What's new

Iranian Air Defense Systems

Given the depth of the above, the Q that begs to be asked is whether there is any future for the Sayyad - 4 -4 B and possibly Arman?

I just hope that this is not a parallel effort such as the Taer & Sayyad missiles were. Or could be, at least up to a Taer-4/Sadid-630 vs a possible Arman.

The two upper range Taer's were developed without much fanfare in contrast to Sayyad-4. So again, is there any pressing reason to carry on with the Sayyad's and Arman.

Of course there are probably dynamics at work here that is not in the public domain.

P

Competition is healthy. If there was only one long range system then innovation wouldn’t happen as quickly.

Also Arman and 3rd Khordad are quite different systems. 3rd is significantly cheaper than Armand to build and operate. Armand or next gen Bavar is an all around anti aircraft/anti BM/anti bomber shield. Where as 3rd Khordad is a medium range ring made to cover areas the Armand battalions do not.

The fact it can carry a longer range is likely a redundancy measure, doesn’t mean it will use the full range. Scoring a fighter jet kills above of 100KM is rare and I would ask someone show it has happened in last 30 years. It’s not easy since the pilot has so many measures they can take to defend. And now with 5th Gen aircraft it would be quite difficult to get precise enough location data that far away from a radar source to accurately be able to illuminate the target.

Air defense rings need to be as saturated as possible against a heavy air opponent like USA or Israel or even Saudi Arabia. You can never have too many air defense systems. That much is true.

The real question is how many of these systems actually exist? It seems every year Iran unveils a new system and we have zero insight into how many are produced. That is the key.
 
.
One emerging issue is just like the Ukraine conflict showed the main threat against static targets is a low altitude saturation attack possibly combining kamikaze drones, low observable cruise missiles stormshadow-scalp-jassm and other cheaper cruise missiles. Even a layered defense network cannot shoot down all targets and some missiles pass inside hitting a strategic point like an airbase or similar. Other than mobile air defense, long range high altitude anti aircraft defense and abm, saturation shorad defense is another dimension that firms can compete with each other. The shorad system needs to have a modern aesa radar and be able to track 20-30+ targets both stealth cruise missiles and other cms and medium-long range kamikaze drones from at least 20km range. It can then queue other individual mobile shorad launcher systems to share the targets engaging them individually and additionally can engage and launch its own short range missiles kind of like aegis short range systems. Ultra small short range quad rotor drones that can be launched from close ranges by enemy agents or similar needs another shorter range system like Lidar+rapid aa guns.
Another emerging threat is atacms like tactical bms this would require another type of higher altitude medium range sam system. For those cases other than simulations you also have the option to experiment with live drills by engaging your own tactical bms, cms and drones.
 
Last edited:
.
Given the depth of the above, the Q that begs to be asked is whether there is any future for the Sayyad - 4 -4 B and possibly Arman?

I just hope that this is not a parallel effort such as the Taer & Sayyad missiles were. Or could be, at least up to a Taer-4/Sadid-630 vs a possible Arman.

The two upper range Taer's were developed without much fanfare in contrast to Sayyad-4. So again, is there any pressing reason to carry on with the Sayyad's and Arman.

Of course there are probably dynamics at work here that is not in the public domain.

P
To add to what @TheImmortal has already said: Taer-3 is not directly competing with Sayyad-4. Taer-3 has a stated range of 200 km but against low-maneuverable targets (e.g. MALE/HALE UAVs, AWACS, bombers). Sayyad-4A/B are higher performant. The part about Sadid-630 is mostly speculation. Judging by the few information we have and assuming that it actually exists, it should have a more offensive/forward role and be more mobile than Arman, which might be more like a 2020s reinterpretation of S-200 derived from Bavar-373. But we are just speculating here.

 
Last edited:
.
Raad, especially Raad-2, is probably Iran's most underappreciated AD system: Fully passive (no radar emissions), mobile, relatively low footprint (1 TEL + 1 FCS vehicle per unit), decent mid-range (50 km) and high-altitude (25-27 km) engagement capability and likely very numerous due to its low cost and long service history, complicating SEAD/DEAD operations.
Hey Messerschmitt;

I see a continous wave illumination radar in Raad-2. The front dish it is a radar. It is someway similar to french "Crotale" system that Iran had many years ago reverse engineered and even improved in iterations called "Yah Zahra" and "Herz-9".
 
.
Hey Messerschmitt;

I see a continous wave illumination radar in Raad-2. The front dish it is a radar. It is someway similar to french "Crotale" system that Iran had many years ago reverse engineered and even improved in iterations called "Yah Zahra" and "Herz-9".
Yes, I remember reading that its CWIR is used in bad weather conditions when its EO/IR sensors aren't effective. The missiles then switch to their SARH guidance mode.
 
.
One emerging issue is just like the Ukraine conflict showed the main threat against static targets is a low altitude saturation attack possibly combining kamikaze drones, low observable cruise missiles stormshadow-scalp-jassm and other cheaper cruise missiles. Even a layered defense network cannot shoot down all targets and some missiles pass inside hitting a strategic point like an airbase or similar. Other than mobile air defense, long range high altitude anti aircraft defense and abm, saturation shorad defense is another dimension that firms can compete with each other. The shorad system needs to have a modern aesa radar and be able to track 20-30+ targets both stealth cruise missiles and other cms and medium-long range kamikaze drones from at least 20km range. It can then queue other individual mobile shorad launcher systems to share the targets engaging them individually and additionally can engage and launch its own short range missiles kind of like aegis short range systems. Ultra small short range quad rotor drones that can be launched from close ranges by enemy agents or similar needs another shorter range system like Lidar+rapid aa guns.
Another emerging threat is atacms like tactical bms this would require another type of higher altitude medium range sam system. For those cases other than simulations you also have the option to experiment with live drills by engaging your own tactical bms, cms and drones.

