Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
fuel 27 missile ?
how , those were solid fuel missile
not much circular my guess is a Fateh variant.
Last edited:
Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions
- Thread starter The SiLent crY
- Start date
how , those were solid fuel missile
Stryker1982
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2016
- Messages
- 4,864
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
They made a wrong assessment about Iran as usual and the types of missiles they'd use, I have no clue where they got 27 from but is bad intellegence.
skyshadow
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2017
- Messages
- 5,056
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
yes warhead was detonated on impact, well depends on what kind of target you have for maximum impact on soft targets you need to detonated your warhead few meters above ground but if you want to rip your target apart and kill every one hidden in bunker or give them brain injuries and make the ground shake then you let the warhead do its job by hitting the ground first
Iranian missile detonated on impact, it makes a small but powerful earthquake for 300 meters
Iranian missile detonated above Target, it makes no earthquake but it has maximum kill radius
Pakistan scientist Dr Abdul Qadir Khan was big ZERO when it comes to Iran nuclear........ program. just smok screen to keep IAEA busy for 15 years.
google sreach Vyacheslav Danilenko former soviet thermonuclear weapon expert.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...ons-and-treasons.427176/page-68#post-11602044
This is United Nation nuclear agency not me
First
UNSCR 2231 has recognized iran as nuclear power if you should know . to educate yourself please google search nuclear power country so to find out what it meaning by international law and understand it does not mean at all nuclear electricity .
UN website NOT ME
resolution 2231 (2015) - the United Nations
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2231(2015)
2nd: The 2011 IAEA Iran report : the 1990 Marivan large-scale nuclear test .
which guess what U.S has provided to IAEA the satellite pictures .
this is IAEA websilte NOT ME
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2011-65.pdf
3rd: also known as PMD ( previous military dimension )
Frontline- April 13, 1993 (Iran and the Bomb)
++++++
Iran Exploding-bridgewire Wire detonator (EBW)
EBW references from IAEA Board of Governors’ reports
http://www.atomicreporters.com/2014/02/iran-new-developments-exploding-bridge-wire-ebw/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploding-bridgewire_detonator
++++++
Project Midan: Developing and Building an Underground Nuclear Test Site in Iran
http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...uilding-an-underground-nuclear-test-site-in-i
The secret part the Iran nuclear deal with US ( JCPOA )
U.S John kerry told IAEA not to publish the photos,
Obama's secret Iran deals exposed
+++++
People just google sreach Vycheslav V. Danilenko former Soviet scientist nuclear weapons expert .
our program had multi ................route, it would been even unwise and unreliableto to only relay one route, . and if you follow and study IRI Iran they are never interested in anything that the China offers them and always after Russian or western technology .
AQ Khan in our program was big zero compared to soviet union Vycheslav V. Danilenko thermonuclear weapon experts . AQ Khan was IAEA ghost chess before Israeli American quote Iran with real stuff
Vycheslav V. Danilenko former Soviet scientist nuclear weapons expert then you come to realization thatAbdul Qadeer Khan story has almost zero rule in Iran program and AQ Khan it was just smoke screen cover up to keep IAEA busy by iranians to be used before we (iran ) got quote red handed
Vyacheslav Danilenko
NOT ME it is IAEA
he November 8, 2011 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards report on Iran identifies a foreign expert that may have been important to Iran’s development of implosion detonation systems used in nuclear weapons. The Agency writes in the report that it has “strong indications that the development by Iran of the high explosives initiation system, and its development of the high speed diagnostic configuration used to monitor related experiments, were assisted by the work of a foreign expert who was not only knowledgeable in these technologies, but who, a Member State has informed the Agency, worked for much of his career with this technology in the nuclear weapon programme of the country of his origin.”
