Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[WinterNights]

I am sorry. It was 550kmph. But this is not high either. Commercial planes fly at 1000kmph. 550kmph amounts to 150m/s. Most important is that it is not maneuverable and hence can't evade any missile fired at it.

You need to stop talking about matters you don't have a clue about because you only make yourself looks like a moron.

The UAV was flying at above 50,000 feet when Iran downed it, that by itself was a feat. Seconly, only bunch of clueless kids like you are acting as if this UAV was some helpless dove. This UAV had the sophisticated electronic warfare suit made by Raytheon. Just because it was not effective in front of Iranian SAM's, it does not mean it was defenceless.

It is not stealthy. It just has long endurance. U2 was also not stealthy. U2 was 1960s drone. There was no stealth in 1960.

The UAV has layers of honey-comb composite material designed to absorb radars waves for varying frequencies. Just because it is not as stealth as the F-22, it does not mean it did not have RCS lowering techniques employed on it.

Iran hit the drone using ground based SAM. I don't understans the meaning of high mobile SAM. Is it on racing car? Otherwise, a SAM system with multiple trucks having power generation to the tune of hundred kW should not find it hard to detect a big drone like RQ4.

You're obviously mentally handicapped. A mobile SAM in this context is one that is not static and can be moved easily and put into operation very quickly in another area.

It is 6ton heavy and does not have stealth. It is also not very manoeuvrable and any missile that can overtake it can be easily directed to hit it.

You keep repeating the same nonsense over and over and think people will buy it.

1- The UAV was flying at well over 50,000 feet.

2- The UAV did have varying RCS lowering techniques employed.

3- The UAV has many varying countermeasures against being attack, but Iran rendered them ineffective.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

You need to stop talking about matters you don't have a clue about because you only make yourself looks like a moron.

The UAV was flying at above 50,000 feet when Iran downed it, that by itself was a feat. Seconly, only bunch of clueless kids like you are acting as if this UAV was some helpless dove. This UAV had the sophisticated electronic warfare suit made by Raytheon. Just because it was not effective in front of Iranian SAM's, it does not mean it was defenceless.

So, merely flying at 15km makes it difficult for a missile to hit? How?

What were the defences of the drone? It was made in 1995 and even F22 type stealth was unavailable at that time. You can't simply say that RQ4 is stealth drone. It has no design of a stealth drone

The UAV has layers of honey-comb composite material designed to absorb radars waves for varying frequencies. Just because it is not as stealth as the F-22, it does not mean it did not have RCS lowering techniques employed on it

Composites don't absorb radar waves. Also, radars have improved enough to detect these drones. We have radars on commercial ships that can detect fishing boast at 5km. Similarly, seeing a 1995 era drone at 50000 feet is not a big feat. The drone is 6.5 ton heavy and is bigger than MiG21 plane

You're obviously mentally handicapped. A mobile SAM in this context is one that is not static and can be moved easily and put into operation very quickly in another area.

Almost every SAM is mobile nowadays. What is the specialty here?

 

[WinterNights]

So, merely flying at 15km makes it difficult for a missile to hit? How?

"merely" Let me know when you Indians show to have such a capability in practise.

What were the defences of the drone? It was made in 1995 and even F22 type stealth was unavailable at that time. You can't simply say that RQ4 is stealth drone.

This drone was called the triton, a more advanced version of the MQ-4 and had its first flight in 2013. It is equipped with state of the art raytheon electronic warfare systems.

You don't even have the brain capacity to do a simple google search?

It has no design of a stealth drone

A BS claim that I debunked already with reference to their active attempts to reduce its RCS by the utilisation of radar absorbing technique.

Composites don't absorb radar waves.

Yes they do, you clueless kid. The drone has layers of honey comb material designed to absorb radars with varying frequency types.

Also, radars have improved enough to detect these drones.

Who said anything about radars not being able to detect them? Stealth in a military RCS context does not mean invisible to radar.

We have radars on commercial ships that can detect fishing boast at 5km. Similarly, seeing a 1995 era drone at 50000 feet is not a big feat. The drone is 6.5 ton heavy and is bigger than MiG21 plane

And B-2 is much larger than this UAV but much more stealthy. Size is not the only factor. And your "1995" BS has been debunked already.

