be careless about radar nets. When I was active duty and on the F-111 stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, our squadrons, along with F-111S from RAF Lakenheath, often trained to avoid radar detection. Once, I was in the WSO seat over the Channel at 50 ft altitude in TFR hard ride. From the WSO seat, I tuned the TFR so that it would pick up even the waves. It was a hard flight because our two-ship flight were flying the waves as if they were land terrain features. We successfully 'attacked' France when they requested our assistance in testing their new air defense radar.
> 
> The B-2, F-117, F-22, and F-35 pilots are no different. Their mission plannings would include avoidance of radar nets as much as possible. Being low radar observable means that if you have to be in a radar beam, you would have enough time to exit the situation without being tagged as a target. It does not mean you can fly as if nothing happened. But in this particular situation, the F-22 pilot did not cared. The fact that he flew close enough to the Iranian F-4s means he knew he would be inside the Iranian GCI radar beam, but he also knew that being that close to the F-4s, he would be essentially invisible to the Iranian ground radars. Keep in mind that the American drone was physically smaller than the F-22 but the Iranian GCI radar saw only three, not four, targets, when all of them were flying in a *STEADY STATE FORMATION*.
> 
> If an Israeli F-35 was inside Iranian airspace, most likely the Iranians would not know it.


Question remains, would have USA allowed Israeli F-35 to risk a crash in Iranian airspace? 

For sure, F-35 is not more stealthier than F-22, you maybe able to fool your European customers but not us. F-35 is obviously inferior to F-22 from every point of view. The engines, avionics, stealthy etc. 

Iranian general prior to the Israeli claims, announced that they had detected F-22 on their radar scopes in Persian Gulf. So it wouldn't be hard to detect Israeli F-35 even if the pilot followed every instruction of remaining undetected. 

Let me tell you an other thing, F-35 is so garbage that USA doesn't give a hoot if it flies over a territory that lacks strategic depth. Russians can easily study it from Syrian bases using their advanced air defense systems. In Russian case, F-35 is not something to be afraid of. It is already evaluated over the occupied Palestine's airspace.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Horse_Rider

Muhammed45 said:


> Question remains, would have USA allowed Israeli F-35 to risk a crash in Iranian airspace?
> 
> For sure, F-35 is not more stealthier than F-22, you maybe able to fool your European customers but not us. F-35 is obviously inferior to F-22 from every point of view. The engines, avionics, stealthy etc.
> 
> Iranian general prior to the Israeli claims, announced that they had detected F-22 on their radar scopes in Persian Gulf. So it wouldn't be hard to detect Israeli F-35 even if the pilot followed every instruction of remaining undetected.
> 
> Let me tell you an other thing, F-35 is so garbage that USA doesn't give a hoot if it flies over a territory that lacks strategic depth. Russians can easily study it from Syrian bases using their advanced air defense systems. In Russian case, F-35 is not something to be afraid of. It is already evaluated over the occupied Palestine's airspace.



These are some silly questions. If the US can send in F-22 into the Iranian airspace many times I think they will use the F-35 whenever they need to. After all, it's an offensive weapon system designed to fight. F-35 is also not "inferior" to the F-22.. In many ways, the F-35 uses more advanced tech than the F-22 as it was build after about two decades, but then there are a few things kept away from people's view limited to only F-22 due to it's role, Iranian AD is just as ineffective against the F-35 than it was against the F-22. 

I think I've read reports that Israel has used the F-35 already a few times to penetrate the Iranian airspace. I also read on an Israeli forum that there were constant combat missions being flown by the F-35's and that did include deep penetration into Iranian airspace for a future conflict. Seems like they've created a full map of ingress and egress when need be.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Ich

Horse_Rider said:


> These are some silly questions. If the US can send in F-22 into the Iranian airspace many times I think they will use the F-35 whenever they need to. After all, it's an offensive weapon system designed to fight. F-35 is also not "inferior" to the F-22.. In many ways, the F-35 uses more advanced tech than the F-22 as it was build after about two decades, but then there are a few things kept away from people's view limited to only F-22 due to it's role, Iranian AD is just as ineffective against the F-35 than it was against the F-22.
> 
> I think I've read reports that Israel has used the F-35 already a few times to penetrate the Iranian airspace. I also read on an Israeli forum that there were constant combat missions being flown by the F-35's and that did include deep penetration into Iranian airspace for a future conflict. Seems like they've created a full map of ingress and egress when need be.


