Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

[TheImmortal]

Good job Iranians. Finally something good.

What is the guidance method? GPS/INS?


Edit:
Oh damn... it says laser guided... my bad.

It's not very useful like this on its own. It needs to be networked with forward observers and drones. That's much trickier than making the laser guided shell. I mean having the artillery directly linked with the network using datalink.

Still, good start.

You never use GPS for artillery shells or you get the problem Ukraine now has with HIMARS which is Russia deploys jammers around sensitive targets and it throws the gps kit on the warhead off by enough meters to miss the target.

So against a peer military, anything that relies GPS that doesn’t move extremely fast (RV of a BM) can get jammed enough to make it miss.

Laser is better and not easily jammable when target is a drone in the air.

Only other “better” method would be optical + AI image tracking. But that would be overkill for artillery. Even laser guidance is overkill for artillery when you are firing 1000+ rounds a day the cost of a laser guided shell adds up quickly. Better to use a guided artillery rocket at that point if target is so important.

 

[LegionnairE]

You never use GPS for artillery shells or you get the problem Ukraine now has with HIMARS which is Russia deploys jammers around sensitive targets and it throws the gps kit on the warhead off by enough meters to miss the target.

So against a peer military, anything that relies GPS that doesn’t move extremely fast (RV of a BM) can get jammed enough to make it miss.

Laser is better and not easily jammable when target is a drone in the air.

Only other “better” method would be optical + AI image tracking. But that would be overkill for artillery. Even laser guidance is overkill for artillery when you are firing 1000+ rounds a day the cost of a laser guided shell adds up quickly. Better to use a guided artillery rocket at that point if target is so important.

Depends how good you are at EW, Russia is pretty good, Ukraine I'm not aware of any EW systems of theirs. Near peer enemy could much more easily shoot down the UAV you're doing the laser guidance with.

If you're shelling random trenches, sure dumb ammo is more cost effective but if you're actually trying to hit something and you have a forward observer, one laser guided shell is worth 100 dumb ones. So good job on basir.

Turkey is pretty good at EW on land and sea, we're going to be good in the air too once HavaSOJ becomes operational. Americans have growlers etc

 

[Hack-Hook]

Thank you

The footage is too low quality to determine what drone(I'm assuming shahed 129) or what munition is being used but it did catch my attention that all of it was captured through a day camera.

Interesting.

more likely Mohajer and Ababil , the bigger drones like Shahed 129, 149 and Kaman Series also have that capabilities but in Kurdistan we used mainly mohajers

 

[TheImmortal]

Near peer enemy could much more easily shoot down the UAV you're doing the laser guidance with.

Not really. Usually artillery targets are near front lines or Line of contact (LoC). So air defense systems (like patriot or S-300 etc) are much further back. They will struggle to pick up a drone that far away amidst the noise of war. So the task would be left to SHORADs which usually have ranges between 5-20KM. A drone can laser a target at least 10KM if not more.

Doesn’t need to be a big drone either, here is a low cost solution: a recent unveiling by a western arms company.

Pretty much can slap on a laser designator on any type of small drone. Don’t need predator class to do a simple like this.

If you're shelling random trenches, sure dumb ammo is more cost effective but if you're actually trying to hit something and you have a forward observer, one laser guided shell is worth 100 dumb ones. So good job on basir.

Basir is better for moving targets like an armored column or troops charging into an area.

For fixed targets, As long as you have ballistic computer on your cannons then you don’t need basir as much unless it’s really windy or weather conditions are bad. A ballistic computer can get you very close to the target if you have the coordinates of what you want to hit by calculating curvature of the earth, wind, in relation to launch angle and degrees.

If I recall the howitzers sent to Ukraine didn’t have the ballistic computers with them. Maybe that has changed since beginning of war.

 

[HGV]

Basir is better for moving targets like an armored column or troops charging into an area.

You would use artillery against a moving target? Didn't know that was a thing. Presume that would require laser designator to track the moving target as it moves and continue to light it up until the artillery shell lands? Not sure how easy that is.

 

[TheImmortal]

You would use artillery against a moving target? Didn't know that was a thing.

Ukraine and Russia absolutely demolished each other’s mechanized columns using artillery (dumb shells) as well as Russia using (on some occasions) laser shells.

People don’t realize what happens if a drone catches armour and troop transport within artillery range. It becomes hell for the opponent even with dummy shells using a ballistic computers.

Presume that would require laser designator to track the moving target as it moves and continue to light it up until the artillery shell lands? Not sure how easy that is.

Pretty easy. How do you think laser guided bombs dropped from fighter jets work? Same concept.

 

[LegionnairE]

Doesn’t need to be a big drone either, here is a low cost solution: a recent unveiling by a western arms company.

