WordsMatter
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2017
- Messages
- 443
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
@arashkamangir I am afraid I do not have enough privilege to post a link. But you can google ISW and find the study at Institute for Study of War.
Iranian Air Defense Systems
- Thread starter twilight
- Start date
@arashkamangir I am afraid I do not have enough privilege to post a link. But you can google ISW and find the study at Institute for Study of War.
arashkamangir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2017
- Messages
- 702
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Ah I just saw it on top of your post. Cheers mate.
PeeD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
One of the most interesting announcements from the IRGC-ASF wargame was the claim for ranges.
75km for 3rd Khordads Taer-2B missile,
75km for Sayyad-2M
60km for Tabas' Taer-2A
While 2012 when the Raad system was unveiled, the range was claimed to be 50km and the Sayyad-2 was claimed to have the same range. All those ranges seem to be too high as the similar 2010 vintage Buk-M2 and HQ-16 have ranges of 40-45km. Something seems to be not right there, maybe a counter to the Buk-M3's 70km range?
No I don't think so.
I think those range differences are due to two factors.
- Engagement radars for illumination have improved with the Tabas planar array and 3rd Khordad AESA (yes like the Bavar illumination radar this radar seems to be a X-band AESA too, while Buk-M2 is PESA).
- Robust data-link system allows continuous course updates which in combination with a good INS-autopilot system enable to switch from a P-Nav system to a optimized long range trajectory (same thing was done to create the SM-2 out of the SM-1). The Buk-M1-2 and M2 also has a data-link system, but here its about a advanced system with real-time trajectory calculation and updates which makes a illumination only necessary in terminal phase.
The latter point is responsible for the large 50% range increase for the Sayyad-2M from the prototype 50km range LOBL Sayyad-2 without data-link/autopilot. Back then the Talash-3 system (IRGC-only?) had been just tested and possibly no engagement radar with 75km illumination range and was available. The change of Taer-2A to Taer-2B seems to be the addition of the Sayyad-2M heritage data-link/autopilot system. The huge range increase of Buk-M2 to -M2 is also due to this change.
The first point would be responsible for the range increase of 50 to 60km for the Taer-2A P-Nav guided SARH missile which first used the truck based engagement radar of the Raad-1 system and later got the Tabas engagement system with longer illumination range. However 10-15km range (kinematic-only) increase over Buk-M2 and HQ-16 would be huge and only possible if more advanced missile technology than that of Chinese and even Russians was used.
Those range performances are state of the art for missiles of those classes. Simplified a Sayyad-2 battery can protect a circle of 150km and a 3rd Khordad battery can hunt enemy aircraft at the frontline in a 150km range circle.
75km for 3rd Khordads Taer-2B missile,
75km for Sayyad-2M
60km for Tabas' Taer-2A
While 2012 when the Raad system was unveiled, the range was claimed to be 50km and the Sayyad-2 was claimed to have the same range. All those ranges seem to be too high as the similar 2010 vintage Buk-M2 and HQ-16 have ranges of 40-45km. Something seems to be not right there, maybe a counter to the Buk-M3's 70km range?
No I don't think so.
I think those range differences are due to two factors.
- Engagement radars for illumination have improved with the Tabas planar array and 3rd Khordad AESA (yes like the Bavar illumination radar this radar seems to be a X-band AESA too, while Buk-M2 is PESA).
- Robust data-link system allows continuous course updates which in combination with a good INS-autopilot system enable to switch from a P-Nav system to a optimized long range trajectory (same thing was done to create the SM-2 out of the SM-1). The Buk-M1-2 and M2 also has a data-link system, but here its about a advanced system with real-time trajectory calculation and updates which makes a illumination only necessary in terminal phase.
The latter point is responsible for the large 50% range increase for the Sayyad-2M from the prototype 50km range LOBL Sayyad-2 without data-link/autopilot. Back then the Talash-3 system (IRGC-only?) had been just tested and possibly no engagement radar with 75km illumination range and was available. The change of Taer-2A to Taer-2B seems to be the addition of the Sayyad-2M heritage data-link/autopilot system. The huge range increase of Buk-M2 to -M2 is also due to this change.
The first point would be responsible for the range increase of 50 to 60km for the Taer-2A P-Nav guided SARH missile which first used the truck based engagement radar of the Raad-1 system and later got the Tabas engagement system with longer illumination range. However 10-15km range (kinematic-only) increase over Buk-M2 and HQ-16 would be huge and only possible if more advanced missile technology than that of Chinese and even Russians was used.
Those range performances are state of the art for missiles of those classes. Simplified a Sayyad-2 battery can protect a circle of 150km and a 3rd Khordad battery can hunt enemy aircraft at the frontline in a 150km range circle.
AmirPatriot
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2015
- Messages
- 4,156
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Excellent analysis as always PeeD.
I do have a question though... Considering it's size, isn't the Sayyad-2M still a bit short on range (maybe 100 km would be state of the art)? Or is it still good as it is likely to have a high speed considering it's SM-1 heritage, and it lacks a solid rocket booster?
PeeD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
@AmirPatriot
Thanks. Yes given that the later SM-2 of similar size, without boost stage could reach nearly 120km one could say that 75km for the Sayyad-2M is sill not state of the art.
However, the SM-2 had the huge Aegis for target illumination. If the new radar shown during the last parade is indeed the Talash-3 system, a large aperture X-band AESA for the IRGC Sayyad-2, it is possible that a extrem long range trajectory regime with a near ballistic flight path is implemented to the Sayyad-2 (with possible hardware changes to the aerodynamic steering system). But whether the missile is light enough and the booster strong enough to reach such high performance, remains open.
Also subsystems like batteries must be advanced enough to enable such range increases.