You mean that F-22 in 2013? Yes, at that time Iran radar wasnt that good what it is today.


----------



## Hack-Hook

gambit said:


> Actually, the F-35 would be obeying the laws of physics. Remember when an F-22 flew with the Iranian F-4s and surprised them?


We are still waiting for any evidence of it, just like evidence of those F35 fly over Tehran or USA disabled our air defense after Ain-al-Asad or that truck you parked on deck of your carrier actually managed to shoot down our drones


----------



## tsunset

Horse_Rider said:


> These are some silly questions. If the US can send in F-22 into the Iranian airspace many times I think they will use the F-35 whenever they need to. After all, it's an offensive weapon system designed to fight. F-35 is also not "inferior" to the F-22.. In many ways, the F-35 uses more advanced tech than the F-22 as it was build after about two decades, but then there are a few things kept away from people's view limited to only F-22 due to it's role, Iranian AD is just as ineffective against the F-35 than it was against the F-22.
> 
> I think I've read reports that Israel has used the F-35 already a few times to penetrate the Iranian airspace. I also read on an Israeli forum that there were constant combat missions being flown by the F-35's and that did include deep penetration into Iranian airspace for a future conflict. Seems like they've created a full map of ingress and egress when need be.





> I think I've read reports that Israel has used the F-35 already a few times to penetrate the Iranian airspace. I also read on an Israeli forum that there were constant combat missions being flown by the F-35's and that did include deep penetration into Iranian airspace for a future conflict. Seems like they've created a full map of ingress and egress when need be.


Israeli primitive propaganda, same as their claim they've struck a bavar-373 in Syria, which isn't even deployed in Iran yet

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Horse_Rider

tsunset said:


> Israeli primitive propaganda, same as their claim they've struck a bavar-373 in Syria, which isn't even deployed in Iran yet



I don't deny that there is propaganda on all ends. But here's the question, Syria has similar air defenses in place. The Israelis tamper with their AD's almost on weekly basis at will. What makes you think they can't penetrate Iran's? We know just in the past few years alone, the US's been going in and out and that F-22 encounter was an example. So why do you think they can't penetrate?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sanel1412

Ich said:


> You mean that F-22 in 2013? Yes, at that time Iran radar wasnt that good what it is today.


US never send F22 in Iran air space,they claimed they came fly above F4 in international airspace in P.Gulf but that is joke,if that happen they would publish video everywhere like every time they actualy did something...just as Israel,every time they had something they show it 1 hour later,rest is wet dreams....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gambit

Messerschmitt said:


> Based on reports from 2013 and USAF claims, which can't be verified. Even if the story were true, Iran's AD posture has improved significantly since the 2010s. The country is flooded with long-wavelength LR EW radars now and has capable ADS close to the border with powerful EO/IIR sensors (e.g. 3rd Khordad). A F-22 or F-35 attempting to enter Iranian airspace would likely be exposed to emissions by these lower band radars from multiple angles. Since "stealth" fighters are not optimized against longer wavelength radars and the fighters wouldn't face most radars from an optimal angle (large country, radars spread all over the place), they won't be invisible to Iran's IADS, as shown in this open-source model. The point wasn't that "stealth" is "crap" or doesn't play a role but that a F-35 entering Iranian airspace undetected and carrying out strikes on HVTs undisturbed before returning home will only work in Hollywood.


First, we do not care if anyone 'verify' anything we said and/or any event in the air at that time. In that event, if Iranian GCI radars detected the F-22, there would have been corresponding responses, such as additional EM activities or even the Iranian F-4s changed their courses.

Second, the 'long wavelength' argument remains unsubstantiated *OUTSIDE* of the labs. Technically speaking, yes. But the real world is seldom as environmentally clean as the scientists would have us believe. Of all the countries that can test their theories using a genuine low radar observable body and not software simulation? Errr...None, except US. And you think we do not know how to create that 'long wavelength' environment to refine our tactics?