This may work for static points, but as soon as your army is moving its gone. So me think the laser approach is more suitable for defending a moving army. It has logistical advantages and also can have a high fire rate. Maybe if the technic develop further one can put all the needed, included good short range radar, on one special truck, maybe 4 or 6 per brigade or so.
 
.
This may work for static points, but as soon as your army is moving its gone. So me think the laser approach is more suitable for defending a moving army. It has logistical advantages and also can have a high fire rate. Maybe if the technic develop further one can put all the needed, included good short range radar, on one special truck, maybe 4 or 6 per brigade or so.
For moving targets as you have mentioned laser if developed further can be effective. Currently it needs to focus on the target for several seconds to bring it down and hop onto the next target. If power output gets higher the focus time will reduce and if cooldown time is reduced it can engage multiple targets at the same time similar to a sam system. Sams are generally one to many guiding its missiles to different targets at the same time. Mobile-sam clos systems like Tor, Pantsyr variants can take out the smaller number of drones-missiles flying towards a mobile installation. Lasers even in its current condition can still be effective on unshielded low flying kamikaze drones.

For shielded targets like cruise missiles and higher altitude targets the laser beams need to be strengthened much further than the current variants. There is a limit to improving the durability of materials so the power output of the laser trucks is limited and the trucks get larger-less mobile as the power source increases. One option to strengthen the beam is combining the beams together. Several trucks can combine their beams to take down a hardened target like cruise missile or even a ballistic missile by using plasma optics for example. I think this kind of research has some future. Air ionisation by microwaves or similar can produce plasma. Or the trucks can focus on the same point if the guidance system is developed further

 
.
For shielded targets like cruise missiles and higher altitude targets the laser beams need to be strengthened much further than the current variants. There is a limit to improving the durability of materials so the power output of the laser trucks is limited and the trucks get larger-less mobile as the power source increases.

Yes, wheras the limitation depends on the kind of the laser, here mostly used fiber-laser or gas-laser.

One option to strengthen the beam is combining the beams together.

Yes, that is the path what most if not all military use at the moment.

I think this kind of research has some future. Air ionisation by microwaves or similar can produce plasma.

Jep, this is a multi use tool. With this, one also can "light up"/illuminate any stealth air target by manipulation of e.g. the ionosphere, let her radiate to illuminate air targets as i mentioned here often.

The development of lasers is going on, but not so fast i would like. And in variants what do not have the limitations you mentioned, e,g, fiber laser have a limitation cause of the material of the fiber itself ect.. There is lot of work ingoing to overcome these limitations by creating new kinds of laser, but it is hard to find any news, if any, about these new lasers. But as we "normals" also see the need of development, all military see it too. I assume in 2-3 years we will hear about new kind of lasers.
 
. . .
Friends, Mashreghnews says that new canisters of 3rd Khordad AD is upgraded to have 2 additional loitering airdefense munitions.

@Ich dear friend. This adds to our info about that loitering munition

3925877.png


According to Mashregh, two cubic tubes were added in the middle of launcher in addition to 4 existing ones shown by that red arrow. The new ones look smaller.

My crazy theory is, this ability allows the AD system to stay operational in war zones even if it loses connection with mother-radar in case the radar is hit by anti radiation bombs. Given that loitering munitions attack independently, imagine if they had data link to the main launcher, then this could make the loitering munition eyes and ears of other mid range missiles.

All in all, the new launcher has 6 tubes containing 2 loitering munitions.
 
. .
Friends, Mashreghnews says that new canisters of 3rd Khordad AD is upgraded to have 2 additional loitering airdefense munitions.

@Ich dear friend. This adds to our info about that loitering munition

View attachment 955716

According to Mashregh, two cubic tubes were added in the middle of launcher in addition to 4 existing ones shown by that red arrow. The new ones look smaller.

My crazy theory is, this ability allows the AD system to stay operational in war zones even if it loses connection with mother-radar in case the radar is hit by anti radiation bombs. Given that loitering munitions attack independently, imagine if they had data link to the main launcher, then this could make the loitering munition eyes and ears of other mid range missiles.

All in all, the new launcher has 6 tubes containing 2 loitering munitions.

Its early in the sunday morning and coffee just started to move into my body. So if it is called "loitering airdefense munition", then is it used in that kind i assumed? Staying in air till some rockets/glidebombs/airplane come along and then attack them? The datalink option back to the launcher, being also ears and eyes for the next SAM salvo, that is indeed top notch. Lets hope they developed it that kind.
 
.
Its early in the sunday morning and coffee just started to move into my body. So if it is called "loitering airdefense munition", then is it used in that kind i assumed? Staying in air till some rockets/glidebombs/airplane come along and then attack them? The datalink option back to the launcher, being also ears and eyes for the next SAM salvo, that is indeed top notch. Lets hope they developed it that kind.
It is difficult to imagine something like that.
Remember that UAV or loitering munition must be equipped with IR or radar sensors, being itself a truly mini UAV itself. It is something not viable. Probably the other 2 containers (in the middle and shorter ones) could be another two missiles canisters just positioned a bit backwards to let any hidraulic or mechanic servo of the TEL to be erected or move in other axe,
 
.
Remember that UAV or loitering munition must be equipped with IR or radar sensors, being itself a truly mini UAV itself. It is something not viable

It is old stuff


The new thing would be that it not only can direct arty shells on a target, but also SAMs at flying objects.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom