What's new

Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

skyshadow

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 12, 2017
4,715
3
12,586
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,511
You are straw-manning me a little.

I didn't say the U.S should abandon their airforce in favor for BMs, point is: They have no real BMs or hypersonic missiles at all, at this moment, and working to get them.

The U.S has realized that ranges of typical tacair like F/A-18 or even F-35 are not sufficient to counter advanced enemies (of which there are only a handfull in the world).

They will go for a large B-21 fleet, with strategic range and hypersonic weapons ( more or less BM) that can penetrate the target at extended ranges.

Tacair and drones are only brought in if the key enemy capabilities are degraded. Then they can be used as tactical bombtrucks as you described
Not straw manning you azeezam we are just talking.....

The U.S. may not view BM as a viable conventional solution due to their vast requirements but that doesn't mean they don't have them.

And how we categorize Hypersonic is much different than they way they categories them. And you know that!



In fact less hard.
Your saying hitting a moving target on the ground from 2000km is harder than hitting airborne target at that range? Come on now!!!

No one talks about transport aircrafts here. Its about the old fashioned (2000's) U.S dream of F-35 striking Natanz deep inside Iran via stealth, SDB and other fancy things.
No. This wont work against a country like Iran anymore.

They need more potent weapons, like B-52 delivered hypersonic missiles, or the Pershing-2 if they still had it.
I very much doubt the U.S. was ever under the impression that they could use F-35's as the main delivery system to hit Natanz. No doubt F-35's would be used in the operation and used against Iranian IADS but not as the main payload delivery system for hitting Natanz it's self.

A Pershing2 armed with a conventional payload would not be able to penetrate Natanz either.

And if the U.S. didn't put much value in BM's they wouldn't be using as the main payload delivery system for their nuclear weapons.


Which aircraft can go and strike 2000-3000km range BM's for which you would need tacair to counter it?
Its all about the ranges.
Simply put, if the US had vast BM stationed in Diego Garcia instead of a vast Air Power would Iran allow them to have so many bases around Iran?
Would we stand by and let their ships to come and go and deploy so many weapons as they please?

I'm not questioning the value of BM's but the fact is it's not ether or! You can not create a unidimensional military and expect your enemy to idly sit by and not create a counter to that one capability!

If you create a military that is utterly incapable of countering areal targets beyond 200km what do you think your enemy is going to do? Of course they will develop capabilities around your weaknesses to try to take away any advantages you many have

Again, I didn't say Iran should completely abandon its airforce. Just the vast priority is with the missile forces.
It's not either or!

And the development of a capable Air Force isn't simply about Fighter jets!

Look at the state of Iranian civil aviation! Look at the age of our Fighters and Transport aircraft!

How much longer do you think this will last?

So no! Priority can not be with Missiles alone

Want to see those large soft assets survive and take off from their homebase after it received a salvo of 2500km range hypersonic missiles fired at safe distance from B-52.

2-3 AEW with 100 long range Su-57, for offensive force projection against typical low capability neighbors? That would be good, but not more.
No! I would like to see those soft assets become Airborne &/or moved before shots are fired! Just like how US moved most of it's assets as soon as they felt an Iranian missile attack was coming. Which is why having a large sensor network is vital to the security of any country

As for Su-57's I honestly believe Iran is technologically advanced enough that given sufficient funding we can produce a fighter that would be more than sufficient.
At the rate the Russians are producing Su-57's it would take them 2 decades before they can transfer 100 Su-57s to Iran. If properly funded we can easily produce a viable fighter of our own within that timeframe

Production of a viable fighter isn't just about a fighter or just about an Airforce!

Fact is lack of budget in the Military clearly shows that our leadership still doesn't clearly understand the value and implications of a properly funded defense industry and it's effects on various civilian industries.


Such a capability is good to have and should be there, The vast majority of resources should be put in missiles, then drones and then tacair.

So while in 1980, tacair made up 100% of high-end capability, 20% are whats good today.
So we agree in principle!

Kelooyee agheh hesab koneem if before 60%-70% of your budget for new weapons and equipment acquisitions went to the Air Force today under normal circumstances that should be divided between 20% manned fixed winged Aircraft from transport to fighters 20% Missiles from SLV to LACM & Rockets 15%Navy & Coastal Defense 15% Cyber warfare, AI, robotics & unmanned systems UAV/UCAV/UGV 10% IADS 10% Infantry equipment from coms to ISW 5% Helo's 5% Ground Vehicles, Equipment & Artillery
Kilooiii! For weapons, parts and equipment acquisitions NOT military budget!

Now under normal circumstances that would absolutely be ideal, however, when you have failed to properly acquire new aircrafts over decades on end then a smart leadership should have built up the budget needed to make up for it!