Pretty much can slap on a laser designator on any type of small drone. Don’t need predator class to do a simple like this.

c'mon this has to be a joke.

If I have artillery that has a range of 40-60 kilometers, I would want UAVs that has that can designate targets at that range and stay in the air long enough to be useful.

For fixed targets, As long as you have ballistic computer on your cannons then you don’t need basir as much unless it’s really windy or weather conditions are bad. A ballistic computer can get you very close to the target if you have the coordinates of what you want to hit by calculating curvature of the earth, wind, in relation to launch angle and degrees.

No matter how good your computers are, you can't overcome the inherent inaccuracies like minor differences in shell production, how they were stored, the temperature and the wear on the barrel (It's safe to assume those M109 barrels are pretty worn) the changes in the weather etc.


Small differences like these really add up when we're talking such long ranges. Guidance is still required if you want to hit something specific. Or you're going to have to fire a number of shells over a period of time to ensure that the statistical probability of that thing not being hit is close to zero.

You would use artillery against a moving target? Didn't know that was a thing. Presume that would require laser designator to track the moving target as it moves and continue to light it up until the artillery shell lands? Not sure how easy that is.

it happens all the time but obviously it requires good coordination and takes a bit of time. Armed drones are still better for time sensitive targets.

 

[Flotilla]

c'mon this has to be a joke.

If I have artillery that has a range of 40-60 kilometers, I would want UAVs that has that can designate targets at that range and stay in the air long enough to be useful.

You don´t need to have a MALE patrolling for 20 hours near to the front. It is enough a FAC controller team, 2 guys with laser designators hidden from 5 or 6 km away of the target.
Russian has cooked all inventory western SPG´s with just Orlan 10 and small FAC teams.

 

[LegionnairE]

a FAC controller team, 2 guys with laser designators hidden from 5 or 6 km away of the target.

That's a big luxury you may not have.. Are you going to send a special forces infiltration team 20-30km deep behind enemy lines

or is it easier with a tactical UAV like Bayraktar TB2? Or Muhajer or Ababil or whatever.

 

[TheImmortal]

c'mon this has to be a joke.

If I have artillery that has a range of 40-60 kilometers, I would want UAVs that has that can designate targets at that range and stay in the air long enough to be useful.

Max artillery you have is 40KM. More like 20-30KM during wartime.

Russians have bigger artillery pieces, but the NATO armies generally use 155mm.

No matter how good your computers are, you can't overcome the inherent inaccuracies like minor differences in shell production, how they were stored, the temperature and the wear on the barrel (It's safe to assume those M109 barrels are pretty worn) the changes in the weather etc.

It’s still physics and CEP probability statistics. So the target will be destroyed cheaper using unguided to a guided. Even US/Israel still don’t use guided shells for most of their missions. It’s a luxury, not a necessity.

Small differences like these really add up when we're talking such long ranges. Guidance is still required if you want to hit something specific.

Depends how specific. Both Ukraine and Russia have demolished each others troop and mechanized columns in urban warefare and rural countryside using artillery.

Those videos you saw of Bradley tanks and western vehicles getting demolished were because they entered Russian artillery kill zones purposely set up to defend their fortifications.

Or you're going to have to fire a number of shells over a period of time to ensure that the statistical probability of that thing not being hit is close to zero.

In many cases it’s cheaper. To your point if your are trying to hit a single point in a long trench or a moving vehicle then yes a laser shell would be cheaper. But usually artillery has been used for softening a broad area of front lines of the enemy location for suppressing/dislodging the enemy. Wether that’s in Gaza city right now or Mariupol during the Russian -Ukraine war. More precise strikes are usually done by UAV/Helicopters/CAS/suicide drones. This go back to medieval times when catapults were used to fulfill the same role.

it happens all the time but obviously it requires good coordination and takes a bit of time. Armed drones are still better for time sensitive targets.

You’d be surprised how fast an artillery team can compensate and take a out a target.

Look at how a simple cheap Orlan 10 by Russian provides error correction information to the teams. You don’t know TB2 or Mohajer-6 or S-136 to do this job. Just a drone with a few hours worth of endurance that can travel 20-40KM (range of standard artillery).

 

[LegionnairE]

Max artillery you have is 40KM. More like 20-30KM during wartime.

Russians have bigger artillery pieces, but the NATO armies generally use 155mm.

You can go much further than 40km with 155mm with specialized ammo and We have 210mm guns and obviously we have rocket artillery

It’s still physics and CEP probability statistics. So the target will be destroyed cheaper using unguided to a guided. Even US/Israel still don’t use guided shells for most of their missions. It’s a luxury, not a necessity.

I doubt it, laser guided shells aren't that expensive, iran can afford them and if you can get the job done with fewer shells, it's less strain on logistics.

