Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[Bahram Esfandiari]

sadam Hussain also fired antiaircraft missiles at u.s jets in 1991 gulf war but failed to down any jet so better training and strategy to use weapons is more important than possessing weapons.To use sam alot of training is needed in simulated war like conditions but I doubt iran not have better training in this regard

The U.S and its coalition lost 39 fixed winged aircraft and 5 helicopters in combat to Iraq during Dessert Storm. With the exception of an USN F/A-18C shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25 and an EF-111A that crashed while trying to out maneuver a missile from a Mirage F-1, all the other losses were caused by Iraqi air defence assets. Iraq was operating outdated Soviet systems(SA-2/3/6/8/9/13)and French supplied Roland short range air defence missiles during the war. Do you honestly think the Iraqis with all there foreign supplied air defence systems had better trainng than Iran that actually builds its own air defence Radars, missiles and simulators?

 

[Sineva]

Does anyone know why in this day and age, Air defense systems are still surrounded by a wall of dirt?

I believe thats actually referred to as a "berm".

 

[Sineva]

sadam Hussain also fired antiaircraft missiles at u.s jets in 1991 gulf war but failed to down any jet so better training and strategy to use weapons is more important than possessing weapons.To use sam alot of training is needed in simulated war like conditions but I doubt iran not have better training in this regard

Saddams sams were a mixture of old soviet and western legacy[cold war] systems that were barely even up to the task of keeping iran at bay in the 1980s.In addition the iraqis used a centralised air defence system KARI that was based on the soviet model but even more rigid and without its depth or complexity,not to mention the fact that it was built by the french so the west knew pretty much all the secrets of the iraqi air defences...such as they were.Indeed the most advanced sams that the iraqis fielded were the point defence western roland 2 and the soviet sa8 gecko,both of which were late 70s/early 80s vintage and well known to the west.

 

[SubWater]

I want to mention hitting the entrance of the tunnels is not that much easy that many here thinks.
the most entrance are in the positions that cruise missiles can not hit it from good angle.
they are in the middle of the valleys with very sharp angle of the mountain that even is hard for warplanes to hit it.
They would waste many cruise missiles to hit one entrance which hide behind big wall of mountain.

Also I think aggressors have very narrow angle to attack entrances which help AAA guns and other air defense missiles concentrate on that directions to hit coming warplanes and cruise missiles. Clearly they can not hit entrance from back or sides in my assumptions.

 

[gambit]

Does anyone know why in this day and age, Air defense systems are still surrounded by a wall of dirt?

Explosions, pressurized water, and electricity, always seeks the path of least resistance.

A sloped wall of dirt, or of any material for that matter, directs the force of any explosions up and away from the valued target, this is assuming it is not a direct hit.

If you want to get into the math of the issue on why sand and other 'soft' material are desirable over hard materials like concrete, here is a good read...

http://aimt.unob.cz/articles/10_01/10_01 (7).pdf

 

[SubWater]

I search this random picture in the web from unknown place in earth

Just imagine if entrance of Tunnel be in the somewhere in this mountain walls, how much is hard for cruise missiles to reach that point even without air defenses to protect entrance.
Also the missiles are force to fly high and attack from very Predictable direction.

 

[gambit]

I search this random picture in the web from unknown place in earth

Just imagine if entrance of Tunnel be in the somewhere in this mountain walls, how much is hard for cruise missiles to reach that point even without air defenses to protect entrance.
Also the missiles are force to fly high and attack from very Predictable direction.

If there is a tunnel entrance, there will be signs of human activities. If the local terrain make it too difficult for cruise missiles, then B-52 raids will do the job.

 

[SubWater]

If there is a tunnel entrance, there will be signs of human activities. If the local terrain make it too difficult for cruise missiles, then B-52 raids will do the job.

But even your B-52 must attack from clear angle and direction.

 

[PeeD]

B-52 will only employ long range stand-off weapons in any Iran scenario with the IADS intact.