By the way, how is that Iranian 'stealth' fighter coming?



Muhammed45 said:


> Question remains, would have USA allowed Israeli F-35 to risk a crash in Iranian airspace?


Let us follow this line of argument.

1. Israel did what they wanted independent of what we wanted.

2. Both countries are confident that Iranian radars cannot detect the F-35 and 'allowed' the incursion.

Your choice.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## gambit

sanel1412 said:


> US never send F22 in Iran air space,they claimed they came fly above F4 in international airspace in P.Gulf but that is joke,if that happen they would publish video everywhere like every time they actualy did something...just as Israel,every time they had something they show it 1 hour later,rest is wet dreams....


The US drone was in international airspace. Iran GCI controllers sent F-4 interceptors. Were the Iranian F-4s inside Iranian airspace? Or were all three in international airspace? Legally speaking, the Iranian F-4s can fly in international airspace just like the American drone did.



Hack-Hook said:


> We are still waiting for any evidence of it, just like evidence of those F35 fly over Tehran or USA disabled our air defense after Ain-al-Asad or that truck you parked on deck of your carrier actually managed to shoot down our drones


The point of being low radar observable is *NOT* to leave any evidence. Until it is too late for the other guy, of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Ich

gambit said:


> Your choice.


I choose:

B) All in the US like to kill little Babies in other countries and jerking of while doing.

Me choosed long ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flotilla

gambit said:


> 1. Israel did what they wanted independent of what we wanted.


That is the key. From invading Lebanon to make the biggest concentration camp in the History. I agree at 100%.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tsunset

Horse_Rider said:


> I don't deny that there is propaganda on all ends. But here's the question, Syria has similar air defenses in place. The Israelis tamper with their AD's almost on weekly basis at will. What makes you think they can't penetrate Iran's? We know just in the past few years alone, the US's been going in and out and that F-22 encounter was an example. So why do you think they can't penetrate?


Syria AD isn't at all similar to Iran's one, let alone radars, they fully rely on Russian and soviet era systems bought off the shelf that are decoded since decades by NATO/US, dunno what makes you think that Syria has a similar AD to Iran, if you are talking of Iran AD in 2010 then its a more valable claim

Alleged F-22 encounter wasn't even in Iran airspace and yet they managed to make a Hollywood scenario off of it, actually no encounter or intrusion backed with proofs was made inside Iran since the end of the Iran Iraq war, there were surely non-detected intrusions made during Afghanistan invasion in the early/late 2000s but since then a lot evolved

When Israel shot down a drone over their own airspace using an F-35, they immediately released a video from the F-35 perspective to boast about it, so meanwhile they are flying for 2 whole hours over Tehran and even throwing bombs on factories without being detected at all and what we get as a proof is..words coming from an anonymous source posted on a Kuwaiti outlet, not even a short video to boast about it and make Iran AD and radars look ridiculous


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589627260214337538

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stryker1982

Horse_Rider said:


> I don't deny that there is propaganda on all ends. But here's the question, Syria has similar air defenses in place. The Israelis tamper with their AD's almost on weekly basis at will. What makes you think they can't penetrate Iran's? We know just in the past few years alone, the US's been going in and out and that F-22 encounter was an example. So why do you think they can't penetrate?


Considering that just now it has been released on Twitter about the psychological warfare operations the US military has been conducting with Twitters support before Elon Musk's takeover is worth mentioning regarding this F-22 claim that has no recording or evidence of.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe_Adam

Horse_Rider said:


> These are some silly questions. If the US can send in F-22 into the Iranian airspace many times I think they will use the F-35 whenever they need to. After all, it's an offensive weapon system designed to fight. F-35 is also not "inferior" to the F-22.. In many ways, the F-35 uses more advanced tech than the F-22 as it was build after about two decades, but then there are a few things kept away from people's view limited to only F-22 due to it's role, Iranian AD is just as ineffective against the F-35 than it was against the F-22.
> 
> I think I've read reports that Israel has used the F-35 already a few times to penetrate the Iranian airspace. I also read on an Israeli forum that there were constant combat missions being flown by the F-35's and that did include deep penetration into Iranian airspace for a future conflict. Seems like they've created a full map of ingress and egress when need be.