And by no means am i advocating the purchase of foreign Aircraft! Simply that they invest properly in the infrastructure needed to make up for years of neglect. And purchasing fighters is not the answer!
If the French where able to produce an Aircraft like the Mirage IV in the late 60's then the idea that Iran is technologically incapable of building something far superior today is nothing but a sad excuse. Iran's requirements for manned Aircrafts are not going away
 

bahadur

BANNED
Jul 27, 2020
749
-7
287
Country
Nepal
Location
India
Iran's efforts to build long-range ballistic missiles and artillery with a high range can be divided into three periods .

First period : ( 1977 - 1979 )

Second period : During the years of war with Iraq ( 1980 - 1988 )

Third period : since end of war ( since 1988 )

Since the second period , manufacture of rockets and missiles entered a new phase and designing and producing them in a huge number was performed . ( The experience of 8 year war helped Iran to understand the influence of ballistic missiles and missile technology in War , defense strategy which led Iran to unlimited missile defense strategy ).

After the war , Iran tried to develop it's missile technology with the help of foreign experts who were driven from their country or were unemployed .

Solid Fuel :

The main foundation of using this fuel were Oghab and Shahin 2 missiles .

Iran used this technology systematically for it's field artillery which caused producing Fajr , Naze'at and Zelzal artillery groups . Initial efforts were supported by China's technical assistance and technology .
Many Assembly and manufacturing plant were built during the years from 1991 to 1992 . Iran with an incredible speed overtook china and was needless of china in producing .


Fajr 2


Fajr 3

Weight : 45 kg (HE Content) _ 90 kg (Warhead) _ 407 kg (Rocket)

Length : 10.45 m (Launcher) _ 5,200 mm (Rocket)

Width : 2.54 m (Launcher)

Height : 3.34 m (Launcher)

Caliber : 240 mm

Maximum range :43 km




Fajr 5

Weight : 90 kg (HE Content) _ 175 kg (Warhead) _ 915 kg (Rocket)

Length : 10.45 m (Launcher) _ 6.485 m (Rocket)

Width : 2.54 m (Launcher)

Height : 3.34 m (Launcher)

Caliber : 333 mm

Effective range : 68–75 km



Naze'at 6

Weight : 130 kg (Warhead) _ 960 kg (Rocket)

Length : 6.29 m

Width : 356 mm

maximum range : 100 km



Naze'at 10

Weight : 230 kg (Warhead) _ 1830 kg (Rocket)

Length : 8.02 m

Width : 455 mm

maximum range : 130 km


To be continued
great country .
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,511
We have an Air Force. Drones. Combat fighters is retrograde thinking. Iran shouldn't invest a penny in operational aircraft only for TOT and the minimum required.
A fighter program isn't just about a fighter! The requirements for manned Aircrafts isn't going away and you can't point to a single country on the planet that is capable of producing a viable airliner with engines and all but has yet to master the ability to produce it's own fighters!

It's almost always the defense industry that pushes forward the science, technological and infrastructural capabilities of country

So failing to properly invest in aircraft development is simply put "IDIOTIC"
 

yavar

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 20, 2013
5,581
-4
10,811
USA will use tactical ballistic missiles to target our assets ....
to add or give better or clear picture,

they will use low yield (useable nuclear weapon ) missile cruise or ballistic for sure the second round of escalation

something like this

low yield neutron bomb

or

bit more efactive

January 29, 2020
US Deploys New Low-Yield Nuclear Submarine Warhead
The US Navy has now deployed the new W76-2 low-yield Trident submarine warhead. The first ballistic missile submarine scheduled to deploy with the new warhead was the USS Tennessee (SSBN-734), which deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia during the final weeks of 2019 for a deterrent patrol in the Atlantic Ocean.
The W76-2 warhead was first announced in the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) unveiled in February 2018
Though almost all of the discussion about the new W76-2 has focused on Russia scenarios, it is much more likely that the new low-yield weapon is intended to facilitate first-use of nuclear weapons against Iran.


I just wanted to make more clear for Iranian members here or anyone who has delusions about the use such weapons by U.S against Iran if anything get escalated .
 

Draco.IMF

FULL MEMBER
Jan 17, 2015
1,195
0
2,901
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
to add or give better or clear picture,

they will use low yield (useable nuclear weapon ) missile cruise or ballistic for sure the second round of escalation

something like this

low yield neutron bomb

or

bit more efactive

January 29, 2020
US Deploys New Low-Yield Nuclear Submarine Warhead
The US Navy has now deployed the new W76-2 low-yield Trident submarine warhead. The first ballistic missile submarine scheduled to deploy with the new warhead was the USS Tennessee (SSBN-734), which deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia during the final weeks of 2019 for a deterrent patrol in the Atlantic Ocean.
The W76-2 warhead was first announced in the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) unveiled in February 2018
Though almost all of the discussion about the new W76-2 has focused on Russia scenarios, it is much more likely that the new low-yield weapon is intended to facilitate first-use of nuclear weapons against Iran.