Why are you fighting me on this? Iran has this technology. What is this love towards low tech?

You’d be surprised how fast an artillery team can compensate and take a out a target.

Look at how a simple cheap Orlan 10 by Russian provides error correction information to the teams. You don’t know TB2 or Mohajer-6 or S-136 to do this job. Just a drone with a few hours worth of endurance that can travel 20-40KM (range of standard artillery).

We have artillery radars to make corrections before the first fired shells even land. But it's never as accurate as actually guided ammo.

This is a 105mm air portable howitzer called boran. You can see the little radar on top of the system

 

[jauk]

That's a big luxury you may not have.. Are you going to send a special forces infiltration team 20-30km deep behind enemy lines

or is it easier with a tactical UAV like Bayraktar TB2? Or Muhajer or Ababil or whatever.

Don’t worry. Iranians know how.

 

[TheImmortal]

You can go much further than 40km with 155mm with specialized ammo

Please provide evidence. NATO uses mostly 155mm and below that is well known. There ranges are well known from extended range down to short range shells.

We have 210mm guns

No you don’t. Not in active service anyway.

and obviously we have rocket artillery

That was not topic on hand. We are talking artillery shells. Not rockets. Not mortars. Not missiles.

I doubt it, laser guided shells aren't that expensive,

You make these blanket statements when google is literally at your finger tips. I wonder if you trolling sometimes.

Excalibur shells that Ukraine fires cost about $100-110K a shell. Compare that to a dummy shell that’s $1000 on average. That’s a 100x difference.

 

[LegionnairE]

@TheImmortal We do have 210mm howitzers, they were last used in Afrin offensive. Where do you get this hubris of telling me what our army does or doesn't have?

And are you incapable of making the simplest google search about the subject you're talking about?

You're embarrassing yourself. You're comparing literally the most expensive GPS/INS guided artillery shell in the world to the Iranian Basir. Utter fucking stupidity at display here is astounding.

You don't know what the **** you're talking about, you're merely arguing for argument's sake

At this point I'm wondering if you are really this stupid or if you're just trolling me.

 

[TheImmortal]

@TheImmortal We do have 210mm howitzers, they were last used in Afrin offensive. Where do you get this hubris of telling me what our army does or doesn't have?

Then show me the evidence. I was not able to find any howitzers in 210mm in Turkish possession. That is why I asked.

So do you have the evidence or do you not? I’m glad to be wrong (unlike you).

Let me save you time: 210mm howitzers don’t exist in this day and age.

You are likely referring to the 50+ year old 203mm howitzers that no one really uses anymore.

Are you by chance talking about this:

Even Iran has these dinosaurs and their range sucked: 15-25KM in most cases.

And are you incapable of making the simplest google search about the subject you're talking about?
View attachment 967992

Did you bother to click the citation? It’s Chinese. You trolling me again my Turkish friend?

To get 70KM range you need M1299 howitzer (A .58 caliber artillery cannon). M1299 is still in prototype stage AND you need to use a rocket assisted round.

The M1299 is armed with a new 155 mm L/58 caliber long, a 9.1 m gun tube, XM907 gun, designed by Benét Laboratories that will fire the XM1113 rocket-assisted round. This will give a range of over 70 km – much greater than the 38 km (24 mi) of the M109A7 Paladin.

So my point stands. Max range of current .39 caliber howitzers is around 40KM.

Straight from Raytheon’s mouth:

This weapon system also extends the reach of .39-caliber artillery to 40 kilometers, .52-caliber artillery to 50 kilometers, and .58-caliber artillery to 70 kilometers

Excalibur Projectile

With more than 600 rounds fired in theater to date, the Excalibur® munition is the revolutionary precision projectile for the U.S. Army and Marine Corps artillery

www.rtx.com

So not only do you need a howitzer that is not even in service yet (.59 caliber), you also need a rocket assisted round variant that is yet to be mass produced. Lol

You're embarrassing yourself. You're comparing literally the most expensive GPS/INS guided artillery shell in the world to the Iranian Basir.

I was talking about Ukraine - Russian war and both sides using laser guided shells and how much Ukraine cost.

Lastly no one knows how much Iranian Basir cost. It could be $20K or it could be $60K. It’s a fallacy to assume everything Iran makes is 10x cheaper than USA. And given our modest military budget even a $20K-$40K artillery shell is very expensive compared to a dummy shell we make for $250. That’s a difference of 10-50x!

Why is that hard to understand?

You don't know what the **** you're talking about, you're merely arguing for argument's sake

Ironic considering you citied something you didn’t even know the source of or that it’s not even in mass production let alone deployed to any battlefield.

So the only person that likes to argue is you.