Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

[Stryker1982]

You mean Iran couldn't move 10-15 launchers and 500 missiles into Crimea to begin striking targets? They wouldn't have that capability?

Anyways, ignoring what that clown has said.

Fateh-110's can be transported by sea using container ships. Fateh-110's are also small enough to be containerized in shipping containers for delivery covertly. Caspian sea route can deliver these containers to Astrakhan, and delivered to Crimea using army logistics.

They can also be accompanied with TEL's that are also disguised as civilian trucks, with delivery and loading in Crimea. This is more a matter of willpower and decision making, rather than a logistical issue.

 

[Stryker1982]

Something that is interesting in the Russian-Ukrainian war is the lack of ballistic missiles. Am I wrong in thinking that if Iran were fully deployed in the Donbas alongside Russian forces that they would be utilize Fateh-110 ballistic missiles en masse? Pretty much around the clock striking of targets with ballistic missiles?

Russia is using Iskanders occassionally, but most of their bombardments are Shahed-136 drones and Kaliber cruise missiles.

The problem is Russian decision to go with the Iskander design. Not that Iskander is a bad missile, quite the contrary it is actually top of the line for this range class. That is the precise issue. It's state of the art status, makes it a expensive and time consuming production process. You will run out quickly if used aggressively.

Quantity prevails here. This is really a matter of doctrine. Perhaps another simpler design should have been produce alongside Premium weapons like Iskandar. Something to use in areas where their are little ability for AD to target. Well protected targets can use Islanders.

 

[Aryzin]

Anyways, ignoring what that clown has said.

Fateh-110's can be transported by sea using container ships. Fateh-110's are also small enough to be containerized in shipping containers for delivery covertly. Caspian sea route can deliver these containers to Astrakhan, and delivered to Crimea using army logistics.

They can also be accompanied with TEL's that are also disguised as civilian trucks, with delivery and loading in Crimea. This is more a matter of willpower and decision making, rather than a logistical issue.

You see, the problem is that you have people here, who go and memorize something they read and try and act as technical experts and then there is some of us who actually have combat experience and know US military capabilities. This clown has 20 years of the experience. Maybe @Stryker1982 needs to read again before commenting. I never said Iran cannot deploy missiles. I said they will be detected. Anyways have fun.

 

[Stryker1982]

You see, the problem is that you have people here, who go and memorize something they read and try and act as technical experts and then there is some of us who actually have combat experience and know US military capabilities. This clown has 20 years of the experience. Maybe @Stryker1982 needs to read again before commenting. I never said Iran cannot deploy missiles. I said they will be detected. Anyways have fun.

Congrats on your combat experience. US military has plenty of grunts for combat experience. Your experience means nothing in this area. The people who design your Patriot batteries don't have combat experience either. I know what USA's capabilities are and it doesn't involve some magical capability to detect movement of relatively small and disguised missiles. You need real-time recon.

I have no need to disclose anything about my own background to you. I don't believe in magical detection capability of disguised trucks.

 

[shadihassan28]

You see, the problem is that you have people here, who go and memorize something they read and try and act as technical experts and then there is some of us who actually have combat experience and know US military capabilities. This clown has 20 years of the experience. Maybe @Stryker1982 needs to read again before commenting. I never said Iran cannot deploy missiles. I said they will be detected. Anyways have fun.

You actually said their projection capabilities was limited and it seemed you were implying only on the Syrian front, just going by what i read.

 

[Stryker1982]

You actually said their projection capabilities was limited and it seemed you were implying only on the Syrian front, just going by what i read.

That's what I understood as well. That's why I addressed the logistical aspect, because his/her implication was Iran cannot transport these systems...

 

[shadihassan28]

That's what I understood as well. That's why I addressed the logistical aspect, because his/her implication was Iran cannot transport these systems...

Yeah I’m just going by what I read, night @Stryker1982 and when I say Goodnite to you I mean it

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Yeah I’m just going by what I read, night @Stryker1982 and when I say Goodnite to you I mean it

In other words, you are a troll.

You see, the problem is that you have people here, who go and memorize something they read and try and act as technical experts and then there is some of us who actually have combat experience and know US military capabilities. This clown has 20 years of the experience. Maybe @Stryker1982 needs to read again before commenting. I never said Iran cannot deploy missiles. I said they will be detected. Anyways have fun.

How come your 20 years experience failed to detect Iran's ability to build and send drones? Iran went from a photoshopping faker to challenging US air superiority in PG overnight, much to the shock of US military brass! There will always be some things that your numerous eyes will never detect.

 

[Blue In Green]

The problem is Russian decision to go with the Iskander design. Not that Iskander is a bad missile, quite the contrary it is actually top of the line for this range class. That is the precise issue. It's state of the art status, makes it a expensive and time consuming production process. You will run out quickly if used aggressively.

