Iranian Air Defense Systems

[Shams313]

Moragheb and Merjad-4 seems to be very similar, what's the differences between them?

Sometimes i also get confused for iranian designs..

Several radars by Iran uses linear array antennas...

Can anyone explain, whats so much difference among em, meraj was pretty much good design.

 

[skyshadow]

Moragheb and Merjad-4 seems to be very similar, what's the differences between them?

Sometimes i also get confused for iranian designs..

Several radars by Iran uses linear array antennas...

Can anyone explain, whats so much difference among em, meraj was pretty much good design.

Moragheb radar was the test bed for bigger Meraj radar back then its name was Qamar radar but now with upgraded version coming its name changed from Qamar to Moragheb

 

[Raghfarm007]

 

[Philosopher]

Moragheb radar was the test bed for bigger Meraj radar back then its name was Qamar radar but now with upgraded version coming its name changed from Qamar to Moragheb

But Meraj-4 was developed from Qamar. I still don't see what differences this Moragheb has relative to Meraj-4. I know Meraj-4 is an AESA. Perhaps this Moragheb is a cheaper non-AESA system.

 

[skyshadow]

But Meraj-4 was developed from Qamar. I still don't see what differences this Moragheb has relative to Meraj-4. I know Meraj-4 is an AESA. Perhaps this Moragheb is a cheaper non-AESA system.

well Moragheb is less powerful it has even lesser range then Meraj-4 and it can not identify as same amount of target as Meraj-4 can so it is cheaper to buy in exchange it uses less electricity and its more movable

 

[Hack-Hook]

well Moragheb is less powerful it has even lesser range then Meraj-4 and it can not identify as same amount of target as Meraj-4 can so it is cheaper to buy in exchange it uses less electricity and its more movable

but both of them have 400km range

 

[PeeD]

Moragheb is a PESA, apparently with TWT.

Irans TWT production quality has reached a point where it has sufficiently long lifetime

Thats why IRIADF has also got itself their Kavosh/Kasta variant that can operate "continuously".

Meraj is a more complex and expensive line-element AESA with solid state amplifiers.

Moragheb can replace TPS-43, in the role of mobile emergency replacement of static radar stations.

 

[skyshadow]

but both of them have 400km range

meraj4 has 450 to 500 km range and it uses alot more energy

 

[AmirPatriot]

Moragheb is a PESA, apparently with TWT.

Irans TWT production quality has reached a point where it has sufficiently long lifetime

Thats why IRIADF has also got itself their Kavosh/Kasta variant that can operate "continuously".

Meraj is a more complex and expensive line-element AESA with solid state amplifiers.

Moragheb can replace TPS-43, in the role of mobile emergency replacement of static radar stations.

How do you come to the conclusion that Moragheb is a PESA?

 

[PeeD]

@AmirPatriot

3D capable (so ESA), no visible cooling and the Meraj-4 which fills the role of an AESA.
In terms of reliability it may would make sense to have an AESA but with a good TWT and limited operation time PESA should be more cost effective.

Another point: IRIADF SSJ is unlikely to have the advanced capabilities of Shiraz electronic industry.

 

[TruthHurtz]

@AmirPatriot

3D capable (so ESA), no visible cooling and the Meraj-4 which fills the role of an AESA.
In terms of reliability it may would make sense to have an AESA but with a good TWT and limited operation time PESA should be more cost effective.

Another point: IRIADF SSJ is unlikely to have the advanced capabilities of Shiraz electronic industry.

???

They don't share resources?

 

[PeeD]

???

They don't share resources?

They do on subsystem level, like TWT but the overall system is developed independently. Here Shiraz electronic industries is simply way ahead.

 

[Shams313]

Such a beautiful system...
No of missile count per launcher in s350 is remarkable , but i wonder why Iranian design has few missile per launcher...

 

[Sineva]

Such a beautiful system...
No of missile count per launcher in s350 is remarkable , but i wonder why iran has few missile per launcher...

The 9M96E2 missiles used in this are the same shorter ranged ones developed for the s400,these were intended to be used as a four to one replacement on an s400 tel so they had to be extremely compact and were literally crammed into their launch canisters.The original inspiration for this system was the korean-russian KM-Sam which used only 8 missiles.

When iran began designing the various new sam systems back in the late 2000s it followed the basic design templates that were used on other systems ie usually 4 missiles to a tel,in addition some of these like the 15th khordad and mersad 16 used preexisting airframes that were based on older non canisterised designs,and even with considerable redesign they were still on the larger side.
In short theres no reason why iran couldnt follow the exact same sort of design template as this system,for instance one option would be following the russian approach with the latest buk sams and canisterising the missiles on the 3rd of khordad,as this would potentially give you the option of doubling the sam loadout on the tel by using two rows of missiles ie 6 missiles rather than the current 3.Another option would be to follow the approach used on the s400 and have a shorter ranged missile that could be a 4 to 1 replacement for the existing sam tel loadout.
I`ve no doubt that even as we speak iran is designing the B-373b model with all sorts of upgrades and improvements and I imagine that that would be true of the other sam systems as well.

 

[Philosopher]

The question is, would you rather have 8 missiles per 1 truck or spread them out and have 4 missiles per 2 trucks, and so on. What do you think is a more survivable system layout? As long as you're providing the same "kill zone" radius, then I'd rather have my missiles spread out.