Almost every SAM is mobile nowadays. What is the specialty here?

You asked what mobile meant, and I answered. Seriously dude, why are you this thick?

There are mobile and then mobile. For example, this third of khordad systems is much more mobile and with lower footprint than something like S-300 etc.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

"merely" Let me know when you Indians show to have such a capability in practise.

India already has this. Akash SAM has 18km altitude. India even has demonstrated BMD capability at much greater heights.

This drone was called the triton, a more advanced version of the MQ-4 and had its first flight in 2013. It is equipped with state of the art raytheon electronic warfare systems.

You don't even have the brain capacity to do a simple google search?

Triton is naval version of RQ4. It is not a steath drone. Also, EWS can not be equipped on RQ4 as they don't have the other sophisticated sensors to detect incoming threats. Using EWS arbitrarily can cause others to be alerted. Don't talk nonsense about it having EWS or other things.

A BS claim that I debunked already with reference to their active attempts to reduce its RCS by the utilisation of radar absorbing technique.

Merely having composites does not make a plane stealth. It just has lower RCS compared to metals but it still is not low observable. Please understand the difference.

Yes they do, you clueless kid. The drone has layers of honey comb material designed to absorb radars with varying frequency types.

I know what composites can do. But honey comb is for strength of structure rather than stealth. Stealth requires radar deflecting design. This will cost fuel and it will be fuel inefficient. Triton has 30hour endurance which is impossible with stealth design.

And B-2 is much larger than this UAV but much more stealthy. Size is not the only factor. And your "1995" BS has been debunked already.

How much fuel efficiency does B2 have? This drone can stay afloat for 30 hours, flying at 300kmph. Can B2 do that? Understand the difference between stealth of B2 and stealth of long endurance surveillance platform.

You asked what mobile meant, and I answered. Seriously dude, why are you this thick?

There are mobile and then mobile. For example, this third of khordad systems is much more mobile and with lower footprint than something like S-300 etc.

This is pantsir :

This is khordad:

Do you think Khordad is any more mobile than Pantsir? Pantsir is not a very modern SAM either. So, why this unwarranted boasting?

 

[WinterNights]

India already has this. Akash SAM has 18km altitude. India even has demonstrated BMD capability at much greater heights.

You have not demonstrated jack. This is my point. Many nations can claim x or y, but until you have shown these capabilities in practise, it means little.

And isn't your Akash a homebuilt Russian kub?

Triton is naval version of RQ4. It is not a steath drone.

It is stealthy, as I explained already. Your words mean nothing when hard evidence on the ground debunks your claim.

as they don't have the other sophisticated sensors to detect incoming threats.

Like I said, you don't even have the capacity to do a simple google search.

RQ-4A BAMS-D is an ISR platform, with Receivers level EW capabilities (not exactly significant per American standards). Global Hawk class HALE is suited for providing surveillance from significant altitudes, and not try to penetrate defenses of any country.

AN/ALR = Receivers (Warning)
AN/ALQ = Jamming/Spoofing (Penetration); necessary to suppress SAM assets among other stuff
AN/ALT = Transmitters (Communications Suppression)

Merely having composites does not make a plane stealth. It just has lower RCS compared to metals but it still is not low observable. Please understand the difference.

The point is this UAV used various methods to reduce it's RCS. There is no cut off point from which something becomes "stealth" in an RCS context , it is all relative.

How much fuel efficiency does B2 have? This drone can stay afloat for 30 hours, flying at 300kmph. Can B2 do that? Understand the difference between stealth of B2 and stealth of long endurance surveillance platform.

What does endurance have to with RCS?

This is pantsir :

This is khordad:

Do you think Khordad is any more mobile than Pantsir? Pantsir is not a very modern SAM either. So, why this unwarranted boasting?

Are you seriously comparing a mid-long range sam system to a short range system? Your arguments are getting dumber by the second.

 

[VEVAK]

I am sorry. It was 550kmph. But this is not high either. Commercial planes fly at 1000kmph. 550kmph amounts to 150m/s. Most important is that it is not maneuverable and hence can't evade any missile fired at it.


