What's new

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

TheImmortal

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2017
5,543
-12
9,364
Country
United States
Location
United States
Forgot to edit this . Short to medium ranged indeginous development is rooted from the american hawk and french croatile with minor advancments and very similair. The rest are from russian chinese designs with almost identical specifications. And no data on the accuracy of these "indigenous" products.

Also incorrect since Sayyad family fall under medium range systems. Not copies of Russian systems since Russia uses mostly cold launch and Iran uses mostly hot launch. I just told you the Iranian missile body for medium range SAMs is SM-3—a American missile body. Interior is Iranian.

A modernized HAWK and modernized croatile exist but they aren’t being mass produced anymore and likely haven’t in over a decade.

Iran‘s short range to semi-medium range consist of Mersad (SM-3 body, Iranian internal), Iranian version TOR-M1, Russian TOR-M1, Mobin (copy of South African system), Majid, Talash (Iranian patriot AD), and a future Iranian Pantsir.

Iran’s Long Range is composed of Sayyad 2 & 3 missiles of Bavar 373. Russian S-300 and modernized version of S-200 against large targets.

So it seems you are not very knowledgeable about Iranian air defense systems.
 

Stryker1982

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 5, 2016
3,239
-2
5,223
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
Forgot to edit this . Short to medium ranged indeginous development is rooted from the american hawk and french croatile with minor advancments and very similair. The rest are from russian chinese designs with almost identical specifications. And no data on the accuracy of these "indigenous" products.
What did you do? About a 5 minute read on wikipedia? It's clear you don't know much about Iran yet you continue to speak very confidently.

So it seems you are not very knowledgeable about Iranian air defense systems.
He's not and it's fairly obvious. The worst part is how he is trying to explain Iran to us who we've been researching about for years as if we don't know what scalp is or the general SDB threat is, from much stronger adversaries I might add. Whole post is full of broad assumptions, I can't tell if he is just screwing around or he's already decided his assumptions are correct in his mind.
 
Last edited:

Hydration

FULL MEMBER
Feb 9, 2022
1,215
0
834
Country
Egypt
Location
Egypt
Also incorrect since Sayyad family fall under medium range systems. Not copies of Russian systems since Russia uses mostly cold launch and Iran uses mostly hot launch. I just told you the Iranian missile body for medium range SAMs is SM-3—a American missile body. Interior is Iranian.

A modernized HAWK and modernized croatile exist but they aren’t being mass produced anymore and likely haven’t in over a decade.

Iran‘s short range to semi-medium range consist of Mersad (SM-3 body, Iranian internal), Iranian version TOR-M1, Russian TOR-M1, Mobin (copy of South African system), Majid, Talash (Iranian patriot AD), and a future Iranian Pantsir.

Iran’s Long Range is composed of Sayyad 2 & 3 missiles of Bavar 373. Russian S-300 and modernized version of S-200 against large targets.

So it seems you are not very knowledgeable about Iranian air defense systems.
So your medium ranged missiles mersad is based off the SM-3 an intercontenital american hypersonic interceptor missile and you turned it into a medium ranged missile? Talk about downgrades. Mersad with shaheen and shamalesh missiles identical to the american hawk still in service and is actively being upgraded. The short to medium ranged missiles in iranian inventory seems to be lacking and mostly semi active radar homing of 3rd generation missiles with exception of the bavar and tor m1. The chance of iran succesfully inteecepting an aerial attack or a ballistic missile barrage is highly unlikely but is not zero. At this moment it is not enough or complete, good but slow steps of constant copies trying to reach them to the 21st century. Your current adversaries have significant advantge and ypur only bet is to spam missiles before theirs get to you
 

mulj

FULL MEMBER
Apr 1, 2022
389
0
562
Country
Bosnia And Herzegovina
Location
Bosnia And Herzegovina
Forgot to edit this . Short to medium ranged indeginous development is rooted from the american hawk and french croatile with minor advancments and very similair. The rest are from russian chinese designs with almost identical specifications. And no data on the accuracy of these "indigenous" products.
Your concern is legitimate, plenty of years and time to test capabilities in Syria by Iran but none happened.
 

Hack-Hook

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 11, 2012
15,188
3
14,560
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
bavar 373 and the listed above based upon russian chinese systems introduced in the 90s 2000s and iam talking variants.
the missiles based on Standard missiles not Russian ones

For the bavar threat SCALP cruise missiles employed by emiriati rafales or egyptian coupled with a formation of f16s with al tariq winged small diameter bombs as a distraction overcomplicate the situation for the bavar and its formation of short range medium ranged 3rd generations missiles which it wont be able to deny.
Seems like iran isnt focusing on quality or the percentage hit rate success but only numbers and the range ignoring that it might be jammed easily or miss its target, thinking like nasser era of the 60s
bavar duty is not countering those , it need counter rafale itself , for those bombs and missile other systems will be used
Forgot to edit this . Short to medium ranged indeginous development is rooted from the american hawk and french croatile with minor advancments and very similair. The rest are from russian chinese designs with almost identical specifications. And no data on the accuracy of these "indigenous" products.
as I said iran no longer produce anything based on Hawk , for short range we use system based on crotale and Tor.
for medium and long range systems are based on Standard missiles . a simple search would have shown you that
oh I forget in short range we have one system based on a chinese manpad design
 