Information in other IAEA documents reviewed by ISIS identifies this person as Vycheslav V. Danilenko1. Born in 1934, Danilenko worked in the nuclear weapon complex at VNIITF, Chelyabinsk-70 for three decades. At VNIITF in the early 1960s, he was a member of the gas dynamics group and became involved in the study of the manufacture of synthetic diamonds. He worked with leading explosives experts in the Soviet nuclear weapons program and developed understanding of the fundamentals of detonation, including shock compression. In 1960, the head of VNIIF, B. I. Zababakhin, launched the institute’s research into the possibility of diamond synthesis by using the shock compression of graphite. Leading Soviet nuclear weapons experts were leaders in this effort in the early 1960s. In a recent book chapter Danilenko says that “experiments aimed at developing methods for synthesis were highly classified; for security reason, the results were initially contained only in secret reports from VNIITF.”2 According to IAEA officials, he likely had knowledge of the application of high explosives in the Soviet nuclear weapons program. Given his background and experience, this ex-Soviet nuclear weapons expert was well versed in key aspects of developing nuclear weapons.
Danilenko also has experience in the important area of the diagnostics of high explosions. His publications include work on high-speed photography and describe optical techniques by which fiber optic cables are used to capture the time of arrival of explosive shock waves.
After leaving VNIITF in either 1989 or 1991, Danilenko moved to Ukraine and established the company ALIT in Kiev, producing ultra-dispersed diamonds (UDD or nanodiamonds). He experienced economic difficulties by the mid-1990s. According to the IAEA, he contacted the Iranian embassy in mid-1995, offering his expertise on UDD. At the end of the year, he was contacted by Dr. Seyed Abbas Shahmoradi, who headed the Physics Research Center and also worked at the Sharif University of Technology.3 Danilenko signed a contract with Shahmoradi, according to IAEA documents.
+++++
Thanks to Obama for PMD
before Yukio Amano IAEA chief visit to Iran suddenly floods in Tehran province and Parchin area
Sep 20, 2015
then
samples taken by Iranian experts from Parchin military site with no IAEA inspectors present before close IAEA PMD case \ basically Iran curry out inspection itself and guess what Iran came out clean
and then
IAEA Board of Governors closes Iran PMD case
IAEA Board of Governors closes Iran PMD case
The governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency has decided to close Iran’s so-called PMD case.www.presstv.com
CNN news analysis North Korea nuclear weapon program and miniaturization in 2013
people can draw their own conclusions
connect dots together then people can get good Idea where Iran nuclear program is and how it has come about
Yavar jaan
I will add this super important video again that is ignored by most of us:
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
youtu.be
This is not an easy task at all. Only Iran can do this.
You will need spherical array of explosives with less than nanoseconds of trigger to have a chance of symmetrical explosion.
Now think super critical:
scimitar19
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2011
- Messages
- 305
- Reaction score
- -1
Iranian missile detonated above Target, it makes no earthquake but it has maximum kill radius
Interesting. If I want to cover larger area, lets say eradicate soft targets then I would detonate much higher to cover larger radius from conical shaped charges filled with shrapnel. Charges needs to be directed to secure maximum damage and direct all that kinetic potential on the ground. I guess Iranian engineers have a vast area to play with.
If someone is hiding in a bunker then it is not necessary to hit the bunker you just need to land one in front of the entrance of the bunker and let the huge increase and decrease of pressure do the work on live targets.
skyshadow
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2017
- Messages
- 5,056
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
exactly
Raghfarm007
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2017
- Messages
- 1,209
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Watch the above video with from 10.20 mins. Stacy Coleman say that there were no fatalities.... then swallos a big visible gulp....this is a CLASSIC sign of lying. They are clearly hiding big things.....
Because the US is made up of mentally stunted people, they can keep repeating ridiculous things like "it was a MIRICLE that no one died".
The child like mind of Ameritards still belives in fairytails... so "miricles" like this are belived.
I suspect that when evidence comes out that there were deaths as a result of the missile attack.... the US will say "it was a MIRICLE that only foreign contractors were killed"
Last edited:
Military sources: Government forces backed by tribes regained the past two days all the sites that were controlled by the Houthi militia within weeks of the most violent escalation towards Marib, with the exception of Camp Coufal, which is close to r
Military sources: Government forces backed by tribes regained the past two days all the sites that were controlled by the Houthi militia within weeks of the most violent escalation towards Marib, with the exception of Camp Coufal, which is close to retaking it, while the militia suffered...
