Mithridates
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,897
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I’m curious how you think an exit is going to avoid satellite detection. From what I saw of satellite images of Fordow, it has two main exits. In case of these missile bases, An exit needs to allow the removal of missile by something the size of a TEL. So it wouldn’t be a “shaft” but rather a tunnel size exit.
Furthermore, there cannot be “random” exits along the mountain because that defies logic. A TEL while having some off road capability cannot just go up and down rugged mountain edges while carrying a sensitive solid fuel missile. Thus any exits from the mountain would built near a dirt road and again visible to recon sats.
So that type of exit is not exactly going to be easy to hide especially with technologies such as SAR or even imagining technologies much more advanced than that (classified) that can pick up changes to earths foundation/dirt.
Like I said, US has been facing underground bases since 1940s through the Cold War and through rise of nuclear Communist China. It knows a thing or two about finding these types of bases. Never underestimate your enemy.
In the past, Soviet Union and China used such bases to cement second strike capability and project Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) Doctrine. The enemy could not be sure that it could relabily destroy all of the other party’s nuclear weapons in a first strike salvo, thus such bases created nuclear survivability deterrence.
In Iran’s case, these bases also serve as deterrence. However, once war breaks out deterrence is lost because the enemy will attack the bases irregardless because the worst case scenario and doing nothing are the same result for the enemy.
Worst case scenario for US is the base is still operational after an concerted attack by B-2’s carrying MOABs flanked by F-22’s for air to air protection. Iran then fires BMs in retaliation from said base.
If the US does nothing and leaves these bases alone, then Iran likely fires BMs during course of war from those bases anyway.
Like I said, same result.
Some examples of Iran underground missile bases
Well VEVAK, people must also realize that Iran has entered a new era in air defense. Sending B2's or airpower in general to knock out such heavily hardened bases is extremely difficult in Iran.
The reason I like the 3rd Khordad even more than the Bavar 373 is because it can be anywhere, in any warhouse, disguised as any truck. Just a single vehicle.
Anything picked up by any early warning system will trigger a 3rd Khordad or Tabas to come out and engage if anything is in it's kill zone. Secure transit or a SEAD campaign has become a monumental task with this new generation of air defenses.
This is the concept the IRGC-ASF has developed to protect its main strike assets: The missile forces.
Things have changed dramatically. No SA-2/HQ-2/Sayyad or HAWK sites will protect those bases, but 3rd Khordad and Tabas all around the country... Not a dozen of fixed early warning radars will find targets but a vast network of mobile systems of many different kinds.
The US never got a taste of anything even remotely similar to that. In fact the missile cities are almost immune to conventional warfare, their goal is to remain survivable against nuclear warfare.
Well VEVAK, people must also realize that Iran has entered a new era in air defense. Sending B2's or airpower in general to knock out such heavily hardened bases is extremely difficult in Iran.
The reason I like the 3rd Khordad even more than the Bavar 373 is because it can be anywhere, in any warhouse, disguised as any truck. Just a single vehicle.
Anything picked up by any early warning system will trigger a 3rd Khordad or Tabas to come out and engage if anything is in it's kill zone. Secure transit or a SEAD campaign has become a monumental task with this new generation of air defenses.
This is the concept the IRGC-ASF has developed to protect its main strike assets: The missile forces.
Things have changed dramatically. No SA-2/HQ-2/Sayyad or HAWK sites will protect those bases, but 3rd Khordad and Tabas all around the country... Not a dozen of fixed early warning radars will find targets but a vast network of mobile systems of many different kinds.
The US never got a taste of anything even remotely similar to that. In fact the missile cities are almost immune to conventional warfare, their goal is to remain survivable against nuclear warfare.
i'm not sure but i saw some other countries do the same, maybe they hope considering a projectile heading angle it hit the barrier and reduce the damage or maybe low profile flight characteristic of cruise missiles is the reason.Does anyone know why in this day and age, Air defense systems are still surrounded by a wall of dirt?
i'm not sure but i saw some other countries do the same, maybe they hope considering a projectile heading angle it hit the barrier and reduce the damage or maybe low profile flight characteristic of cruise missiles is the reason.
also you are assuming that the CEP of enemy weapon is zero but in real world it is not, so it's better to have something to protect the system from shrapnels.
and there is another classified air defence missile named Sadid 630, i do not know its specifications but its huge God damn it, its a huge missile even bigger than Taeer 2C
View attachment 563384
Does anyone know why in this day and age, Air defense systems are still surrounded by a wall of dirt?
Weren't there a discussion about Sadid-630 being an antisat weapon? If I recall correctly from IMF days, someone estimated the size to be double of Taer. Please correct me if I am wrong.