Day dreaming by a clueless aerospace wannabe . . . . Deep penetration, how deep is deep? How did those flying junks got refueled on such d e e e e p penetrations and where? Then some more, they created full map of ingress and egress? That calls for a big party in the Jew-dome for an accomplishment that even the mighty US air force couldn't achieve. 

Dude, get a pill, you're talking nonsense . .

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## tsunset

Joe_Adam said:


> Day dreaming by a clueless aerospace wannabe . . . . Deep penetration, how deep is deep? How did those flying junks got refueled on such d e e e e p penetrations and where? Then some more, they created full map of ingress and egress? That calls for a big party in the Jew-dome for an accomplishment that even the mighty US air force couldn't achieve.
> 
> Dude, get a pill, you're talking nonsense . .


I actually wonder how some people really believe these stories

Or saying Iran AD is similar to Syria's one

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

gambit said:


> First, we do not care if anyone 'verify' anything we said and/or any event in the air at that time. In that event, if Iranian GCI radars detected the F-22, there would have been corresponding responses, such as additional EM activities or even the Iranian F-4s changed their courses.


*If* the story is true, yes. But even then, that was in 2013. Iran's IADS was *much* less capable than it is today. Iranian EW radars were rather rare and less sophisticated. Most of the AD and radar systems which build the backbone of Iran's IADS today were either not mass-produced or not even developed back then. Iran has come a long way when it comes to radar and AD technology since the 2010s and is flooded with mobile VHF EW radars. You can't compare a 2013 Iran relying on few, mostly obsolete Soviet-era radars with Iran in 2022.


gambit said:


> Second, the 'long wavelength' argument remains unsubstantiated *OUTSIDE* of the labs. Technically speaking, yes. But the real world is seldom as environmentally clean as the scientists would have us believe. Of all the countries that can test their theories using a genuine low radar observable body and not software simulation? Errr...None, except US.


Same is true for "stealth" fighters though. They would also have to face Iran's IADS in a real world scenario, not in a simulated environment. It goes both ways.


gambit said:


> And you think we do not know how to create that 'long wavelength' environment to refine our tactics?


So basically a "don't you think we have an ace up our sleeves?" argument.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

Messerschmitt said:


> So basically a "don't you think we have an ace up our sleeves?" argument.


How is that Iranian 'stealth' fighter coming?


----------



## Ich

gambit said:


> How is that Iranian 'stealth' fighter coming?


The truth is: Fighterplanes will be obsolete in near future after flying tanks enter the chat.

Edit: I know that most of the readers do not understand. So here are the hints:

1. Armor what is now in development is up to 1000 times lighter as the armor what is normally used in todays tanks but equally strong (or even better)
2. Lasers what are now in development will be 10-50 times stronger as the lasers what are today used succsessfully at CRAM and will be perfect for the APS of flying tanks (missiles? What missiles?)
3. Hydrogen and future fuel cell technics will provide lots of energy while itself be lightwheight

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608740778251280385

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609128190672359424

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609127170235924487

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609120120949047296

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609109279163777024

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609101490831892480

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## tsunset

Does someone have an analysis explaining that 3rd Khordad isn't a KUB or a BUK? I heard so many times of that but i never had the actual technical specs to argument

Or even making the difference analysis so everyone can respond to those saying it is a copy, it would be great


----------



## WudangMaster

SPAAG?