yemen.liveuamap.com
Saudi Arabia: 5 civilians were injured as a military projectile fell in a village in the Jizan region, launched by the Houthi militia Jizan - Interactive map of Yemen war - Yemen news live map- yemen.liveuamap.com
Saudi Arabia: 5 civilians were injured as a military projectile fell in a village in the Jizan region, launched by the Houthi militia. Yemen Civil war and Saudi-led intervention news on live map in English
yemen.liveuamap.com
Raghfarm007
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2017
- Messages
- 1,209
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
VEVAK
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2013
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 1
I don't think you truly appreciate what an impressive number 11 of 16 (Near 70% success rate) truly is! Even with subsonic cruise missiles, it may not have been a great number but it would have been more than acceptable!
For a solid fuel missile where the entire body of the rocket heats up to extreme temperatures and at the same time has to travel at extreme speeds and reaches it's target in mere minutes with only seconds to properly adjust it's trajectory during terminal guidance and to hit with such a high success rate & such accuracy, it was beyond impressive!
And no doubt your success rate would naturally increase as you fired more shots....
But if you think your going to get a 100% success rate and every missile has to hit its target every single time that's just not realistic plus the amount of money Iran would have to spend on each missile to ensure something even close to that would overall end up costing more than the cost of 2 missiles.
Iran should instead focus on mass production & storage. Quality improvement will naturally come the more experience they gain.
To simply disable such a base for any significant amount of time Iran at the very least would have to fire +100 BM + 100 UCAV's in the 1st wave alone.
Surenas
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 6,740
- Reaction score
- -6
It depends.
In any chaotic war situation, it would take far less missiles to psychologically and physically eliminate a significant amount of soldiers at the base, either through brain injuries or (mortal) wounds. The attack on Al Asad was just a demonstration of ability and didn't intended to disable it. Completely different when shit really hits the fan and those at the base have far less time to prepare for impact.
Stryker1982
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2016
- Messages
- 4,864
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
You can clearly tell that the strike has taken a serious mental toll on these troops. They all look like they don't sleep and/or are severely depressed.
Stryker1982
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2016
- Messages
- 4,864
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Highly informative thread regarding 60 mins episode on Ain Al-Assad and CENTCOM commander McKenzie's claims.
He notes multiple problems with detail: The following are solely his words, not mine:
Problem 1: The story could not have occurred on the timeline that McKenzie describes. There is a big time gap between when a picture is taken ("collection time") and when the image is available to customers ("delivery time"). The image has to go from the satellite, to a ground station, then to the company, and finally to the customer. In reality, only a very small number of commercial satellite imagery providers like @planet offer images on anything like the timeline implied by McKenzie. More likely, McKenzie doesn't understand what he's saying because he could have moved his forces after the satellite collected the image. If McKenzie wasted several hours after collection waiting for the image to be *delivered*, he should be relieved of command for incompetence.
Problem 2: Gen. McKenzie claims the satellite image showed "airplanes on the ground and people working" in the last image before he moved them. It's uncommon to see piloted aircraft at Ain Al Asad out in the open and the resolution isn't good enough to see "people working." But here's the thing. We do often see UAVs and helicopters out in the open. McKenzie did not move those, at least not to a safe distance. They were still parked in the open near the craters. And at least one helicopter was damaged in the strike.
Problem 3: I can't find any evidence that any commercial satellite firm offered for sale a picture from the days before the strike. The most recent pre-strike images from @planetlabs and @airbus were taken December 30, more than a week prior. You can get a sense of what images were available from a reseller like @ApolloMapping. I just don't see the commercial image that Iran could have purchased, as McKenize claims. I can't prove one doesn't exist, but who sold it? When?
Problem 4: Iran did show high-resolution satellite images of Ain Al Asad from BEFORE and AFTER the strike. The BEFORE image that Iran showed, however, was taken at least 11 days, and very likely more than that, prior to the strike based on the structures that are visible.
It seems very unlikely that Iran possessed a more recent image of the base as Hajizadeh was perfectly willing to show fresh commercial images from AFTER the strike that were only a day old in his briefing. Generals make up stories all the time. But this one is pernicious because it implicates commercial satellite imagery in an attack on American forces. But for near-real time targeting, Iran is far more likely to use a drone than a month-old satellite image. What's going on here?