For the 3rd Khordad, a 120km Taer-2 variant would possibly make no sense because the illumination power of the AESA radar, more so against VLO/stealth targets, would not be sufficient.
Some more hints about those 3 missiles: Buk-M3 is the first one of the large Buk family to use TVC and the rather short ranged HQ-16 (very similar in layout to Sayyad-2M) also has a TVC system. The purpose in such medium range missiles is anti ballistic missile capability (high level atmospheric intercept). At the outer edges of the envelope, the TVC system would certainly be inactive. But its due to the TVC system that the Buk-M3 is credited with 35km max. altitude. Hence Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 are optimized against aerodynamic targets and less effective against BMs.
Thanks. Yes given that the later SM-2 of similar size, without boost stage could reach nearly 120km one could say that 75km for the Sayyad-2M is sill not state of the art.
However, the SM-2 had the huge Aegis for target illumination. If the new radar shown during the last parade is indeed the Talash-3 system, a large aperture X-band AESA for the IRGC Sayyad-2, it is possible that a extrem long range trajectory regime with a near ballistic flight path is implemented to the Sayyad-2 (with possible hardware changes to the aerodynamic steering system). But whether the missile is light enough and the booster strong enough to reach such high performance, remains open.
Also subsystems like batteries must be advanced enough to enable such range increases.
For the 3rd Khordad, a 120km Taer-2 variant would possibly make no sense because the illumination power of the AESA radar, more so against VLO/stealth targets, would not be sufficient.
Some more hints about those 3 missiles: Buk-M3 is the first one of the large Buk family to use TVC and the rather short ranged HQ-16 (very similar in layout to Sayyad-2M) also has a TVC system. The purpose in such medium range missiles is anti ballistic missile capability (high level atmospheric intercept). At the outer edges of the envelope, the TVC system would certainly be inactive. But its due to the TVC system that the Buk-M3 is credited with 35km max. altitude. Hence Sayyad-2 and Taer-2 are optimized against aerodynamic targets and less effective against BMs.
PeeD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Some points on the IRGC-ASF Sayyad-2 system:
It was shown with the Najm 802 as battery surveillance radar system. A long range large aperture AESA for a medium range 75km SAM system? A clear overkill.
The camo of the IRGC-ASF Najm 802 is similar to what was described as "Talash" system/radar in the 2016 parade:
It seems those two radars are the components of the IRGC Sayyad-2 system.
What sense does it make to have those two if both are S-band AESAs, one just larger than the other?
It would make sense if the Talash (3?) radar is a X-band AESA for target illumination and array integrated missile up-link. The problem here is that this would be a huge AESA, twice the size of the Bavar engagement/illumination radar, element count could be easily over 10.000. It would be again a huge overkill for a medium range SAM and make only sense for a SAM system significantly longer ranged than the Bavar 373 up to S-400.
Hence at this point the "Talash" radar seems to be a smaller S-band cousin of the Najm 802 used for battery level surveillance, while the Najm 802 is used at division level. This also means that the IRGC-ASF's engagement/illumination radar of its Sayyad-2 system has not yet been shown (could be identical to that of the IRIADF).
It was shown with the Najm 802 as battery surveillance radar system. A long range large aperture AESA for a medium range 75km SAM system? A clear overkill.
The camo of the IRGC-ASF Najm 802 is similar to what was described as "Talash" system/radar in the 2016 parade:
It seems those two radars are the components of the IRGC Sayyad-2 system.
What sense does it make to have those two if both are S-band AESAs, one just larger than the other?
It would make sense if the Talash (3?) radar is a X-band AESA for target illumination and array integrated missile up-link. The problem here is that this would be a huge AESA, twice the size of the Bavar engagement/illumination radar, element count could be easily over 10.000. It would be again a huge overkill for a medium range SAM and make only sense for a SAM system significantly longer ranged than the Bavar 373 up to S-400.
Hence at this point the "Talash" radar seems to be a smaller S-band cousin of the Najm 802 used for battery level surveillance, while the Najm 802 is used at division level. This also means that the IRGC-ASF's engagement/illumination radar of its Sayyad-2 system has not yet been shown (could be identical to that of the IRIADF).
Faravahar
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2016
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Why on earth would Iran waste money on the S-400 when its own long range systems are months away from mass production?
yavar
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,988
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
yavar
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2013
- Messages
- 5,988
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Blue In Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Can someone tell me how many batteries did Iran buy (as on how many launchers are set up) I'm not to keen on how air defenses are set up.
What is a regiment and battery, or battalion.
What is a regiment and battery, or battalion.
AmirPatriot
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2015
- Messages
- 4,156
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Iran got 4 battalions.
The S-300 is a long-range surface-to-air missile system, and can engage aircraft, cruise missiles and theater ballistic missiles. One S-300 battery usually consists of an engagement radar, a low-altitude radar, and up to eight transporter erector launchers (TEL) with four launch tubes each. Each tube carries one surface-to-air missile. A battalion comprises up to six batteries in addition to a command/fire and control post, as well as an extra target acquisition radar unit.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/05/russia-supplied-s-300-air-defense-battalion-to-iran/
Note the word "up to".
Blue In Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Ah, thank you so much. Still though, seems a little bit lacking in numbers, I'm guessing when the legit unveiling of bavar-373 comes out, we can get a better picture of how iran plans to complement these s-300s with other domestic Iranian systems.
4 battalions? I was hoping for around 10 or 13.
AmirPatriot
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2015
- Messages
- 4,156
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
1 battalion = up to 6 batteries = up to 48 TELs = up to 192 missiles.
For ONE battalion.
Of course, Iran doesn't have that number, it specifically said "up to", but I don't think we are short in numbers.
Similar threads
- Article
