What's new

Iranian Air Defense Systems

It is open information that the US plans to employ hypersonic cruise missiles in situation attacks. Current cost means nothing but the US has not yet fully started mass production of any such systems yet. Once it does, then the game has changed considerably. The only question then is, how much range would such systems have, if they can make them in longer ranges then you can imagine a threat of tomohawk like saturation attacks but at hypersonic speeds.
You talk all this futuristic talk but Ignore the fact that US soldiers currently in Iraq have no good AD protecting them in their bases. You only want to talk about how US can attack in future but ignore what US cant defend in the future..smh
 
You talk all this futuristic talk but Ignore the fact that US soldiers currently in Iraq have no good AD protecting them in their bases. You only want to talk about how US can attack in future but ignore what US cant defend in the future..smh

The Russians can also wipe the US off the map, it does not mean they are not investing in new ways to protect their own air space. My comment had little/nothing to do with Iran's ability to counter attack but its ability to defend its airspace in a conflict with the US. Todays kinetic attack in the form of missiles are likes of tomohawk, tomorrow they'll be hypersonic CMs and gliders. In my opinion, the only way for Iran to economically defence against such hypersonic threat is not to invest heavily in next gen anti-hypersonic (glide vehicle etc) air defences that even the US does not have the capability to make yet but to make its own hypersonic systems on top of what it has now. Iran priority should be able to quickly detect and dismantle launch platforms where such attacks will come from. Currently Iran access denial capability is still not large enough.
 
The actual physics of these designs has existed for decades. I think the major hurdle is the material science?
 
I don't need you to explain to me how they work.



None-sense. The Russians are already working on a version of the Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles with 1000km range. These are still beginning stages, ranges will go even longer.

Furthermore, you're obviously not paying attention. Once the US starts mass production, the prices will go even lower. If country like the US is planning to produce 2500+ F-35, you think they could not afford to mass produce hypersonic cruise missiles, which they are seeing as an extremely important strategic asset in the future?

let’s say that US makes a long range supersonic CM in similar performance to Tomahawk. Let’s say it cost $2-3M per missile (tomahawk cost 1.4M) For US to fire 100 cruise missiles with a standard failure rate of 10-20% means that it would cost US 200-300 million dollars basically the cost of an F-35 fighter jet. US fired that 20 cruise missiles when it attacked Syrian air base. Simply not economical. And the results were underwhelming.

Russia can say what it wants, last I checked they don’t even have 12 SU-57s. Russia may build something, but can’t afford it in large numbers. It’s hypersonic CMs/BMs are strategic weapons likely to be nuclear.

Saturation attacks by hypersonic missiles is unrealistic unless you can get price of missile below 500K per missile. And since SUB-SONIC Tomahawk has been around for DECADES and the price is still north of 1M what makes you think a similar range hypersonic missiles would be anywhere close to that price or cheaper?

like I said you don’t know what you are talking about and sitting in the Hollywood movies.


This dude doesn’t even make sense.

If it is boosted by a BM, it is a HYPERSONIC BM. No CM can stand at 20,000/H at sea level, that speed is glide vehicle in upper atmosphere. It would evaporate at sea level at that speed. Go tell me what material can withstand that heat and friction.

Hence why it’s terminal phase (going to strike target as it descends in altitude is less than Mach 6). Which is nothing out of ordinary as Iranian BMs reach that speed and higher.

Glide vehicles just allow the warhead to move extremely fast to the target in upper atmosphere and not have fixed trajectory. At the end of the day when it comes to strike its speed becomes no different than a BM.
 
let’s say that US makes a long range supersonic CM in similar performance to Tomahawk. Let’s say it cost $2-3M per missile (tomahawk cost 1.4M) For US to fire 100 cruise missiles with a standard failure rate of 10-20% means that it would cost US 200-300 million dollars basically the cost of an F-35 fighter jet. US fired that 20 cruise missiles when it attacked Syrian air base. Simply not economical. And the results were underwhelming.

And yet, the US still produces these systems like tomahawk in the 1000's. Like I said, Hypersonic systems will provide the US with a great strategic capability. The cost difference between them and tomohawk will not be so substantial that the US would avoid mass procurement.


Russia can say what it wants, last I checked they don’t even have 12 SU-57s. Russia may build something, but can’t afford it in large numbers. It’s hypersonic CMs/BMs are strategic weapons likely to be nuclear.