----------



## mack8

Looks like a Shilka.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Iran Army fires Khordad 15 air defense system during drills​On the third day of Zolfaqar 1401 drills, the Army’s joint war game, that started on December 29, 2022, the Army forces fired the indigenous Khordad 15 air defense system on December 31

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Joe_Adam

gambit said:


> Actually, the F-35 would be obeying the laws of physics. Remember when an F-22 flew with the Iranian F-4s and surprised them? The reality is that the F-22 surprised Iranian ground radars, not the Iranian F-4s.
> 
> Aside from AWACS, airborne radars are limited to frontal view, simply because the array is mounted in the front end of the jet. It means that for air defense, the ground control intercept (GCI) method is the best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NORAD Control Center - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *NORAD Control Center*s (NCCs) were Cold War "joint direction centers"[2] for command, control, and coordination of *ground-controlled interception* by both USAF Air Defense Command (ADC) and Army Air Defense Command (ARADCOM).​
> Iranian air defense is no different. I used NORAD to remove any suspicious of deception.
> 
> What GCI does is direct interceptors to the air location of suspicious targets, then the interceptors make *VISUAL* identification of whatever they see. So when Iranian ground radars detected the US drone, they directed Iranian F-4s to intercept. What Iranian GCI controllers saw were three targets when there was a fourth body -- the F-22. In other words, Iranian air defense radars saw three bodies when there were *PHYSICALLY* four. If the F-22 flew close enough to check out the armaments carried by the Iranian F-4s, the F-22 was definitely inside the Iranian GCI radar beam.
> 
> Even if the platform is 'stealth', it does not mean the pilot have a license to be careless about radar nets. When I was active duty and on the F-111 stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, our squadrons, along with F-111S from RAF Lakenheath, often trained to avoid radar detection. Once, I was in the WSO seat over the Channel at 50 ft altitude in TFR hard ride. From the WSO seat, I tuned the TFR so that it would pick up even the waves. It was a hard flight because our two-ship flight were flying the waves as if they were land terrain features. We successfully 'attacked' France when they requested our assistance in testing their new air defense radar.
> 
> The B-2, F-117, F-22, and F-35 pilots are no different. Their mission plannings would include avoidance of radar nets as much as possible. Being low radar observable means that if you have to be in a radar beam, you would have enough time to exit the situation without being tagged as a target. It does not mean you can fly as if nothing happened. But in this particular situation, the F-22 pilot did not cared. The fact that he flew close enough to the Iranian F-4s means he knew he would be inside the Iranian GCI radar beam, but he also knew that being that close to the F-4s, he would be essentially invisible to the Iranian ground radars. Keep in mind that the American drone was physically smaller than the F-22 but the Iranian GCI radar saw only three, not four, targets, when all of them were flying in a *STEADY STATE FORMATION*.
> 
> If an Israeli F-35 was inside Iranian airspace, most likely the Iranians would not know it.


Lame and useless gibberish nonsense. Wake up dude, America is a washed up, crumbling nation ruled by a horde of very old, or better put expired braindead losers. The idea that drug ingesting American or a Jew boy could fly over Iran "TEHRAN" for two hours or even 2 seconds would be the greatest accomplishment in aerial acrobatics "pun intended". The US army, Navy and the rest of that rotten establishment mostly comprised of illiterates green card holding south and Latin American mercenaries. America has no capacity nor the guts to fight a high intensity war against Iran or any nation equipped for modern warfare, they will be litrally rapped and they know it, and yet, now and then we see loudmouth losers pop up "from behind PC screen" in USA or fake Israel fabricating stories about high-tech wonder weapons, flying over Tehran for two hours with a platform "F-35" that couldn't even reach that distance physically even if Iran lacked any means of detection or functional SAM systems. Unless of course by some divine miracle those junks consume nitrogen instead of Jet Fuel? That's possible since Jesus loves people with blue eyes who overdose on drugs and get drunk constantly. 

Aside from people suffering perpetual hallucination or mental retardation no rational individual on earth would believe this physics defying fairytale. America was good, very good in 1960s to late 1990s but that's no longer the case. Technology gap between USA & Iran in most military technologies is almost ZERO. The only aspect of superiority USA has is in space based information gathering but nations such as Iran have means of neutralizing that.

The strange part of these phony stories is the idea that few squadrons of light aircraft could pacify Iran. Even the full fledge US assault on Iran wouldn't succeed due to Iran's long reach that's way more effective than any phony stealth . . Are you ready to lose 50,000 drunken US GIs in few weeks, then get ready and act instead of babbling like an old woman, get on with it and show the world your manhood, and surely you won't as you folks got none. Dogs that bark don't bite. 

