Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

[VEVAK]

1960’s US technology:

D-21 and D-21B without booster

• Wingspan: 19 ft 0.25 in (5.8 m)
• Length: 42 ft 10 in (13.1 m)
• Height: 7 ft 0.25 in (2.1 m)
• Launch weight: 11,000 lb (5,000 kg)
• Maximum speed: Mach 3.35 (2,300 mph; 3,600 km/h; 2,000 kn) (conversions estimated at the service ceiling altitude)
• Service ceiling: 95,000 ft (29,000 m)
• Range: 3,000 nmi (3,500 mi; 5,600 km)
• Engine: 1 x Marquardt RJ43-MA-20S4 ramjet, 1,500 lbf (6.7 kN)

Wether it’s flying wing or delta wing, my idea would be a force multiplier creating synergies with the BM force. If Iran implements my idea (swarm based high altitude supersonic UCAVs) it would be one of the greatest assets for the Republic.

On the other hand, brand new tanks would be a waste that would sit and decay in military bases only to be rolled out in few numbers for war games and would create no additional deterrence effect.

Your comparing that design to a potential flying wing design capable of Mach 2 and you assume it makes no difference? LOL!

The fact that you haven't yet matured enough nor educated yourself enough to see the absurdity of even attempting to build a flying wing design capable of Mach 2(hi altitude) especially at Iran's level of technology speaks for itself. And the fact that your showing a high angled relatively short winged low drag Aircraft as some kind of proof of validity to your concept shows your immaturity on the subject. pass nazar nadee sangeen tar e!

And just incase you didn't comprehend, in no way am I saying it's technology not possible! Simply that it's not feasible!

 

[Ich]

Almost any system will first use a laser range finder before launch/shot.

This triggers the laser warning sensors and tells the tank where the threat is coming from.

Turret and vehicle is turned toward the threat.

Radar sensor goes active and detects incoming projectile. It times when to automatically launch aerosol grenades.

Aerosol grenades are launched to create smoke screen in front of the incoming projectile.

Useful against ATGM and rockets, less effective against gun launched HEAT or even APFSDS rounds.

Me wonder why there are no active radar homing anti tank guided missiles. The homing system doesnt need to be big cause the target is only some kilometers away.

 

[TheImmortal]

View attachment 661140


Your comparing that design to a potential flying wing design capable of Mach 2 and you assume it makes no difference? LOL!

The fact that you haven't yet matured enough nor educated yourself enough to see the absurdity of even attempting to build a flying wing design capable of Mach 2(hi altitude) especially at Iran's level of technology speaks for itself. And the fact that your showing a high angled relatively short winged low drag Aircraft as some kind of proof of validity to your concept shows your immaturity on the subject. pass nazar nadee sangeen tar e!

And just incase you didn't comprehend, in no way am I saying it's technology not possible! Simply that it's not feasible!

That was merely an example of what can be done with 60 year old technology. And you need to educate yourself because China has already begun implementing my idea and using the D-21 as a reference point for its Sharp Sword supersonic UCAV!

Furthermore, you should continue to educate yourself as China’s other major UCAV project dark sword can supercruise at Mach 2 without use of afterburner and they are hopeful it can be the worlds first HYPERSONIC UCAV.

So again it is def possible to build a stealth wing supersonic UAV and well within Iran’s capabilities in the next decade.

No where did I claim that the design can only be a flying wing, but merely a reference point as Iran has experience with it via RQ-170. And it is possible to build a flying wing and incorporate physical stabilizers while retain the aerodynamic nature of a flying wing design both China and Russia have done it.

The end game is clear: a fast (Mach 2+) stealth designed high altitude UCAV bomber. That will be the greatest asset to the republic next to its BM arsenal and allow strikes across the entire Middle East.

China already has two major UCAVs Sharp Sword and Dark Sword. So the rising superpower of the world agrees with my logic! So who are you to doubt me and them? What are your military qualifications?

Again like I said you cannot see strategic nature of my idea. You just want shiny toys (useless tanks) with no care for how it fits into the greater military paradigm of Iran.

 

[TheImmortal]

Almost any system will first use a laser range finder before launch/shot.

This triggers the laser warning sensors and tells the tank where the threat is coming from.

Turret and vehicle is turned toward the threat.

Radar sensor goes active and detects incoming projectile. It times when to automatically launch aerosol grenades.

Aerosol grenades are launched to create smoke screen in front of the incoming projectile.

Useful against ATGM and rockets, less effective against gun launched HEAT or even APFSDS rounds.

I believe the Syrian Shrota like system is better.

I followed the Syrian conflict closely and until the Shrota like system was deployed, Syrian forces were losing armour by the droves to mobile TOW teams. But the system effectively brought TOW kills to manageable levels and was able to be deployed on a variety of systems such as trucks, apcs, IFVs.

A combo of Shrota and a kinetic APS system plus ERA should give current Iranian tanks decent survivability against IFVs and Mobile atgm teams. The dual system would be better for export to conflict areas such as Syria, Yemen, Libya, etc. as asymmetric and urban warfare is greater there.

 

[TheImmortal]

Me wonder why there are no active radar homing anti tank guided missiles. The homing system doesnt need to be big cause the target is only some kilometers away.

Radar and laser guided ATGMs can be jammed And in case of laser aerosol can also cause the laser signal to lose strength. FBW is the best and only defense is APS basically, though the crew has to be closer to target.

 

[Ich]

Radar and laser guided ATGMs can be jammed And in case of laser aerosol can also cause the laser signal to lose strength. FBW is the best and only defense is APS basically, though the crew has to be closer to target.

The jamming would come from the tank. No other source normally would be there and so home in on jamming.

