What's new

Iranian Air Defense Systems

The argument I sometimes see here regarding the speed of Iranian anti-aircraft missiles... too slow!
There is an opinion that The average speed of the 3rd khordad that shot down the RQ-4 was just under Mach 2, and the average speed of the Bavar 373 when it shot down a drone 300km away in an exercise was about Mach 3.
I have seen people who do not believe this and claim Mach 5-7!
If you do the calculations for the Bavar 373 sayyad-4B missile, you will find that Its CdA value (forward projected area A x drag coefficient Cd) is about 0,06,
while the F-35's estimated CdA is about 0.2, a difference of only 3 times.
The F-35's specific impulse at military thrust is about 10 times that of a solid-fuel rocket engine, and its onboard fuel is about 5 times that of the sayyad-4B.
This means that at the same speed, the F-35 can fly about 17 times longer.
If the F-35 flew at full military thrust, the onboard fuel would be empty in about 25-30 minutes. This is a law of physics that cannot be escaped.
So, if the sayyad-4B reaches a speed of Mach 3, the drag coefficient increases by about 30% in this speed range, and the aircraft will experience 6 times more drag than the F-35 flying at Mach 0.8,
and the time until the fuel is empty is 1/300 of the F-35!
If you force the Sayyad-4B to fly at Mach 3 at an altitude of 0 m, its fuel will be empty in just a few seconds, which is nothing to sneeze at!!
So what to do is simple, the missile will fly at high altitude where the air is as thin as possible. The speed of a ballistic missile is high because it travels through space.
At the maximum altitude of 110,000 feet, which is what the sayyad-4B reached during the exercise, the air density drops dramatically to 1/60th of that on the ground!
Long-range anti-aircraft missiles first ascend rapidly, then approach their targets by maintaining as high an altitude as possible before descending.
How much speed can be maintained is almost entirely determined by this flight profile, and fuel improvements are at the margin of error.
Flying at an average of Mach 3 up to 300 km away creates fairly severe route restrictions. The speed performance of sayyad-4b is excellent enough.
And the 3rd khordad went above the clouds just before the hit, not taking a high-altitude advantage profile, probably to avoid being conspicuous.
Mach 2 is good enough without taking a high altitude profile, albeit at 70km range!
So, please, let go of the illusion that an anti-aircraft missile can reach speeds of Mach 5 or 7, and that's limited to far, far above 100,000 feet.
 
last night, iran's air defenses were reportedly activated near karaj. According to reports and video footage, there were explosions. The target is said to have been a production facility for IR6 centrifuges.
Iran is said to have said that this was an air defense exercise by the Basiji.

Does anyone have more information? I have created a main topic in the thread "Iranian Nuclear Doctrine".

 
The argument I sometimes see here regarding the speed of Iranian anti-aircraft missiles... too slow!
There is an opinion that The average speed of the 3rd khordad that shot down the RQ-4 was just under Mach 2, and the average speed of the Bavar 373 when it shot down a drone 300km away in an exercise was about Mach 3.
I have seen people who do not believe this and claim Mach 5-7!
If you do the calculations for the Bavar 373 sayyad-4B missile, you will find that Its CdA value (forward projected area A x drag coefficient Cd) is about 0,06,
while the F-35's estimated CdA is about 0.2, a difference of only 3 times.
The F-35's specific impulse at military thrust is about 10 times that of a solid-fuel rocket engine, and its onboard fuel is about 5 times that of the sayyad-4B.
This means that at the same speed, the F-35 can fly about 17 times longer.
If the F-35 flew at full military thrust, the onboard fuel would be empty in about 25-30 minutes. This is a law of physics that cannot be escaped.
So, if the sayyad-4B reaches a speed of Mach 3, the drag coefficient increases by about 30% in this speed range, and the aircraft will experience 6 times more drag than the F-35 flying at Mach 0.8,
and the time until the fuel is empty is 1/300 of the F-35!
If you force the Sayyad-4B to fly at Mach 3 at an altitude of 0 m, its fuel will be empty in just a few seconds, which is nothing to sneeze at!!
So what to do is simple, the missile will fly at high altitude where the air is as thin as possible. The speed of a ballistic missile is high because it travels through space.
At the maximum altitude of 110,000 feet, which is what the sayyad-4B reached during the exercise, the air density drops dramatically to 1/60th of that on the ground!
Long-range anti-aircraft missiles first ascend rapidly, then approach their targets by maintaining as high an altitude as possible before descending.
How much speed can be maintained is almost entirely determined by this flight profile, and fuel improvements are at the margin of error.
Flying at an average of Mach 3 up to 300 km away creates fairly severe route restrictions. The speed performance of sayyad-4b is excellent enough.
And the 3rd khordad went above the clouds just before the hit, not taking a high-altitude advantage profile, probably to avoid being conspicuous.
Mach 2 is good enough without taking a high altitude profile, albeit at 70km range!
So, please, let go of the illusion that an anti-aircraft missile can reach speeds of Mach 5 or 7, and that's limited to far, far above 100,000 feet.