Most x US corpals and non-commissioned officers who never passed the threshold of 9th grade get excited by the slightest mention of US army, Navy or air force "many folks in this forum have the same inclinations too", and one would ask why; using too much drugs, drinking too much alcohol, and consuming loads of Lard at very early age could do that to you. By the time they reach adulthood, they no longer resemble humans neither mentally nor physically, but behave and think "acting on impulse" exactly like deformed creatures we call pigs. Thus, imagine the degree of difficulty in teaching such deadbrains the distinction between reality and fantasy . . . 

Banning such retards would be the best course of action.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Cancerous Tumor

Mersad and Ghadir

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Messerschmitt

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609376440620912641

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Flotilla

Why using a Karrar UAV?. Maybe for avoiding any F22 or F35 to hide behind their radar signal???


----------



## Sineva



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## gambit

Joe_Adam said:


> Lame and useless gibberish nonsense. Wake up dude, America is a washed up, crumbling nation ruled by a horde of very old, or better put expired braindead losers. The idea that drug ingesting American or a Jew boy could fly over Iran "TEHRAN" for two hours or even 2 seconds would be the greatest accomplishment in aerial acrobatics "pun intended". The US army, Navy and the rest of that rotten establishment mostly comprised of illiterates green card holding south and Latin American mercenaries. America has no capacity nor the guts to fight a high intensity war against Iran or any nation equipped for modern warfare, they will be litrally rapped and they know it, and yet, now and then we see loudmouth losers pop up "from behind PC screen" in USA or fake Israel fabricating stories about high-tech wonder weapons, flying over Tehran for two hours with a platform "F-35" that couldn't even reach that distance physically even if Iran lacked any means of detection or functional SAM systems. Unless of course by some divine miracle those junks consume nitrogen instead of Jet Fuel? That's possible since Jesus loves people with blue eyes who overdose on drugs and get drunk constantly.
> 
> Aside from people suffering perpetual hallucination or mental retardation no rational individual on earth would believe this physics defying fairytale. America was good, very good in 1960s to late 1990s but that's no longer the case. Technology gap between USA & Iran in most military technologies is almost ZERO. The only aspect of superiority USA has is in space based information gathering but nations such as Iran have means of neutralizing that.
> 
> The strange part of these phony stories is the idea that few squadrons of light aircraft could pacify Iran. Even the full fledge US assault on Iran wouldn't succeed due to Iran's long reach that's way more effective than any phony stealth . . Are you ready to lose 50,000 drunken US GIs in few weeks, then get ready and act instead of babbling like an old woman, get on with it and show the world your manhood, and surely you won't as you folks got none. Dogs that bark don't bite.
> 
> Most x US corpals and non-commissioned officers who never passed the threshold of 9th grade get excited by the slightest mention of US army, Navy or air force "many folks in this forum have the same inclinations too", and one would ask why; using too much drugs, drinking too much alcohol, and consuming loads of Lard at very early age could do that to you. By the time they reach adulthood, they no longer resemble humans neither mentally nor physically, but behave and think "acting on impulse" exactly like deformed creatures we call pigs. Thus, imagine the degree of difficulty in teaching such deadbrains the distinction between reality and fantasy . . .
> 
> Banning such retards would be the best course of action.


How much does Tehran pay you? By the words or by the hour. For the shid that I just read.


----------



## Muhammed45

gambit said:


> How much does Tehran pay you? By the words or by the hour. For the shid that I just read.


Guy! Honestly your claims make you seem very foolish. 

If your pirate leaders had any sort of assurance that they could win a possible battle with Iran, then believe it or not, they wouldn't have delayed it with no hesitation by now. 

Iran's area denial capability beside your vulnerability in economic and political sectors plus the fighting spirit of Iranians leaves you with no choice but to avoid any conflict. 

According to IRGC general they can target every spot in your country and according to Iranian leader, Iran will reapond to any attck with same volume and same method. If you attack our mainland, we will surely respond in the same way. How come Iran has sacrificed billions of billions on nuclear technology? To get NUKEd by USA with no response? Then you are a complete idiot like always you have shown to us. 