Last edited:

Hack-Hook

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 11, 2012
15,188
3
14,560
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
So your medium ranged missiles mersad is based off the SM-3 an intercontenital american hypersonic interceptor missile and you turned it into a medium ranged missile? Talk about downgrades. Mersad with shaheen and shamalesh missiles identical to the american hawk still in service and is actively being upgraded. The short to medium ranged missiles in iranian inventory seems to be lacking and mostly semi active radar homing of 3rd generation missiles with exception of the bavar and tor m1. The chance of iran succesfully inteecepting an aerial attack or a ballistic missile barrage is highly unlikely but is not zero. At this moment it is not enough or complete, good but slow steps of constant copies trying to reach them to the 21st century. Your current adversaries have significant advantge and ypur only bet is to spam missiles before theirs get to you

BusterFacePalm.gif
what are you talking about SM-3 is not intercontinental , it was a Standard missile 3 build to protect navies against air threat and if needed used against surface threats , believe me our experience say it was alot more effective than harpoon for that role.

by the way Mersad, Shalamcheh and shahin is the part we told you there was a system based on hawk but its not produced anymore. what is produced for short to medium range is Mersad-16
as you see a lot different from old Mersad
bavar use sayyad missile , 3rd of khordad use sayyad and Taer missiles , 15th of khordad use Sayyad missiles and Mersad-16 use Shalamcheh-2 missile which is not based on MIM-23
 

Blue In Green

FULL MEMBER
Nov 30, 2016
1,896
0
3,644
Country
United States
Location
United States
I love it when people from other regional countries who grew up under the belief of "Iran has F-5 and Scuds only" end up seeing Sejjil MaRV-MRBM, Emad, Kheibar Shikan, our SLV's, Bavar-373, Karrar tanks, Kaman-22/Gaza wide-body MALE UCAVs, Fateh class, long range cruise missiles etc etc they end up making the stupid most clueless comments like our misri friend here is doing.

A few weeks ago one turkish was claiming that Turkey with its short range SAMS and Short range BM has somehow become regional power ROFL, likely he did not know that Iran makes and operates domestically made AESA coupled long range SAMS and MaRV-MRBMs that can hit CEP of less than 10 m.

We are very humble people with no idea what self boosting propoganda is. We have a killer in our arsenal called Khalije Fars Anti-Shipping Ballastic Quasi Trajectory Ballastic Missile, we have literally shown it from its seeker piercing barges into pieces in persian gulf yet most people here think only China fields out AShBMs.

Iran is still very much a mystery to outsiders who simply just don't know and are utterly ignorant as to recent Iranian advancements that have irreversibly changed the paradigm of military power in the region.

I.R.I. has some pretty forward thinking military planners within their ranks and clearly their persistence has payed off in spades.
 

WotTen

FULL MEMBER
Mar 18, 2022
1,006
-3
1,689
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
Thing is, Iranian strategy in wartime is centered squarely on utterly saturating the enemy with as many missiles, drones and cruise missiles as humanly possible in the beginning stages of the conflict.

Any Iranian Air-assets used will be utilize after the enemies ability to retaliate has been greatly reduced to manageable levels.

This strategy does not make sense. All of Iran's adversaries will have the US as an active party in the conflict. Iran does not have the ability to neutralize American retaliatory capability.
 

Blue In Green

FULL MEMBER
Nov 30, 2016
1,896
0
3,644
Country
United States
Location
United States
This strategy does not make sense. All of Iran's adversaries will have the US as an active party in the conflict. Iran does not have the ability to neutralize American retaliatory capability.

The strategy makes perfect sense given the massive ballistic missile/drone/cruise missile umbrella most relevant targets Iran will be destroying fall under. Moreover, it's the leading strategy Iran intends on employing once any hostility erupts. Iran has a doctrine centered around the extensive use of ballistic missiles, drones, cruise missiles as well as regional allies/proxies. I humbly suggest you go through the Iranian missile section here on PDF to get a better idea as to why I'm saying such things to begin with. Missile-Centric warfare is a viable wartime strategy with realistic applications at both the tactical and strategic levels, especially in the theatre of conflict. The Russian Federation, Chinese PLA also use a similar approach to modern warfare as well. Looking at the pace of Russian missile strikes in Ukraine, one can get an idea as to what Iran would be doing as well. Although it should be noted that Iranian missile strikes on regional targets would be way, way, way more aggressive than anything the Russians have been doing in Ukraine thus far. Iran missile stockpiles and the different methods of launch would allow for a massive, near continuous volume of heavy accurate fire at ranges up to 2,000km. Encompassing both ground and NAVAL targets.

Having the U.S. as a partner really doesn't matter as much as you think it does given the type of weaponry and amount of fire IRGC plans on employing. Defenses can be handedly overwhelmed and the assets being obliterated are not easily replaceable (multi-million dollar jets, oil-depots, refineries, hangars, air-ports, run-ways, Control Towers, Radars, power-substations, water desalination plants, places of governance, barracks, sea-ports, off-shore rigs, pipe-lines, shipping vessels, Tankers, etc). Given the target bank and pace of strikes. I'd wager to say that Iran has the potential (maybe) to come out relatively on-top in terms of sheer damage dealt if the conflict is kept relatively short. Anything longer than that, then Iran will face severe problems as they would be forced to increasingly rely on outdated conventional assets that simply don't stack up to regional contemporaries. And would presumably end up battered badly in return if the effort to destroy enemy long-range offensive assets/air-force wasn't all that effective. It really depends on just how comprehensive/thorough an initial IRGC-AEROSPACE missile force strike will be. Which even for me, I'm still skeptical.

It should be the noted that the United States can no longer support regional allies in the Middle East to the level you're alluding given other more pressing geopolitical aspirations that are currently falling apart. Ukraine and East-Asia Pacific to name a few, clearly command the lion's share of American concern geopolitically. Redeploying assets to the MENA region in a bid to counter I.R.I. during a war would have disastrous consequences worldwide and further erode American hegemony or what's left of it.
 
Last edited:

WotTen

FULL MEMBER
Mar 18, 2022
1,006
-3
1,689
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
It should be the noted that the United States can no longer support regional allies in the Middle East to the level you're alluding given other more pressing geopolitical aspirations that are currently falling apart. Ukraine and East-Asia Pacific to name a few, clearly command the lion's share of American concern geopolitically. Redeploying assets to the MENA region in a bid to counter I.R.I. during a war would have disastrous consequences worldwide and further erode American hegemony or what's left of it.

A single American carrier group has more than enough firepower to outgun Iran or any other country in the region.

The US has twelve of them. More than enough to spare.

I don't mean to be disrespectful but the US is not just a superpower, it is truly a hyperpower. Both China and Russia respect that. Their only hope is a nuclear deterrent.
 

Blue In Green

FULL MEMBER
Nov 30, 2016
1,896
0
3,644
Country
United States
Location
United States
This strategy does not make sense. All of Iran's adversaries will have the US as an active party in the conflict. Iran does not have the ability to neutralize American retaliatory capability.

I also want to add that this approach might not make all that much sense depending on the perspective you're coming in with. Iranian military is centered around a hybrid of conventional/non-conventional asymmetric warfare.

Iran isn't fighting jet-for-jet, tank-for-tank, ship-for-ship.
 

Blue In Green

FULL MEMBER
Nov 30, 2016
1,896
0
3,644
Country
United States
Location
United States
A single American carrier group has more than enough firepower to outgun Iran or any other country in the region.

The US has twelve of them. More than enough to spare.

I don't mean to be disrespectful but the US is not just a superpower, it is truly a hyperpower. Both China and Russia respect that. Their only hope is a nuclear deterrent.

The USN doesn't deploy all twelve Carrier Battle Groups at once, this would be require massive resource/monetary spending as well as domestic political support for such an undertaking.

And no, a single American carrier group doesn't have enough firepower to outgun Iran (nuclear weapons shouldn't be factored in), Idk where you're getting this idea from. Iranian domestic weapons manufacturing has been exponentially producing powerful and numerous quantities of game-changing PGMs (precision guided munitions) for quite some time now. Thousands, upon thousands, upon thousands of difficult to counter BMs, and Drones are being produced and fielded by Iranian forces. This isn't something that can be simply dismissed just because America has a carrier battle-group in the vicinity. -- Respective ranges of IRGC AshCM, AshBMs, Drones (UCAV, loitering, suicide, reconnaissance), submarine/surface-vessel launched weapons would be enough to see American NAVAL based sortie rates reduced since they would be forced to operate further away from Iranian soil.

Iranian offensive assets on Iranian-soil are well-defended in vast, well guarded (both passively and actively) mountain bases. Mobile launchers also play a great deal in ensuring that any efforts to attrite such assets (mobile TELS) will be greatly circumvented due to their ever moving nature.

China and Russia respects the reality of the threat they face and have invested heavily in the research/development and production of weapons meant to outright obliterate American NAVAL assets.

China and Iran both employ highly-effective AshBMs (Anti-Ship Ballistic weaponry) and the Russians field a litany of coastal/air-based based systems that can shred any USN vessel apart.

China: DF-21 DongFeng
Iran: Khalijeh Fars
Russian Federation: So many I won't even bother naming them all
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom