Iranian Air Defense Systems

[Arminkh]

How much of an idiot do you guys think this retard feels right right now?

View attachment 566240

You know what the beauty of this Iranian system is? The fact that it is so damn precise that it hit the intended smaller target, I.e. RQ-4, instead of the P-3 that was flying next to it and has a much larger radar signature. Something very similar to the incident happened to Russian patrol aircraft in Syria could have happened there.

And yet, it was photoshopped!

 

[Blue In Green]

You know what the beauty of this Iranian system is? The fact that it is so damn precise that it hit the intended smaller target, I.e. RQ-4, instead of the P-3 that was flying next to it and has a much larger radar signature. Something very similar to the incident happened to Russian patrol aircraft in Syria could have happened there.

And yet, it was photoshopped!

People will just have to accept that Iran is advanced in AD just like they accepted Iran is advanced in BMs. They will be reluctant but it will come to pass!!

 

[TheImmortal]

Good news is that it is already in serial production since some time.
Bad news is that its radar array is expensive, let me describe it briefly as X-band "non-monopulse" electronically steered array.
Here the Tabas system is significantly cheaper and I firmly believe that even the 15th Khordad is still cheaper than the 3rd Khordad.
However the 3rd Khordad is a real killer...

As shown a full battalion has 36 ready to fire missiles and 16 guidance channels. At a high threat first line a battalion can credibly protect a 200km circle and create a nightmare for the opponent.

The Najm series has a different role: Bashir radar was specially developed to support the long range 3rd Khordad.

Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.

Furthermore, how well do you think Iran would have fared in downing the missiles fired at it?

 

[Ich]

Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.

Cause the 150 were F-18/F-22 Pilots?

 

[yavar]

 

[Hack-Hook]

Beautiful vid from 3rd Khordad yankee drone killer:

Interesting the video show the missile as hit to kill system . I thought it use proximity switch.

 

[PeeD]

Note that Hajizadeh said that initially that 20 people were on bord of the P-8 not 35.

Why did the US claim there would “150 casualties” if they had attack. When the intention was to attack 3 radar/Missile batteries.

Furthermore, how well do you think Iran would have fared in downing the missiles fired at it?

The Americans think the 3rd Khordad was from an anti ship missile base between Bandar Abbas and Jask. They probably want to claim that they wanted to attack that base and that this would have caused 150 KIA.
That base is not very hardened like other ones but still a high importance object for Iran, so it would have SAM and AAA protection.
Hence depending on how many missiles the Americans "wanted" (bluff) to use against it, a unknown number would likely had been intercepted.
But that's all speculation, I don't think for a second that Trump really considered this. Just a move in his mad-man doctrine.

@Hack-Hook

I only see proximity fuse: The damage by a directed frag warhead is most of the times more devastating than a direct hit.

 

[mohsen]

As expected: Guiding a SARH Taer-2 to 105km is not possible against fighter-size targets with the 3rd Khordad array.

What's the limitation?

 

[PeeD]

EM wave intensity on target.
Smaller ESA systems, like the Mig-31 Zazlon are rated to provide SARH illumination to 100km+ range. So theoretically these is no real issue.
The issue is this: In 2019 ranges are measured against targets in the 0,1-1m² RCS range not a high two digit number representing a B-52.
Taking the P-8 as a example, 3rd Khordad illumination power would probably be able to support a 150km engagement if the missile would be able to.
Cost also plays a role: The higher the radar output is the more expensive it gets.

So the compromise for the 3rd Khordad is to guarantee sufficient illumination to 75km, likely against targets <0,1m² RCS. But for 105km, a ARH is available to kill such <0,1m² RCS targets.
This is a professional conservative approach.
As said: current BUK-M2 which is just about 10 years old is only rated to about 50km and has a larger array, newest -M3 is rated to 75km.

 

[TheImmortal]

EM wave intensity on target.
Smaller ESA systems, like the Mig-31 Zazlon are rated to provide SARH illumination to 100km+ range. So theoretically these is no real issue.
The issue is this: In 2019 ranges are measured against targets in the 0,1-1m² RCS range not a high two digit number representing a B-52.
Taking the P-8 as a example, 3rd Khordad illumination power would probably be able to support a 150km engagement if the missile would be able to.
Cost also plays a role: The higher the radar output is the more expensive it gets.

So the compromise for the 3rd Khordad is to guarantee sufficient illumination to 75km, likely against targets <0,1m² RCS. But for 105km, a ARH is available to kill such <0,1m² RCS targets.
This is a professional conservative approach.
As said: current BUK-M2 which is just about 10 years old is only rated to about 50km and has a larger array, newest -M3 is rated to 75km.

If what you say is true,

Then shouldn’t the logical decision for a military be to develop next gen radars that are truly sensitive and potentially extremely expensive (hundreds of millions of dollars/maybe billion of dollars per radar) but can reliably detect stealth aircraft (extremely low RCS) from much longer distances then feed that data to acquisition radars.

Clearly such a Radar would need next gen means of aircraft detection as being underground would i imagine impede traditional radar waves. Obviously we have ground penetrating radars, but the reverse I’m not sure I have heard of.

I know US/China are racing in the field of quantum radars.

Again not my area of expertise, but for example in astrophysics/astronomy slight detections of ripples in space time continuum is detected by advanced systems underground that can measure incredibly minute differences in gravity caused by merging of neutron stars or black holes which would signify ripples in space time caused by significant gravity event.

Furthermore, in other areas of astronomy other devices are embedded deep underground in specific contraptions to measure the amount of neutrinos (I believe could be wrong on the particle) that impact the Earth.

That being said, is it possible theoretically based on modern laws of science, to develop a type of next gen radar that can detect extremely low RCS aircraft while being underground let’s say in an Iranian Missile base type structure?

 

[sanel1412]

If you think 3rd Khordad is based on Buk... then you dont know what you are talking about..... 3rd Khordad is based on Standard missiles, thats why the lunchers have 3 missiles, rather than 4 o Buks.

There are also 2 missiles with exactlly same design as BUK-M1/M2 missiles but all 3 versions RAAD2,Tabas and 3th of khordad ,even share similar look,have very different radars...I tought also it is based on BUK-M2E till I didn't saw radars...It share many things with BUK-M2,that is truth...it has same battery design and deployment ,use as BUK and TOR Kasta 2e as search and acquisition radar but it is much more than BUK...and all 3 versions outperform BUK counterparts...So,they probably analyzed BUK M1/M2 but Tabas and 3th of Khordad radar antennas are completely different.... As I could see when comparing Iranian new radars and AD systems, they share similarities with Russia and Chinese counterparts but seems Iran don't want end up in situation where any 3th party has knowledge on their AD assets so they don't simple copy some technology, everything we saw is heavily modified and make it different than counterparts.
Should I said that medium range AD systems are main line of defense against fighter aircrafts,even long range system engage fighter aircrafts at medium ranges...so it is very important to have combat proven system. This target was not easy,MQ-4C is most advanced drone that exist... They call it flying data hub,and it has some stealth capability... But what make it even more harder to target is fact that it try to hide above air trafficking,and despite that they identity target successfully and downed it with one missile(even for slow drone one is only needed)...I saw news minute after they released it and they immediately say it is RQ-4(which is base for MQ-4).
What I saw about this MQ-4 situation, BUK wouldn't be able to reach it probably ...Russian news outlets at first said it was s-300 but latter we found out it was 3 th of khordad which was what I thought ,I was sure it is SU-22 aircraft or 3th of khordad, simple because we know what IRGC operate and those two are logical options for such high altitude... I must say,I'm surprised with efficiency of 3th of khordad and it is not because it is Iranian ,simple because it is very new and it is not simple copy of some already proved SAM...

it's a new, more technological missile with a new function. Sorry to tell you but it's like that ... Do you have any other information about it? And I know it's missile of S-200 HELLO!

No..no info except what I already said about Iran S-200 upgrade and modifications. That is,they solved main flaw of S-200 that makes it very limited against fighter aircrafts and that is huge minimal range.Iran demonstrated S-200 shut down drone in visual range...In reality you will never use such expensive missile and strategic SAM vs drone in close range...they just wanted to demonstrate it is capable to target it,and this is not first time Iran showed modified S-200 missile
.S-200 missile is one of the fastest missiles ever built for SAM and system is pretty capable but it was designed in different time for different deployment but still even today pretty good even without any upgrade. This is not first time Iran showed domestic modified S-200 missile....any way since you have to defend many strategic static objects ,S-200 and most other static SAM are deployed around or inside these strategic objects so you defend object and SAM with same SHORAD and medium range systems...

 

[PeeD]

If what you say is true,

Then shouldn’t the logical decision for a military be to develop next gen radars that are truly sensitive and potentially extremely expensive (hundreds of millions of dollars/maybe billion of dollars per radar) but can reliably detect stealth aircraft (extremely low RCS) from much longer distances then feed that data to acquisition radars.

Clearly such a Radar would need next gen means of aircraft detection as being underground would i imagine impede traditional radar waves. Obviously we have ground penetrating radars, but the reverse I’m not sure I have heard of.

I know US/China are racing in the field of quantum radars.

Again not my area of expertise, but for example in astrophysics/astronomy slight detections of ripples in space time continuum is detected by advanced systems underground that can measure incredibly minute differences in gravity caused by merging of neutron stars or black holes which would signify ripples in space time caused by significant gravity event.

Furthermore, in other areas of astronomy other devices are embedded deep underground in specific contraptions to measure the amount of neutrinos (I believe could be wrong on the particle) that impact the Earth.

That being said, is it possible theoretically based on modern laws of science, to develop a type of next gen radar that can detect extremely low RCS aircraft while being underground let’s say in an Iranian Missile base type structure?

Its non-proportional scaling limits and LOS restrictions that makes such "super-radars" unfeasible/inefficient.
There are some, like ABM radars but the closest to such a super radar is the Russian Container OTHR.
Iran is working on such a OTHR system too.

If a breakthrough happens via quantum radars, equations may change.
However the dream about a nuclear strike hardned early warning radar (like Irans missile force), doesn't seems feasible at this point.

 

[PeeD]

Also note that almost certainly it was Irans IRGC-ASF Ghadir 2 radar unveiled in the documentary yesterday that did the continuous radar track of the RQ-4, from take-off-->climbing to 10km altitude in UAE down to the Jask region.

No other known Iranian asset would be able to do such long range tracking and very few nations in the world have such a capability at all.
I also talk about precision track, not coarse OTHR quality track.
Hence the unveiling of the Ghadir 2 was a signal to the U.S: You know what we used, we see everything at such altitude (even "stealth"). Even possible the the hidden message is: We use Ghadir 2, next target is a manned F-22 or F35.

 

[skyshadow]

Also note that almost certainly it was Irans IRGC-ASF Ghadir 2 radar unveiled in the documentary yesterday that did the continuous radar track of the RQ-4, from take-off-->climbing to 10km altitude in UAE down to the Jask region.

No other known Iranian asset would be able to do such long range tracking and very few nations in the world have such a capability at all.
I also talk about precision track, not coarse OTHR quality track.
Hence the unveiling of the Ghadir 2 was a signal to the U.S: You know what we used, we see everything at such altitude (even "stealth"). Even possible the the hidden message is: We use Ghadir 2, next target is a manned F-22 or F35.

Ghadir 1 has that capability too and there is one more i do not remember its name with 1200 km range, but Ghadir 1 looks a lot bigger then Ghadir 2 almost twice as big, what is your thought on that?

 

[PeeD]

Ghadir 1 has that capability too and there is one more i do not remember its name with 1200 km range, but Ghadir 1 looks a lot bigger then Ghadir 2 almost twice as big, what is your thought on that?

Ghadir 2 is a evolved Ghadir, same array size but 200-300km longer range. There is one Ghadir 2 that covers UAE and Straight of Hormuz airspace.