It is a fact that USA has one of the best strategic depths in its mainland with one of the best equipped regular militaries of the world and hence no attack can stop it from retaliating, it is same about Iran and its mainland. Iran might be in a weaker position but its fighting spirit leaves it in the same level of USA. You point your pistol on my front, i'll do the same. At same time that USA tries to save face and attacks Iran, Russia China India and other capable countries will take the advantage and leave you behind. In short you can inflict a huge dmage on Iran and Iran can respond in a similar way, you gonna lose everything from allies to your reputation. 

So my advice, shut the fuk up and listen to wise people of your country who honestly point to the realities of your society. CIA has been gathering terrorists, warlords, human traffickers, drug dealers and every criminal that you can imagine from around the world for plenty of reasons. The most corrupt political figures from every nationality resides in your country the same traitors that betray their own countries in the hope of US citizenship/greencard. My example is, MEK terrorists and their HQ in USA which is a grave threat to people of USA. The day your pirate leaders lose control over these criminals, they will turn your country into ashes. Not to mention that CIA is one the largest drug dealers in the world and your corrupt NSA spies on people of USA. 

If you don't wake up to the truth and continue with policy of piracy around the world, you gonna lose everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Hack-Hook

tsunset said:


> Does someone have an analysis explaining that 3rd Khordad isn't a KUB or a BUK? I heard so many times of that but i never had the actual technical specs to argument
> 
> Or even making the difference analysis so everyone can respond to those saying it is a copy, it would be great


this part of the article explain it all.








3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing


Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...




patarames.blogspot.com






> As the performance parameters of the 3rd Khordad have not been published, we can calculate the performance of other better known systems against a -20 dB class target.
> The highest performance system, of which the necessary data for the radar equation is known, is the export variant of the Russian S-400:
> 
> Tracking of a -20 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 56km.
> Tracking of a -10 dB class target by the 92N6E X-band engagement radar would be 100km.
> Iran claims that target was tracked or locked at 120km, missile was launched at 90km distance and hit the approaching RQ-4 at 75km distance.
> 
> The 3rd Khordad however is not comparable to the S-400. In terms of aperture size, its about 7 times smaller and doesn't achieve as high power levels.



the people that compare the system with BUK actually compare it to BUK-M2EK which iran never had access to
here are the difference in the two system
range: 
3rd of Khordad depended on missile : 200km, 105km, 75km ,50km
Buk M2Ek: 25-45km
engagement altitude: 
3rd of Khordad: depend on the missile 27-30km
Buk M2EK: 15-25km
a BUK battalion can engage 24 incoming enemy aircraft at 50km of range . the number for 3rd of khordad is 16 incoming enemy aircraft at 200km of range

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> this part of the article explain it all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3rd Khordad: The RQ-4 downing
> 
> 
> Understanding what was achieved This post is about the Iranian 3rd Khordad SAM, a system that should not have been able to do it's first ope...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patarames.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the people that compare the system with BUK actually compare it to BUK-M2EK which iran never had access to
> here are the difference in the two system
> range:
> 3rd of Khordad depended on missile : 200km, 105km, 75km ,50km
> Buk M2Ek: 25-45km
> engagement altitude:
> 3rd of Khordad: depend on the missile 27-30km
> Buk M2EK: 15-25km
> a BUK battalion can engage 24 incoming enemy aircraft at 50km of range . the number for 3rd of khordad is 16 incoming enemy aircraft at 200km of range


3rd Khordad TELs/TELARs are also smaller (reduced footprint) than Buk-M2EK TELs/TELARs while its main missiles (Taer-2) are actually larger in size (longer range) than Buk-M2's 9M317 missiles. 3rd Khordad's Bashir acquisition radar (based on Chinese JY-11B) is also more similar to Belarusian Buk-MB3K's "Radar-150" (based on Chinese JH-18) than to its Russian counterpart.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Messerschmitt