 

[TheImmortal]

The jamming would come from the tank. No other source normally would be there and so home in on jamming.

It doesn’t work like that. A radar seeker would head to where radar is detecting an object that fits targeting parameters. When jammer is deployed radar signals do not reach radar seeker in a coherent manner thus missile gets fed incorrect information. You could potentially have it so if jammed the missile goes to last intercept-able location, but if the tank has moved since then it will miss.

What you are saying is a dual seeker. That would rely on radar in guidance phase and an anti radiation seeker in its terminal phase to overcome possible jamming.

Not sure how cheap such a ATGM could be versus existing laser and FBW based systems.

 

[Ich]

It doesn’t work like that. A radar seeker would head to where radar is detecting an object that fits targeting parameters. When jammer is deployed radar signals do not reach radar seeker in a coherent manner thus missile gets fed incorrect information. You could potentially have it so if jammed the missile goes to last intercept-able location, but if the tank has moved since then it will miss.

What you are saying is a dual seeker. That would rely on radar in guidance phase and an anti radiation seeker in its terminal phase to overcome possible jamming.

Not sure how cheap such a ATGM could be versus existing laser and FBW based systems.

Thx. I dont know prices. But a missile what can hit for sure, how much is it worth?

 

[TheImmortal]

Thx. I dont know prices. But a missile what can hit for sure, how much is it worth?

All ATGMs regardless of seeker would have to overcome an modern kinetic APS system. So it would still not be a perfect kill system.

You can increase the odds by making the system go top attack in its terminal phase as the top part of tanks are most vulnerable.

Or you can build an ATGM that fires a decoy/double warhead as it approaches the tank in order to confuse the APS and have it only intercept one of the warheads.

At the end of the day the cheapest option might be to use just multiple cheaper ATGMs to overwhelm the APS system aka a saturation based attack.

 

[Ich]

All ATGMs regardless of seeker would have to overcome an modern kinetic APS system. So it would still not be a perfect kill system.

You can increase the odds by making the system go top attack in its terminal phase as the top part of tanks are most vulnerable.

Or you can build an ATGM that fires a decoy/double warhead as it approaches the tank in order to confuse the APS and have it only intercept one of the warheads.

At the end of the day the cheapest option might be to use just multiple cheaper ATGMs to overwhelm the APS system aka a saturation based attack.

As far as i understand only hard kill would have a chance. If not the sensors were overloaded before.

 

[PeeD]

I believe the Syrian Shrota like system is better.

I followed the Syrian conflict closely and until the Shrota like system was deployed, Syrian forces were losing armour by the droves to mobile TOW teams. But the system effectively brought TOW kills to manageable levels and was able to be deployed on a variety of systems such as trucks, apcs, IFVs.

A combo of Shrota and a kinetic APS system plus ERA should give current Iranian tanks decent survivability against IFVs and Mobile atgm teams. The dual system would be better for export to conflict areas such as Syria, Yemen, Libya, etc. as asymmetric and urban warfare is greater there.

"Syrian" Sarab IR jammer or the IR jammer element of first Shtora versions are not working against newest ATGM threats. Iran has 2 versions of it anyway.
When facing low-end enemies yes it is very useful.

Lets see if Iran adds it to its Karrar or skips it, like the Russians have done.

Breaking the kill chain via aerosol grenades is the now preferred method.

 

[Shawnee]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1293857457555607553

چیزهایی که حرفش موکول شده به بعد
...

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1293874356335054849

https://twitter.com/x/status/1294246274926088193

https://twitter.com/x/status/1294288758309879808

 

[VEVAK]

That was merely an example of what can be done with 60 year old technology. And you need to educate yourself because China has already begun implementing my idea and using the D-21 as a reference point for its Sharp Sword supersonic UCAV!

Furthermore, you should continue to educate yourself as China’s other major UCAV project dark sword can supercruise at Mach 2 without use of afterburner and they are hopeful it can be the worlds first HYPERSONIC UCAV.

So again it is def possible to build a stealth wing supersonic UAV and well within Iran’s capabilities in the next decade.

No where did I claim that the design can only be a flying wing, but merely a reference point as Iran has experience with it via RQ-170. And it is possible to build a flying wing and incorporate physical stabilizers while retain the aerodynamic nature of a flying wing design both China and Russia have done it.

The end game is clear: a fast (Mach 2+) stealth designed high altitude UCAV bomber. That will be the greatest asset to the republic next to its BM arsenal and allow strikes across the entire Middle East.

China already has two major UCAVs Sharp Sword and Dark Sword. So the rising superpower of the world agrees with my logic! So who are you to doubt me and them? What are your military qualifications?

Again like I said you cannot see strategic nature of my idea. You just want shiny toys (useless tanks) with no care for how it fits into the greater military paradigm of Iran.

Did I ever claim a Mach 2 UCAV was impossible? NO!

Again, if it wasn't clear the last time. I was commenting on your repeated references to a Mach 2 flying wing design which you have repeated numerous times and now your showing these images to prove what? Again, I have NEVER claimed a Mach 2 UCAV was impossible for these post to mean anything.

Also, Iran reverse engineering the RQ-170 would help Iran to design and produce a UCAV capable of sustained supersonic flight in what way exactly? Neither the design, materials, powerplant nor any other part of that Aircraft would have any relevance in a designing a UCAV capable of Mach 2...

And slapping on stabilizers and greater thrust isn't all that's lacking... One design is built to achieve range through speed while the other is built around a high lift ratio of the wings for sustained flights which means achieving range by using less fuel and less thrust!
And that's what makes your idea more Bollywood than Hollywood!

 

[skyshadow]

Toofan Mrap , Iraq