I was referring to range here. I showed you that these systems in longer ranges are being developed. In the context of Russia, I am not interested how many they'll produce. Russia is not the US.

Saturation attacks by hypersonic missiles is unrealistic unless you can get price of missile below 500K per missile. And since SUB-SONIC Tomahawk has been around for DECADES and the price is still north of 1M what makes you think a similar range hypersonic missiles would be anywhere close to that price or cheaper?

Right, because the US has not been using the tomahawk in saturation attacks? Is the price of tomohawk below 500k?

like I said you don’t know what you are talking about and sitting in the Hollywood movies.

Like you said, despite the price of tomohawks, the US is producing them in 1000's. So either show me some actual claims US will not mass produce the next gen hypersonic system or stop pretending as if you know what you're talking about.

The US has more than the financial capability to back the mass procurement of these system in enough numbers. At least go read around the topic a little and then you'll get the sense how seriously US takes this idea of saturation attack via these next gen hypersonic systems.
 
Lasers are not perfect they certainly have their disadvantages. When based as a ground air defense asset they can become useless if you have a stormy weather i.e. sand storm or rain storm, foggy days and nights where it becomes hopeless to use them and enemy can take advantage on that.

This is not correct in total. Yes, the LASER is weakened if there are aerosols in the way of the laser. But since years there are formulars to calculate the loss in different air/wether conditions. The programm MODTRAN is mostly used to calculate the air/wether conditions and based on that then the calculated loss of the LASER. In the follow pic you can see some of the math

atmo.png


Edit:

In this example you can see the atmospheric calculations if an air born LASER would take out a BM from some hundreds kilometers away

fallbeispiel.png
 
This is not correct in total. Yes, the LASER is weakened if there are aerosols in the way of the laser. But since years there are formulars to calculate the loss in different air/wether conditions. The programm MODTRAN is mostly used to calculate the air/wether conditions and based on that then the calculated loss of the LASER. In the follow pic you can see some of the math

View attachment 603287

Edit:

In this example you can see the atmospheric calculations if an air born LASER would take out a BM from some hundreds kilometers away

View attachment 603288

Hmm.. The last image favors more airborne directed energy weapons and yes figures do show that in the near exospheric and above conditions, lasers will shine but yet again questions do rise when you have a passenger plane retrofitted with a laser which can be a huge blimp on the radar screens. One of the things you can have is to retrofit B2 stealth bombers with directed energy weapons loitering close enough the enemy airspace and shooting down everything that flies under the assumption you are able to detect missiles or even planes (the higher the altitude the better). My humble two cents is to build huge balloon aerostats and sentinels with lasers onbaord over important centers under the assumption that you are able to protect them against armed satellites with DEW which can shoot them down where satellite killers are playing an important role if they are able reach for the kill.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these satellites have to be in LEO otherwise the response time will be too long.

Edit.

Lasers do work both ways if you can target from above someone can target you from the ground as well.
 
And yet, the US still produces these systems like tomahawk in the 1000's. Like I said, Hypersonic systems will provide the US with a great strategic capability. The cost difference between them and tomohawk will not be so substantial that the US would avoid mass procurement.




I was referring to range here. I showed you that these systems in longer ranges are being developed. In the context of Russia, I am not interested how many they'll produce. Russia is not the US.



Right, because the US has not been using the tomahawk in saturation attacks? Is the price of tomohawk below 500k?



Like you said, despite the price of tomohawks, the US is producing them in 1000's. So either show me some actual claims US will not mass produce the next gen hypersonic system or stop pretending as if you know what you're talking about.

The US has more than the financial capability to back the mass procurement of these system in enough numbers. At least go read around the topic a little and then you'll get the sense how seriously US takes this idea of saturation attack via these next gen hypersonic systems.

Like I said more nonsense. You have no proof that US is planning to use HGVs in saturation attacks. Furthermore, how do you plan on launching hypersonic missiles from a VLS genius? Right now almost any prototype HGV is either BM boosted to outerspace or air launched at high altitude. Neither of these are “saturation attack methods” but strategic weapons.

To even begin to give you a cost of these missiles see below:


The Army's Space and Missile Defense Command, based in Huntsville, Ala., has conceived of an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon that could boost into space aboard a two-stage rocket, separate and glide to a target up to 6,000 kilometers away in less than 35 minutes.