Kub/Buk-ish systems:
Raad-1: Passive Kub
Raad-2: Passive Buk
Tabas: Ambush Buk-M1
3rd Khordad: Iran's "Super Buk"
3rd Khordad (9th Dey): Short-to-medium-range anti-saturation-attack version
Alamolhoda: Alleged (secret) very-long-range system

HAWK-derived systems:
Mersad: Iran's reverse-engineered (+ improved) HAWK
Mersad-16: Modern, re-designed HAWK

Patriot-lookalike Sayyad missile systems:
Talash: Medium-range capability for Iran's S-200 sites
15th Khordad: IRIADF's Patriot (AESA)
Jooshan: IRIADF's Patriot (PESA)
Sayyad: IRGC-ASF's Patriot?
Tactical Sayyad: IRIADF's 3rd Khordad
Bavar-373: Iran's S-300/400
Arman (?): Upcoming very-long-range (400 km) system

FM-80-based systems (basically forgotten):
Ya Zahra: Reverse-engineered FM-80
Herz-9: Miniaturized, mobile FM-80

Tor-derived systems:
Dezful: IRGC-ASF's Tor-M1
Dezful Plus: IRIADF's improved Dezful
Oghab (?): Possibly Dezful with added AAA

Other SHORADs:
Majid: Very mobile EO/IIR ambush SHORAD
Zoobin: Modern low-altitude AESA VLS SHORAD
Separ (?): Possibly Iran's Pantsir

Quick overview of Iranian SAM systems for those who are getting just as confused as me.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jauk

gambit said:


> How much does Tehran pay you? By the words or by the hour. For the shid that I just read.


You sound like you’re a few fries short of a happy meal brah.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hack-Hook

Messerschmitt said:


> Mersad-16: Modern, re-designed HAWK


Mersad-16 is a mixed bag , they somehow merged part of Hawk subsystems with part of raad project and it become Mersad-16


Messerschmitt said:


> 15th Khordad: IRIADF's Patriot (AESA)


if I'm not wrong its PESA not AESA

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Turkey And Iran Show Off Their Homegrown Air Defense Systems


Ankara and Tehran ultimately plan to export variants of their homegrown systems.




www.forbes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Messerschmitt

Hack-Hook said:


> Mersad-16 is a mixed bag , they somehow merged part of Hawk subsystems with part of raad project and it become Mersad-16


Interesting, didn't know about the Raad part.


Hack-Hook said:


> if I'm not wrong its PESA not AESA


I haven't seen any official specs of the 15th Khordad's Najm-804 radar, but allegedly it's a S-Band AESA. Jooshan appears to be the PESA variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sineva

A very interesting pic.





This could very possibly be the first actual picture of the iranian L-ASR4 radar.
Another possibility is that this is the RLM vhf radar component of the Nebo M anti lo/vlo radar system in iranian service.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1610521659030528001

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## SalarHaqq

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609128190672359424


> *apparently based on Russian variant, or directly Russian*



Glad to see Iran-Russia cooperation yield more and more technological input for Iran. Such input has come in handy to speed up domestic development projects, particularly in the air defence sector (but not limited to it). And as it appears with this news, it's now reflecting itself through a key asset in Iran's possession.

This is a textbook example of a mutually beneficial strategic cooperation on equal footing, enhancing strong indigenous industrial-technological capabilities of two nations endowed with high degrees of self-sufficiency, sharing common interests and aims.

In short, the exact opposite of the master-vassal relationship which used to characterize Iran's subservience to the USA regime under the pro-zionist monarchy, ousted by the Iranian people in their glorious Islamic Revolution.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Stryker1982

Cancerous Tumor said:


> Mersad and Ghadir
> View attachment 908787
> View attachment 908788
> View attachment 908789
> View attachment 908790
> View attachment 908791
> View attachment 908792
> View attachment 908793
> View attachment 908794
> View attachment 908795
> View attachment 908796
> View attachment 908797
> View attachment 908798


Totally missed this post.

Looks like the seed of investment is paying off very well. 

Anyone know of other seeds that have been planted which will blossom in the future? No one would consider Iran to be a serious AD manufacturer just 10 years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------