It is not stealthy. It just has long endurance. U2 was also not stealthy. U2 was 1960s drone. There was no stealth in 1960.


Iran hit the drone using ground based SAM. I don't understans the meaning of high mobile SAM. Is it on racing car? Otherwise, a SAM system with multiple trucks having power generation to the tune of hundred kW should not find it hard to detect a big drone like RQ4. It is 6ton heavy and does not have stealth. It is also not very maneuverable and any missile that can overtake it can be easily directed to hit it.

You don't understand what low signature highly mobile SAM system means because you don't much understand anything about military equipment!

1st the weapon systems Iran used to hit the drone is not a fixed site location with fixed coordinates with radars and targeting equipment as large as a small building like the SA-2 or S-200 where the coordinates of where they operate and where various aspects and limitations of the system is quite clear.

2nd The weapon systems is highly mobile because Radar targeting capability(with search capability if needed), C&C capability & Missile launchers are all built into one vehicle that would allow them to operate independently if need be and go operational rather quickly. So being highly mobile has nothing to do with the max kph of the vehicle! MORON!

So the radar on the launch vehicle is advanced enough where "any" early warning system can relay the relative direction of incoming aircrafts & in turn the launch vehicle that has it's own advanced radar in a matter of minutes can turn on it's radar to search, detect, target & launch against that target from a single vehicle rather quickly and then quickly go back into hiding so simply taking out their standard search radar and or main C&C will not disable them & you would have to go after each vehicle & the fact that Iran hit a low RCS aircraft at 51,000 feet means unlike various other highly mobile systems (where so much capability is built into one vehicle) there would be no flying over them! And with system such as this by the time an enemy fighter detects the radars of this system going on the missile has already been launch and is coming at you at supersonic speeds so the pilot would have no time to do anything but take countermeasures and even if you evade by the time you come to and attempt to search and target the launch location the systems has packed up and moved.

The RQ-4 that Iran downed had a low RCS honeycomb skin made up of RAM composites, it had composites meant to reduce noise & engine heat! So yes it was low signature & low RCS (compared to it's size) but NOT a Stealth! Remaining stealth at those altitudes would be rather hard due to various factors and the 1st of which would be that you would be the only object at those altitudes & Stealth does NOT mean you have NO RCS every American Stealth fighter & bomber has an RCS and with the proliferation of advanced processing power and software it's only at longer ranges that they become harder to target!

 

[Hack-Hook]

I am sorry. It was 550kmph. But this is not high either. Commercial planes fly at 1000kmph. 550kmph amounts to 150m/s. Most important is that it is not maneuverable and hence can't evade any missile fired at it.

it has the best countermeasure and Jammers available around the world , and the body is built of material to reduce its radar signatures

I am sorry. It was 550kmph. But this is not high either. Commercial planes fly at 1000kmph. 550kmph amounts to 150m/s. Most important is that it is not maneuverable and hence can't evade any missile fired at it.


It is not stealthy. It just has long endurance. U2 was also not stealthy. U2 was 1960s drone. There was no stealth in 1960.


Iran hit the drone using ground based SAM. I don't understans the meaning of high mobile SAM. Is it on racing car? Otherwise, a SAM system with multiple trucks having power generation to the tune of hundred kW should not find it hard to detect a big drone like RQ4. It is 6ton heavy and does not have stealth. It is also not very maneuverable and any missile that can overtake it can be easily directed to hit it.

by the way why you attach specification of MQ-9 we are talking about RQ-4 .

What were the defences of the drone? It was made in 1995 and even F22 type stealth was unavailable at that time. You can't simply say that RQ4 is stealth drone. It has no design of a stealth drone

you still talking about MQ-9 not RQ-4 . you knew you totally are on another level.

India already has this. Akash SAM has 18km altitude. India even has demonstrated BMD capability at much greater heights.

