Iranian Air Defense Systems

[sanel1412]

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

 

[yavar]

 

[Ich]

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.

 

[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.

 

[arashkamangir]

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.

 

[Blue In Green]

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.

 

[TheImmortal]

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.

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.

 

[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.

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.

 

[Hack-Hook]

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.



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.

 

[N_Al40]

https://twitter.com/x/status/990588003625074689

https://twitter.com/x/status/990605995788431360

https://twitter.com/x/status/990610200620163072

https://twitter.com/x/status/990610202645934080

 

[Fafnir]

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

 

[gambit]

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.