If the F-35 would attack from over Libanon, could it be possible to take them out with missiles what have ahr? Done by fireing some directly at the F-35 and some at the same time in direction over south Lebanon/border Israel? So that the F-35 directly would fly into them over the border on their way back?
 
last night, iran's air defenses were reportedly activated near karaj. According to reports and video footage, there were explosions. The target is said to have been a production facility for IR6 centrifuges.
Iran is said to have said that this was an air defense exercise by the Basiji.

Does anyone have more information? I have created a main topic in the thread "Iranian Nuclear Doctrine".


Who knows what happened here. Maybe another quad copter.

I am not aware of any production facility for centrifuges in Karaj.

 
Iran reveals new air defense missile
>The Sayyad 4B rocket's engine runs on a hybrid solid fuel
SpaceShipOne_schematic.png

Iran has announced the opening of a plant to produce hybrid solid fuel for various missiles in 2021.
Hybrid rockets are still in the testing stage in various countries, but it is said that it is easier to adjust the power output than solid fuel, and specific impulse can be easily improved by adding metallic materials. Hybrid rockets do not use explosives as fuel, which leads to improved safety.
There are reports that Japan has achieved a 10% increase in specific impulse.
Application to missiles is still in the development stage even in the U.S., and there is no information yet of its full-scale commercialization outside of Iran.
 
Iran reveals new air defense missile
>The Sayyad 4B rocket's engine runs on a hybrid solid fuel
SpaceShipOne_schematic.png

Iran has announced the opening of a plant to produce hybrid solid fuel for various missiles in 2021.
Hybrid rockets are still in the testing stage in various countries, but it is said that it is easier to adjust the power output than solid fuel, and specific impulse can be easily improved by adding metallic materials. Hybrid rockets do not use explosives as fuel, which leads to improved safety.
There are reports that Japan has achieved a 10% increase in specific impulse.
Application to missiles is still in the development stage even in the U.S., and there is no information yet of its full-scale commercialization outside of Iran.
that hybrid fuel announced 2 years ago . i expect it being used for Fateh missile family first but it seems the airdefense system is the first to benefit from it.
wonder if they use such fuel for our air to air missiles and made them smaller or increase the range of them.
 
In the exercise of the upgraded version of Bavar-373, sayyad-4B climbed once to 110,000 feet.
Estimates showed that it hardly decelerates due to low air density up to around 70,000 feet, so a flight profile that maintains this height for a while would result in a much faster hit than in the exercise case.
It is presumed that the deceleration was greater because the aircraft descended to a lower altitude earlier and chose a more gradual route rather than a dive-bombing entry.
Also, at altitudes below 30,000 feet, missiles are subjected to extreme deceleration due to resistance (1,900 kgf even at Mach 3!!!),
so the brakes are applied immediately. Therefore, it is assumed that the entry into this area was just before the hit.
It was also found that the missile can reach the 200 km point in about 120 seconds (about Mach 5), which is consistent with the announcement at the time of the old ver exercise.
Perhaps an average speed of Mach 3 to a 300 km target may not be the limit.
Of course, in reality, a direct attack from an altitude of over 100,000 feet may have been foregone because it was impractical.
 
Iran reveals new air defense missile
>The Sayyad 4B rocket's engine runs on a hybrid solid fuel
SpaceShipOne_schematic.png

Iran has announced the opening of a plant to produce hybrid solid fuel for various missiles in 2021.
Hybrid rockets are still in the testing stage in various countries, but it is said that it is easier to adjust the power output than solid fuel, and specific impulse can be easily improved by adding metallic materials. Hybrid rockets do not use explosives as fuel, which leads to improved safety.
There are reports that Japan has achieved a 10% increase in specific impulse.
Application to missiles is still in the development stage even in the U.S., and there is no information yet of its full-scale commercialization outside of Iran.
Glad to see you have taken such a keen interest on these topics, even if some things are disagreed upon. Nice to see non-Iranians being investigative and researching Iran.
 