Last month we saw the capabilities of the system . sadly it lack a simple FOF. by the way are you camparing that outdated system with the max range of 30km with 3rd of Khordad with engagement range of 100km+ and you are talking about 18km altitude we are talking about 30km of altitude . even F-15 cant escape 3rd of Khordad by flying high

Triton is naval version of RQ4. It is not a steath drone. Also, EWS can not be equipped on RQ4 as they don't have the other sophisticated sensors to detect incoming threats. Using EWS arbitrarily can cause others to be alerted. Don't talk nonsense about it having EWS or other things.

yeah each drone cost with research and development come near as 227 million $ for nothing for the comparison the number for F-35 is 120-130 million$

Merely having composites does not make a plane stealth. It just has lower RCS compared to metals but it still is not low observable. Please understand the difference.

its an improvement you admit the drone had low RCS.

I know what composites can do. But honey comb is for strength of structure rather than stealth. Stealth requires radar deflecting design. This will cost fuel and it will be fuel inefficient. Triton has 30hour endurance which is impossible with stealth design.

Radar deflection or Radar absorption or both and there is several different approach to lowering RCS

How much fuel efficiency does B2 have? This drone can stay afloat for 30 hours, flying at 300kmph. Can B2 do that? Understand the difference between stealth of B2 and stealth of long endurance surveillance platform.

well B-2 is a 170 ton airplane that can fly 11100km at 900km/h RQ-4 is 7 ton airplane that can do 12000km at 575km/h

well I must say B-2 is pretty much fuel efficient if you consider the difference in weight and also the fact that it uses 4 engine compared to one in fact one of the interesting aspect of flying wings is that they are fuel efficients

This is pantsir :

This is khordad:

Do you think Khordad is any more mobile than Pantsir? Pantsir is not a very modern SAM either. So, why this unwarranted boasting?

you really need this

now I really feel what pain Pakistani people are having when they are dealing with some of you guys
this is S-300

pantsir is called SA-22 not S-300

 

[skyshadow]

The Saudi military has claimed that Iranian Ya Ali cruise missile was powered by a TJ100 turbojet made by the PBS group. The Czech company assured me it has never exported to Iran and will cooperate with investigation if it is a TJ100.

 

[TheImmortal]

The Saudi military has claimed that Iranian Ya Ali cruise missile was powered by a TJ100 turbojet made by the PBS group. The Czech company assured me it has never exported to Iran and will cooperate with investigation if it is a TJ100.

Czech sells to middle man or the black market. Middle man/Black market sells to Iran.

 

[PeeD]

The Saudi military has claimed that Iranian Ya Ali cruise missile was powered by a TJ100 turbojet made by the PBS group. The Czech company assured me it has never exported to Iran and will cooperate with investigation if it is a TJ100.

That explains exactly two things: Soumar and its 700km range were correct back when it was unveiled. Original mini-Turbofan was not ready and Toloue would not fit. So a engine was selected which had less than half of the thrust but could be serial produced.
Setback was that the CM could only be fueled to a certain amount in order to not get too slow. That amount is the amount that allows a TJ100 powered Kh-55 to travel to 700km.

Then Hoveyzeh came that allowed a larger but sufficiently powerful engine, the Tolue to be used. Now fully fuel load or full-sized tanks could be used. Setback was that fuel consumption was higher than the original mini-Turbofan. Hence the potential range of 2500km was reduced to about half, 1350km.

However capability-wise it added another cost-efficient missile asset capable to strike Israel together with the 1000km Dezful, hence important requirement fulfilled.
Tolue is cost-effectively serial produced in Iran and the TJ-100 copy should be even cheaper.
A redesigned mini-KH-55 would have been possible but not worth the effort as it was maturing the airframe production for future longer range variants such as the Hoveyzeh and probably later that air launched CM of the IRGC-ASF.

 

[skyshadow]

 

[TheImmortal]

The Saudi military has claimed that Iranian Ya Ali cruise missile was powered by a TJ100 turbojet made by the PBS group. The Czech company assured me it has never exported to Iran and will cooperate with investigation if it is a TJ100.

Soumar

Houthi CM

Ya Ali

 

[skyshadow]

Soumar

Houthi CM

Ya Ali

the first one is not Somar CM its hoveizeh CM

 

[skyshadow]

 

[Ich]

Looks like a nice one. Will there be thermobaric versions of it?