After we published images of the damage from attack, I was told some people at @DeptofDefense were pretty upset with me. Then-SecDef Mark Esper initially downplayed the strike, calling the damage "nothing I would describe as major." The images made him seem untruthful. I would say that it was Esper saying untruthful things that made him seem untruthful. But the bottom line is that we use commercial satellite imagery to hold poweful people accountable. Some powerful people don't like that! I don't know whether McKenzie made up his tall tale himself or just embellished one that was going around. But it seems like a story someone made up to paint OSINT as aiding the enemy. Just keep in mind, the goal isn't to protect the troops, it's to protect their own asses.
He notes multiple problems with detail: The following are solely his words, not mine:
Problem 1: The story could not have occurred on the timeline that McKenzie describes. There is a big time gap between when a picture is taken ("collection time") and when the image is available to customers ("delivery time"). The image has to go from the satellite, to a ground station, then to the company, and finally to the customer. In reality, only a very small number of commercial satellite imagery providers like @planet offer images on anything like the timeline implied by McKenzie. More likely, McKenzie doesn't understand what he's saying because he could have moved his forces after the satellite collected the image. If McKenzie wasted several hours after collection waiting for the image to be *delivered*, he should be relieved of command for incompetence.
Problem 2: Gen. McKenzie claims the satellite image showed "airplanes on the ground and people working" in the last image before he moved them. It's uncommon to see piloted aircraft at Ain Al Asad out in the open and the resolution isn't good enough to see "people working." But here's the thing. We do often see UAVs and helicopters out in the open. McKenzie did not move those, at least not to a safe distance. They were still parked in the open near the craters. And at least one helicopter was damaged in the strike.
Problem 3: I can't find any evidence that any commercial satellite firm offered for sale a picture from the days before the strike. The most recent pre-strike images from @planetlabs and @airbus were taken December 30, more than a week prior. You can get a sense of what images were available from a reseller like @ApolloMapping. I just don't see the commercial image that Iran could have purchased, as McKenize claims. I can't prove one doesn't exist, but who sold it? When?
Problem 4: Iran did show high-resolution satellite images of Ain Al Asad from BEFORE and AFTER the strike. The BEFORE image that Iran showed, however, was taken at least 11 days, and very likely more than that, prior to the strike based on the structures that are visible.
It seems very unlikely that Iran possessed a more recent image of the base as Hajizadeh was perfectly willing to show fresh commercial images from AFTER the strike that were only a day old in his briefing. Generals make up stories all the time. But this one is pernicious because it implicates commercial satellite imagery in an attack on American forces. But for near-real time targeting, Iran is far more likely to use a drone than a month-old satellite image. What's going on here?
After we published images of the damage from attack, I was told some people at @DeptofDefense were pretty upset with me. Then-SecDef Mark Esper initially downplayed the strike, calling the damage "nothing I would describe as major." The images made him seem untruthful. I would say that it was Esper saying untruthful things that made him seem untruthful. But the bottom line is that we use commercial satellite imagery to hold poweful people accountable. Some powerful people don't like that! I don't know whether McKenzie made up his tall tale himself or just embellished one that was going around. But it seems like a story someone made up to paint OSINT as aiding the enemy. Just keep in mind, the goal isn't to protect the troops, it's to protect their own asses.
Blue In Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I just read this thread on Twitter and it made my entire day lol. We knew the Americans were going to lie about what happened (100%) but to go to this extent in order to just fabricate stuff is beyond dishonorable.
Well, I guess now (if you choose to take this professors side) we have our answer.
Stryker1982
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2016
- Messages
- 4,864
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
It makes me wonder how much they truly lie about. Remember shortly after the attack their was a string of suicides in the US military that were unprecedented? We knew or at least highly suspected they cleaned up the wreckages before showing the images to the world, I wonder if they hid a few deaths as well.....
This same McKenize said that Iran fueled up to 27 missiles, despite the fact these are solid-fuel missiles Imao and the obvious choice of a strike like this would be Fateh series.... If you are a CENTCOM commander you should know every single thing about Iran and it seems he doesn't know the most basic.
Similar threads