Proponents of the advanced weapon say it could be fielded as early as 2009 for the Defense Department's "prompt global strike" mission, under which the United States seeks the ability to attack a small number of fleeting targets at long range.

To accomplish that today, the only weapons in the U.S. arsenal with sufficient range and speed are nuclear arms, Pentagon leaders have said. In an effort to expand targeting options for a U.S. president seeking to avoid nuclear war, the military has proposed developing a new set of conventionally armed, prompt global strike weapons.

With terrorist hideouts or rogue nations as its primary targets, an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon could carry a 900-pound penetrator warhead or 900 pounds of rods to impact at Mach 4 speed, according to the system's advocates.

However, critics have said the Army weapon faces some daunting technological challenges that would require a heavy investment of dollars and time to resolve. Chief among them is the development of a thermal protection technology capable of withstanding atmospheric flight at extremely high speeds, according to defense experts.

The missile defense command has estimated that the Pentagon would spend nearly $390 million on the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon over a five-year period beginning in this fiscal year, during which during which just two missiles would be built.

Alternatively, with a 55 percent funding boost, the Army could build 16 missiles in the same time frame, military officials told Global Security Newswire. Under this option, the Pentagon would spend roughly $600 million on the effort through 2012, officials said.

https://www.nti.org/gsn/article/price-tag-for-fast-missile-might-top-600-million/

HGVs threat is between Russia, China, And US circumventing the others second strike nuclear capability. The reason why US cares about HGVs is for DEFENSE in case Russia or China try to attempt a nuclear first strike.

For you to sit here and say “bro US is going to have 1000’s of HGVs” is not rooted in reality. You have no proof even though I have cited evidence of the extreme cost to fielding just a strategic arsenal. Your rebuttal is not in the realm of reality as US has cancelled many projects due to high cost (Zumwaltt, F-22, next gen Supercarrier, etc).

Just because the US has a massive military budget doesn’t mean they have a blank check to buy whatever. A simple history lesson would show you that.

Like I said Tomahawks and next gen stealth cruise missiles being fielded as a conventional attack force do the job at a fraction of the cost.

Almost the entire tomahawk arsenal is aboard destroyers and cruisers in form of VLS. I have already explained to you to get to Mach 15+ you have to be upper stages of atmosphere. Mach 3-4 at sea level isn’t going to fool anybody versus a supersonic missile (Brahmos 1&2) going Mach 1.5-2
 
Hmm.. The last image favors more airborne directed energy weapons and yes figures do show that in the near exospheric and above conditions, lasers will shine but yet again questions do rise when you have a passenger plane retrofitted with a laser which can be a huge blimp on the radar screens. One of the things you can have is to retrofit B2 stealth bombers with directed energy weapons loitering close enough the enemy airspace and shooting down everything that flies under the assumption you are able to detect missiles or even planes (the higher the altitude the better). My humble two cents is to build huge balloon aerostats and sentinels with lasers onbaord over important centers under the assumption that you are able to protect them against armed satellites with DEW which can shoot them down where satellite killers are playing an important role if they are able reach for the kill.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these satellites have to be in LEO otherwise the response time will be too long.

Edit.

Lasers do work both ways if you can target from above someone can target you from the ground as well.

Yes, air born LASER act at highs around 10 km and also yes this planes are easy to detect and to engage. But it is only meant as an example. The point i tried to show is that for every wether condition there is a formula to calculate how the LASER has to be to bring best energy on the target. Also i wrote some post above that LASER is for medium and shortrange AD. As far as i know there are no positiv tests for long range ( 50+ km) by now if it comes to targetting and hold the LASER long enough on the moving target.
 
Last edited:
Like I said more nonsense. You have no proof that US is planning to use HGVs in saturation attacks. Furthermore, how do you plan on launching hypersonic missiles from a VLS genius? Right now almost any prototype HGV is either BM boosted to outerspace or air launched at high altitude. Neither of these are “saturation attack methods” but strategic weapons.

Apparently you're just going in circles now. So then just wait and see what happens. As for the claim regarding how hypersonic cruise missiles can launched, if the Zircon can be launched from naval ships and submatine, does that mean it requires to be launched at high altitude?


Putin Names Ships, Subs That Will Get Shadowy Zircon Hypersonic Missile
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...on-hypersonic-missile-as-test-date-approaches

If you're going to mockingly call someone a "genius" then at least do some research before posting so you don't come across foolishly.
 
Interesting analysis of a guy on twitter, about an secret, man portable Iranian SAM with an range beyond 10 km

sadly a shipment to the Houthis was seized in 2019, so the enemy is already aware of it:



EP8OVz1XsAUMh2U


EP8OVz8WkAcKYjm


Exclusive: In light of the #E-11A "crash" and doubts about any weapon existing in the portable class to do that, I feel free to talk about a secret Iranian SAM here. It was captured by the U.S in 2019, briefly shown on one photo and hence its existence is already compromised.


Iran never disclosed the existence of this weapon, since it was designed for covert operations. When U.S official sources published it, they didn't detail it. It went nearly unnoticed. A recent Saudi Ah-64 kill and the unusual crash of the E-11A may now establish a link to it.

Weapons in this weight and size class, such as IR MANPADs normally pose a lower threat to professional/controlled attack helicopter operations. They remain out of range and have counter-measures. That's also true for the high flying E-11A, which simply stays outside the envelope.

The secret Iranian SAM is of the Qaem family, a laser beam riding TOW sized and based SAM with a terminal kick stage. However it is larger and transported in two pieces by a 2-3 man team. The added size allows for ranges beyond 10km and computerized fire control for a high PK.

Key to how this range is achieved is like the Qaem: Initial acceleration - cruise - coast - re-acceleration - kill. Traditional missiles lack the re-acceleration phase and once they are kinematically defeated, they are worthless. The overall lower velocity of it, preserves energy

30k-40k altitude and speed of an E-11A is not what it was designed for and at the edge of its envelope. However due to advanced thermal optics, gimballed/automated tracking/guiding, ranging and trajectory computing, it becomes possible to set a ambush for that kind of targets.

Counter measures against such laser beam riding missiles are almost non-existing. Bad weather can help and we saw it at the crash site. However it might have been targeted before entering clouds that typically accumulate around mountains. Reminder: Cause of the crash is unknown.
 
Interesting analysis of a guy on twitter, about an secret, man portable Iranian SAM with an range beyond 10 km

sadly a shipment to the Houthis was seized in 2019, so the enemy is already aware of it:



EP8OVz1XsAUMh2U


EP8OVz8WkAcKYjm


Exclusive: In light of the #E-11A "crash" and doubts about any weapon existing in the portable class to do that, I feel free to talk about a secret Iranian SAM here. It was captured by the U.S in 2019, briefly shown on one photo and hence its existence is already compromised.


Iran never disclosed the existence of this weapon, since it was designed for covert operations. When U.S official sources published it, they didn't detail it. It went nearly unnoticed. A recent Saudi Ah-64 kill and the unusual crash of the E-11A may now establish a link to it.

Weapons in this weight and size class, such as IR MANPADs normally pose a lower threat to professional/controlled attack helicopter operations. They remain out of range and have counter-measures. That's also true for the high flying E-11A, which simply stays outside the envelope.

The secret Iranian SAM is of the Qaem family, a laser beam riding TOW sized and based SAM with a terminal kick stage. However it is larger and transported in two pieces by a 2-3 man team. The added size allows for ranges beyond 10km and computerized fire control for a high PK.

Key to how this range is achieved is like the Qaem: Initial acceleration - cruise - coast - re-acceleration - kill. Traditional missiles lack the re-acceleration phase and once they are kinematically defeated, they are worthless. The overall lower velocity of it, preserves energy

30k-40k altitude and speed of an E-11A is not what it was designed for and at the edge of its envelope. However due to advanced thermal optics, gimballed/automated tracking/guiding, ranging and trajectory computing, it becomes possible to set a ambush for that kind of targets.

Counter measures against such laser beam riding missiles are almost non-existing. Bad weather can help and we saw it at the crash site. However it might have been targeted before entering clouds that typically accumulate around mountains. Reminder: Cause of the crash is unknown.
Dadash please provide the original link.
 
I believe someone stated this was just a longer version of the Qaem laster guided missiles system. This system is nothing for Iran. Losing it hardly means anything. I bet everything in my bank that Iran has many more such systems but more advanced not revealed to the public.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom