What's new

Iranian Air Defense Systems

WudangMaster

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2014
670
-2
1,196
Country
United States
Location
United States
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

FULL MEMBER
Jan 9, 2017
1,360
-2
2,691
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
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.
 

WudangMaster

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2014
670
-2
1,196
Country
United States
Location
United States
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...
 

Bahram Esfandiari

FULL MEMBER
Jan 9, 2017
1,360
-2
2,691
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
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.
 

TheImmortal

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2017
3,586
-10
5,946
Country
United States
Location
United States
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.
 

Bahram Esfandiari

FULL MEMBER
Jan 9, 2017
1,360
-2
2,691
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
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.
 

Stryker1982

FULL MEMBER
Oct 5, 2016
1,516
0
2,155
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
credits to Patarames

So a Sosna-like AD system with probably 8 tubes


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.
 

WudangMaster

FULL MEMBER
Apr 17, 2014
670
-2
1,196
Country
United States
Location
United States
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.
 

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


Top Bottom