Iranian Air Defense Systems

[skyshadow]

 

[yavar]

 

[PeeD]

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.

 

[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.

 

[skyshadow]

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.

 

[mohsen]

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!

 

[skyshadow]

 

[VEVAK]

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

 

[PeeD]

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?

 

[Arminkh]

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.

 

[Hack-Hook]

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 .

 

[arashkamangir]

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.

 

[skyshadow]

what is this? is it AS 6?

 

[scythian500]

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.