Quantity prevails here. This is really a matter of doctrine. Perhaps another simpler design should have been produce alongside Premium weapons like Iskandar. Something to use in areas where their are little ability for AD to target. Well protected targets can use Islanders.

I’m glad Iran has moved past the quantity stage of missile development and is now firmly committed to the improvement quality/combat effectiveness of its arsenal outside of just sheer numbers.

It’s good to fire thousands of ballistic missiles but you still need those highly lethal, very accurate and capable weapons that can get past even the most comprehensive of enemy ABM shields.

On the topic of BM use in the theatre of war. IRGC missile forces would be the best suited force on the planet for such a striking regime along with their massive inventory of long-range drones. The BM would easily be able to knock out 100s upon 100s of targets overnight depending on the scope of operation for the fire mission and the drones would mop up whatever is left.

The only issue here is ISR.

In a hypothetical scenario: Iranian land forces would probably be badly beaten by Ukrainian troops, but Ukrainian assets (especially stationary ones) would be virtually wiped out in several weeks or less. All totally dependent on just how comprehensive Iranian planners are in what to strike.

ABM shields, even NATO ones can’t keep up with the massive rate of fire IRGC missile forces can launch.

 

[Stryker1982]

I’m glad Iran has moved past the quantity stage of missile development and is now firmly committed to the improvement quality/combat effectiveness of its arsenal outside of just sheer numbers.

It’s good to fire thousands of ballistic missiles but you still need those highly lethal, very accurate and capable weapons that can get past even the most comprehensive of enemy ABM shields.

On the topic of BM use in the theatre of war. IRGC missile forces would be the best suited force on the planet for such a striking regime along with their massive inventory of long-range drones. The BM would easily be able to knock out 100s upon 100s of targets overnight depending on the scope of operation for the fire mission and the drones would mop up whatever is left.

The only issue here is ISR.

In a hypothetical scenario: Iranian land forces would probably be badly beaten by Ukrainian troops, but Ukrainian assets (especially stationary ones) would be virtually wiped out in several weeks or less. All totally dependent on just how comprehensive Iranian planners are in what to strike.

ABM shields, even NATO ones can’t keep up with the massive rate of fire IRGC missile forces can launch.

Theirs only so much missiles can do. They will be used to shift the balance of power in favor of the missile user. That is ultimately the main goal.

degrading military industry and production. Warehouses and logistical nodes. Forward operating bases and air defenses, airfield and naval capacity and survivability of all assets. Once this is complete, it has served its purpose, but that doesn't mean the war is won. You will still have to fight man-to-man on the ground.

My question is whether or not a missile like Fateh-110 or something smaller like Fath will be used as a ground support weapon or a "Behind the lines weapon" and what is the doctrine for usage in this case.

 

[Blue In Green]

In other words, you are a troll.



How come your 20 years experience failed to detect Iran's ability to build and send drones? Iran went from a photoshopping faker to challenging US air superiority in PG overnight, much to the shock of US military brass! There will always

Theirs only so much missiles can do. They will be used to shift the balance of power in favor of the missile user. That is ultimately the main goal.

degrading military industry and production. Warehouses and logistical nodes. Forward operating bases and air defenses, airfield and naval capacity and survivability of all assets. Once this is complete, it has served its purpose, but that doesn't mean the war is won. You will still have to fight man-to-man on the ground.

My question is whether or not a missile like Fateh-110 or something smaller like Fath will be used as a ground support weapon or a "Behind the lines weapon" and what is the doctrine for usage in this case.

I assume their use would depend on how many Iran has and how much they can produce to replace them once used on the battlefield. Since both are shorter range systems, their use would be limited to the contact line or a little
Bit behind it. If Iran has thousands upon thousands of them ready to go with an adequate replacement rate. Then I see no problem in Iran using them however they deem fit.

- if stock is lower than we think: targets would need to chosen wisely as to not waste munitions.
-if stocks are numerous: Iranian forces have more discretion to pick and choose at will what needs to be targeted.

The bulk of the work would still have be done by artillery, MLRS and Air Force along with probing offensives by ground forces all aided by forward reconnaissance done primarily through drones. One can only hope Iranian ground forces will be up to par with other regional forces sooner or later.

 

[Sineva]

 

[lydian fall]

 

[tsunset]

Is the first turret the one fitted on Karrar tank? The last one looks like a Misagh launcher bot

 

[Stryker1982]

Is the first turret the one fitted on Karrar tank? The last one looks like a Misagh launcher bot

Similar subsystems could've be used for Karrar. The optical system looks different