 

[VEVAK]

I search this random picture in the web from unknown place in earth

Just imagine if entrance of Tunnel be in the somewhere in this mountain walls, how much is hard for cruise missiles to reach that point even without air defenses to protect entrance.
Also the missiles are force to fly high and attack from very Predictable direction.

Also another example would be if all the "visible" entrances are on the mountain on the right but underneath the mountain on the right is only being used as an entrance and decoy and in actuality all the tunnels storing missiles are actually under the mountain on the left, connected via an underground tunnel and most of the visible entrances on the mountain on the right are nothing but decoys and the entrances, exists & silo doors on the mountain on the left are all berried and will only be opened incase of war.....
So without knowing how the tunnels underneath is actually structured even with an MOAB all your doing is collapsing 1 tunnel used as the entrance and that even if you can collapse even that 1 tunnel.

Also Tomahawks and most other cruise missiles unless armed with Nukes simply don't have enough destructive power to do much of anything to these structures and to properly collapse the entrances U.S. will need to use +4000lb bombs that would require the Aircrafts to get within ~40km of the target and within reach of mobile Iranian SAM systems hidden around these bases and that's just to properly collapse the entrances

 

[925boy]

If there is a tunnel entrance, there will be signs of human activities. If the local terrain make it too difficult for cruise missiles, then B-52 raids will do the job.

ha ha ! if only war was this easy for US. Luckily, US military and pentagon knows their technology wont make for a short "Iran campaign".

 

[gambit]

But even your B-52 must attack from clear angle and direction.

Actually...No. Our current guided bomb can hit targets at some angles.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-let-them-drop-smart-bombs-like-never-before/

 

[SubWater]

Actually...No. Our current guided bomb can hit targets at some angles.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-let-them-drop-smart-bombs-like-never-before/

But bombs can not do U turn. for that reason they must have engine and that make them cruise missile not bomb more.
Just imagine entrance is north to south and your B-52 is coming from south to north.
you have only one option, cross the entrance take U turn then find good angle and then drop the bomb which that maneuver put your heavy B-52 at very dangerous position. Also what I am suggesting is that they provide only one corridor for invaders and concentrate most of defenses on that corridor. However I believe with use of terrain and mix of smart and complex plan of Tunnels like what @VEVAK suggest is possible to save entrances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRGC related companies are main guys who are digging metro Tunnels under cities and every body knows how fast they become these days for creating Tunnels. clearly main base is kilometers away from the main entrance and new entrances can build at the time of the war.

Iran even start to study and build localized TBM machines.

125 meter long machine. that is amazing.

 

[Oldman1]

But bombs can not do U turn. for that reason they must have engine and that make them cruise missile not bomb more.
Just imagine entrance is north to south and your B-52 is coming from south to north.
you have only one option, cross the entrance take U turn then find good angle and then drop the bomb which that maneuver put your heavy B-52 at very dangerous position. Also what I am suggesting is that they provide only one corridor for invaders and concentrate most of defenses on that corridor. However I believe with use of terrain and mix of smart and complex plan of Tunnels like what @VEVAK suggest is possible to save entrances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

Actually bombs can do a U turn. Especially if they have wings on it. The only difference is the loitering time they can stay up in the air.

I search this random picture in the web from unknown place in earth

Just imagine if entrance of Tunnel be in the somewhere in this mountain walls, how much is hard for cruise missiles to reach that point even without air defenses to protect entrance.
Also the missiles are force to fly high and attack from very Predictable direction.

Actually it makes it easier for cruise missiles to avoid SAMs because of the fact mountains are blocking most of the radar.

 

[aryobarzan]

having eyes in the sky is also a double edged sword... the more you see the more you are subject to deception..so yes Iran will be using decoys to fool those eyes in the sky..just imagine a tunnel entrance with no depth...same tactics are being used in Syria against Israeli attacks...must be frustrating not knowing if your valuable missiles are actually hitting real targets or Tin cans!..