I just wanted to make more clear for Iranian members here or anyone who has delusions about the use such weapons by U.S against Iran if anything get escalated .
Is Iran prepared for such a scenario?
Any chance to stand against such an escalation?
 

Stryker1982

FULL MEMBER
Oct 5, 2016
1,364
0
1,882
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
to add or give better or clear picture,

they will use low yield (useable nuclear weapon ) missile cruise or ballistic for sure the second round of escalation

something like this

low yield neutron bomb

or

bit more efactive

January 29, 2020
US Deploys New Low-Yield Nuclear Submarine Warhead
The US Navy has now deployed the new W76-2 low-yield Trident submarine warhead. The first ballistic missile submarine scheduled to deploy with the new warhead was the USS Tennessee (SSBN-734), which deployed from Kings Bay Submarine Base in Georgia during the final weeks of 2019 for a deterrent patrol in the Atlantic Ocean.
The W76-2 warhead was first announced in the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) unveiled in February 2018
Though almost all of the discussion about the new W76-2 has focused on Russia scenarios, it is much more likely that the new low-yield weapon is intended to facilitate first-use of nuclear weapons against Iran.


I just wanted to make more clear for Iranian members here or anyone who has delusions about the use such weapons by U.S against Iran if anything get escalated .
You sure that Yemen blast was a neutron bomb. I remember from before that the their was a ammo dump underneath.
Is Iran prepared for such a scenario?
Any chance to stand against such an escalation?
The W76-2 is a 5-7 Kt nuclear missile that would likely be used in a saturation attack against nuclear hardened missile cities. The firepower that can exit these facilities particularly with the carousel system in place would be too costly to bear for Iran's adversaries. The use of these weapons are the only means to disable these bases.

Iran's missile cities are nuclear hardened. Iran has no illusions that these weapons would be used against it. That being said, will it be able to handle multiple hits precision guided strike from a 5-7 Kt warhead is the main question.
 
Last edited:

yavar

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 20, 2013
5,581
-4
10,811
Is Iran prepared for such a scenario?
Any chance to stand against such an escalation?
Iran IRGC Gen Salami: we are fully ready for worst case scenario with US /battlefield will show our power

Iran IRGC Brigadier General Rastegar Panah on IRIB3 : head of Iran’s Center for Sustainable National Security Studies, . he is works for Bait of leader of Iran.
Brigadier General Rastegar Panah :We Can Hit Any American Target any whereand on any level it require


I am not IRGC Gen Salami: or IRGC Gen. Rastegar Panah .
i only speak for myself , I guarantee and promise that that IRI will use nuclear.......... after U.S used Low-Yield , after IRI stricks back all U.S Israeli sensors will detect DEU (depleted uranium) and usage such weapons.

you can all hold me acoutable in this forum if such war or limited conflict break out
 
Last edited:

Shawnee

FULL MEMBER
Jan 22, 2020
1,429
0
2,591
Country
United States
Location
United Kingdom
Is Iran prepared for such a scenario?
Any chance to stand against such an escalation?

مهمترین حرف سلامی در کل زندگیش

من فکر نمیکنم این انفجار هسته ای بود و مدارکی دال بر تشعشع در محل نیست
قدرتش ظاهرا از یک دهم کیلوتن کمتره

ولی اینها به موقع صد در صد استفاده میشن
برای انبارداری نساختن برای استفاده در مواقع ضروری ساختن​
 

yavar

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 20, 2013
5,581
-4
10,811

مهمترین حرف سلامی در کل زندگیش

من فکر نمیکنم این انفجار هسته ای بود و مدارکی دال بر تشعشع در محل نیست
قدرتش ظاهرا از یک دهم کیلوتن کمتره

ولی اینها به موقع صد در صد استفاده میشن
برای انبارداری نساختن برای استفاده در مواقع ضروری ساختن​
i don't think he can read farsi
فارسی نمی تونه بخونه
 

Stryker1982

FULL MEMBER
Oct 5, 2016
1,364
0
1,882
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
i only speak for myself , I guarantee and promise that that IRI will use nuclear.......... after U.S used Low-Yield , after IRI stricks back all U.S Israeli sensors will detect DEU (depleted uranium) and usage such weapons.

you can all hold me acoutable in this forum if such war or limited conflict break out
This is why we have a nuclear program and are continuing to develop more advanced centrifuges. We need to reduce our breakout time as much as possible. Should the USA or Israel resort to nuclear weapons to disable these bases, the designs and centrifuges need to be in place to rapidly enrich to 90% and assemble a few warheads within 1 weeks time in smaller facilities.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Top Bottom