The argument I sometimes see here regarding the speed of Iranian anti-aircraft missiles... too slow!
There is an opinion that The average speed of the 3rd khordad that shot down the RQ-4 was just under Mach 2, and the average speed of the Bavar 373 when it shot down a drone 300km away in an exercise was about Mach 3.
I have seen people who do not believe this and claim Mach 5-7!
If you do the calculations for the Bavar 373 sayyad-4B missile, you will find that Its CdA value (forward projected area A x drag coefficient Cd) is about 0,06,
while the F-35's estimated CdA is about 0.2, a difference of only 3 times.
The F-35's specific impulse at military thrust is about 10 times that of a solid-fuel rocket engine, and its onboard fuel is about 5 times that of the sayyad-4B.
This means that at the same speed, the F-35 can fly about 17 times longer.
If the F-35 flew at full military thrust, the onboard fuel would be empty in about 25-30 minutes. This is a law of physics that cannot be escaped.
So, if the sayyad-4B reaches a speed of Mach 3, the drag coefficient increases by about 30% in this speed range, and the aircraft will experience 6 times more drag than the F-35 flying at Mach 0.8,
and the time until the fuel is empty is 1/300 of the F-35!
If you force the Sayyad-4B to fly at Mach 3 at an altitude of 0 m, its fuel will be empty in just a few seconds, which is nothing to sneeze at!!
So what to do is simple, the missile will fly at high altitude where the air is as thin as possible. The speed of a ballistic missile is high because it travels through space.
At the maximum altitude of 110,000 feet, which is what the sayyad-4B reached during the exercise, the air density drops dramatically to 1/60th of that on the ground!
Long-range anti-aircraft missiles first ascend rapidly, then approach their targets by maintaining as high an altitude as possible before descending.
How much speed can be maintained is almost entirely determined by this flight profile, and fuel improvements are at the margin of error.
Flying at an average of Mach 3 up to 300 km away creates fairly severe route restrictions. The speed performance of sayyad-4b is excellent enough.
And the 3rd khordad went above the clouds just before the hit, not taking a high-altitude advantage profile, probably to avoid being conspicuous.
Mach 2 is good enough without taking a high altitude profile, albeit at 70km range!
So, please, let go of the illusion that an anti-aircraft missile can reach speeds of Mach 5 or 7, and that's limited to far, far above 100,000 feet.
Sayyad4b has max speed of mach 6.1, it's official.

Bavar hit the target at it's maximum range, and so missile had the lowest speed, this engagement was a practice for eliminating big targets eg tankers, bombers and ISR planes (with a drone RCS), not an agile fighter.

Missile predicts the aircraft's path, so F35's maximum cda is irrelevant.
 
Sayyad4b has max speed of mach 6.1, it's official.

Bavar hit the target at it's maximum range, and so missile had the lowest speed, this engagement was a practice for eliminating big targets eg tankers, bombers and ISR planes (with a drone RCS), not an agile fighter.

Missile predicts the aircraft's path, so F35's maximum cda is irrelevant.
What exercise or drill was this? Is their any article with these details?
 
America can Crush Iran easily in a war, the only thing preventing that is that the cowardly effete baby boomers in charge of the US government don't want to see the bloodshed of taking combat casualties and indeed have a weird fetish about combat casualties and collateral damage.
oh-no.gif
 
America can Crush Iran easily in a war, the only thing preventing that is that the cowardly effete baby boomers in charge of the US government don't want to see the bloodshed of taking combat casualties and indeed have a weird fetish about combat casualties and collateral damage.
Ask from your boys wetting their pants in Persian Gulf.
index.jpg


The difference between your Hollywood jokers and reality
download (4).jpeg


Your woman looks weird in Arabic kaffiyeh
3842930-9181-b__99999.jpg


I have proposed this image to Oxford to mention it as a figurative symbol for the phrase of "Americans Scared Shitless"
1429573_570.jpg

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You might sacre defendless people of Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan but when it comes to Iran you are nice gentle sheep of this region.
 
In the above post I don't mean a air war by say a US and/or israeli air strike campaign against the iranian nuclear infrastructure, in such a scenario Iran would have the obligation and option of ballistic missile strikes against the US middle eastern bases. This is the conventional scenario of a US-Iran war and what most people have in mind when such a possibility is mentioned. The traditional scenario is NOT the war scenario I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about regarding "an Iran war" is a full-scale invasion by a US-Sunni alliance. This alliance can be formed by America option to form an alliance with Saudi Arabia,Egypt,Turkey,etc. (The Kurds can be brought aboard and reconciled with the Turks after clandestine purges of the more nationalistic leaders and replaced ones Amenable to both Ankara and Washington). This alliance would cemented with a secret agreement granting this newly assembled sunni coalition a free hand to deal with Israel as one sees fit once the war against Iran was successfully concluded.

US in this scenario could deploy 2 million American troops plus another 1.5 to 2 million sunni alliance troops. After the securing of Iraq, This force could march in to Iran From the Zagros and lake Tabriz (I don't remember the actual name of this lake) in the north to Khuzestan in the south.

Regarding Israel, that state isn't relevant to this war strategy and as if me and other like minded millennials had their way the sunnis would have a free hand to deal with it whatever they (the sunnis) see fit.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom