Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[Mata Elang]

Define "defeated".

Do you think Iran can hurt the US mainland? How many ICBMs do you think Iran has? Well, as far as we know, zero. But even if we're wrong, let's assume that Iran has 100 ICBMs that can reach anywhere in the US. That's a big assumption, but let it be.

How many of these ICBMs do you think will reach the US territory? 40? 50? At such a long distance, none of these missiles can achieve anything of strategic or tactical importance except for terrorizing ordinary Americans. And how do you think the US would respond to it? Do you think 330 million Americans will accept to be terrorized by a far weaker nation?!

I mean at the most optimistic scenario, the US can attack Iran's infrastructure like power plants, dams, airports, etc. Nothing would remain functioning in Iran in such a scenario. The whole country will collapse after a few weeks without electricity, water, food, etc. At the worst case scenario, the US will just nuke the shit out of Tehran. The whole idea of attacking a nuclear power with ICBMs is a ridiculous joke.

Iran can NOT attack the United States, ever. Not today, not in 10 years, not even 20 years later. At the pace of Iran's advances, Iran will not be able to attack the US territory even 50 years later. As soon as Iran launches an ICBM towards the United States, the US has a justified reason to nuke Tehran. You cannot tell if an ICBM is conventional or carrying a nuclear warhead. So, they will just nuke Tehran and say they thought it was a nuclear ICBM.

So, the whole idea of touching the US territory is out of question. Can Iran painfully hurt US interests in the Middle East? Surely we can. We can take out their military bases, rain missiles on strategic assets of their allies, block vital energy routes (even though China is not going to like this one), and we can kill tens of thousands of their soldiers at the most optimistic scenario. The US does not want to pay this cost because well, who in their sane mind would accept this? But what if an insane person in the US takes power and finally reaches the conclusion that it is an acceptable price if they send Iran back to the stone age and solve the whole Iran issue for the next decades? And believe it or not, they can send Iran back to the stone age very easily. They have more than enough fire power for that in the Middle East alone.

So, come out of this delusional, ridiculous, childish, immature idea that Iran is in any way capable of defending itself against a nuclear super power like the United States without even obtaining nukes. All Iran can ever hope to do is to stop a US invasion and destroy US assets in the Middle East. That's all that Iran can do for the next many decades. The issue of attacking the US main land is completely out of question for Iran in the foreseeable future, and by foreseeable future I meany several decades later.


Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign" is the reason that Iran is negotiating with the US at this very moment. Have you forgotten Khamenei's bluff that Iran will never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani?

Guess what? We are negotiating with them, albeit indirectly.

And if you had a peanut in your head, you would've realized that just because something has not happened for 43 years, it doesn't rule out that it cannot happen in future. You guys barked all the time about how the US couldn't do a damn thing until finally Trump played tough and ordered to kill Soleimani just because he could. All it took him was a command to shoot Soleimani to one of his soldiers that had a clear sight of Soleimani's vehicle. And then Khamenei had to cry in front of cameras on national TV, claiming that they will take "revenge", but at an unknown time and an unknown place and in an unknown way. LOL

You know, now what you're saying seems to be in a roundabout way and wishy-washy. Let me explain in a simple way. 'NO NUCLEAR WAR' as long as no one starts it first. How many ICBMs does the US have 400, 600 or 1000? Iran just needs to equalize the number or even more. Impossible? You are wrong! Iran, unlike the US, produces its missiles at a price 1000 times cheaper. Iran already has thousands of BM (then why can't Iran make thousands of ICBMs?). What's the problem with technology? Are you blind not to see the development of Iranian technology in solid and liquid ICBM rocket engines? Or the problem with nuclear enrichment technology? did you miss it again, Iran has made the advanced IR-9 centrifugal machine. Iran's nuclear enrichment is already 60% and if Iran wants it to quickly increase to 90%. Don't you know there are so many military secrets in Iran's underground. Iran doesn't have to have aircraft carriers, destroyers, heavy bombers, and 5th generation stealth planes to deal with the US, what Iran needs is 'smart sense' how to destroy all of them. The main doctrine of Iran's foreign policy is to 'expel' Israeli Zionists from the Palestinian territories (NOT against the US directly). Iran has a clever war strategy (without having to harm their own territory), Iran will not fight Israel directly (unless Israel attacks Iran first) but when the TIME comes (after actually strengthening its proxies with lethal modern weapons and increasing the number of fighters), Israel will be attacked from all directions by Iranian proxies and plus Iran itself is secretly sending troops from Iraq to Syria. Iran wouldn't be stupid to attack the US first for no apparent reason, it's enough just stupid Nazi and japan. Nuclear war will not make one country victorious, there will only be ashes of death for everyone.

 

[serenity]

The missile is "Fantastic"....Just look at the deployment of large quantities...This is now a fully operational and deployed weapon.

Also the underground tunnels are amazing feast indeed. Great job to IRGC..
View attachment 814128View attachment 814129View attachment 814130View attachment 814131View attachment 814132View attachment 814133

Wow Iran's "Underground Great Wall". Are those the conical type HGV? There is a design type that is stepped cone in shape and four stabilizers. Looks very similar.

I see someone has mentioned it is like the common glide body type. Iran has mastered that quickly.

 

[Muhammed45]

Its a good concept but considering you will face an enemy with a potent naval ABM force such as AEGIS its rather questionable if this system can be effective.

The missile is a cruise platform hence radar evading in nature.

Also it is an ASW asset. The real challenges is detecting of Subs plus firing platform. Forward base ships are the best platforms to carry out the mission.

 

[Arash1991]

Define "defeated".

Do you think Iran can hurt the US mainland? How many ICBMs do you think Iran has? Well, as far as we know, zero. But even if we're wrong, let's assume that Iran has 100 ICBMs that can reach anywhere in the US. That's a big assumption, but let it be.

How many of these ICBMs do you think will reach the US territory? 40? 50? At such a long distance, none of these missiles can achieve anything of strategic or tactical importance except for terrorizing ordinary Americans. And how do you think the US would respond to it? Do you think 330 million Americans will accept to be terrorized by a far weaker nation?!

I mean at the most optimistic scenario, the US can attack Iran's infrastructure like power plants, dams, airports, etc. Nothing would remain functioning in Iran in such a scenario. The whole country will collapse after a few weeks without electricity, water, food, etc. At the worst case scenario, the US will just nuke the shit out of Tehran. The whole idea of attacking a nuclear power with ICBMs is a ridiculous joke.

Iran can NOT attack the United States, ever. Not today, not in 10 years, not even 20 years later. At the pace of Iran's advances, Iran will not be able to attack the US territory even 50 years later. As soon as Iran launches an ICBM towards the United States, the US has a justified reason to nuke Tehran. You cannot tell if an ICBM is conventional or carrying a nuclear warhead. So, they will just nuke Tehran and say they thought it was a nuclear ICBM.

So, the whole idea of touching the US territory is out of question. Can Iran painfully hurt US interests in the Middle East? Surely we can. We can take out their military bases, rain missiles on strategic assets of their allies, block vital energy routes (even though China is not going to like this one), and we can kill tens of thousands of their soldiers at the most optimistic scenario. The US does not want to pay this cost because well, who in their sane mind would accept this? But what if an insane person in the US takes power and finally reaches the conclusion that it is an acceptable price if they send Iran back to the stone age and solve the whole Iran issue for the next decades? And believe it or not, they can send Iran back to the stone age very easily. They have more than enough fire power for that in the Middle East alone.

So, come out of this delusional, ridiculous, childish, immature idea that Iran is in any way capable of defending itself against a nuclear super power like the United States without even obtaining nukes. All Iran can ever hope to do is to stop a US invasion and destroy US assets in the Middle East. That's all that Iran can do for the next many decades. The issue of attacking the US main land is completely out of question for Iran in the foreseeable future, and by foreseeable future I meany several decades later.


Trump's lame "maximum pressure campaign" is the reason that Iran is negotiating with the US at this very moment. Have you forgotten Khamenei's bluff that Iran will never negotiate with the killers of Gen. Soleimani?

Guess what? We are negotiating with them, albeit indirectly.

And if you had a peanut in your head, you would've realized that just because something has not happened for 43 years, it doesn't rule out that it cannot happen in future. You guys barked all the time about how the US couldn't do a damn thing until finally Trump played tough and ordered to kill Soleimani just because he could. All it took him was a command to shoot Soleimani to one of his soldiers that had a clear sight of Soleimani's vehicle. And then Khamenei had to cry in front of cameras on national TV, claiming that they will take "revenge", but at an unknown time and an unknown place and in an unknown way. LOL

While Iran is in the process of enriching its uranium and is therefore the actor that controls time (through the continuous enrichment of uranium) and is also the one that can vary the pressure at will and at the same time has countries like Russia and China on its side (this is due to the misbehavior of the West in Ukraine, among others), the West has no other option than to accept any condition of Iran that is not worth a war. This is also the reason why the West initially wanted to include militias and missile program in the negotiations and has now reached a point where they are only satisfied that Iran cannot build the bomb in the foreseeable future. So they are satisfied only with their minimum goal and had to deviate from all other points while Iran can hold on to all other points. That Iran is in the stronger negotiating position was also clear before the current negotiations because the West can no longer dictate the pace of the negotiations. Iran controls and dominates the negotiation like a strong soccer team playing against a second division team. Iran knows full well that the West has no leverage except war (which is not even sure of its outcome) and war is an option that the West could only implement if Iran did not meet the West's ultimate demand. Iran controls the time and thus the speed of the negotiations. Iran has all the leverage in its hand while the West has only the ultima ratio leverage which cannot be used for trivialities. And up to this limit, Iran will play the game down to the end.

Now to the military option: I don't have to say much about that, do I? Either you don't have any technical understanding, or you only read the cuddly toy department in this forum or what? But you have to browse around here a bit to read that this option would simply paralyze half the world. My speculation even goes so far that Iran could even build the bomb and even announce this with enough lead time for everyone and yet nobody would consider a military option against Iran. I think the military option is outdated. In the age of Iranian drones, HGV missiles, underground missile cities and massive Iranian allies in the region, Iran might just build the bomb. What Iran now has is militarily more significant than the nuclear weapon, since Iran is not threatening to destroy it (that's what nuclear powers do every time they threaten with nuclear weapons), but Iran's missiles enable Iran to defeat any opponent if necessary, without losing its infrastructure and its country having to destroy it. The aim of a war is actually never destruction but to force the opponent to fulfill his will. And if it needs to be conquered then it would be better for Iran to get its hands on the enemy's infrastructure intact than to destroy it beforehand.
If Iran develops nuclear weapons then this would lead to the USA sending even more troops to the Middle East and, above all, stationing their nuclear weapons there. This would create a Cold War like situation where the slightest mistake could lead to nuclear escalation. This would severely limit Iran's maneuverability in the Middle East. It would create a balance of power, but at the same time the goal of driving the United States out of the region would be a long way off. If necessary, Saudi Arabia and co. also develop nuclear weapons. (Which I don't necessarily believe, since the USA would certainly ensure security in the region with its own nuclear weapons).

So you notice the topic is much deeper than you think and you prefer to keep your propaganda to yourself. Thanks and bye

 

[aryobarzan]

I see someone has mentioned it is like the common glide body type. Iran has mastered that quickly.

According to our resident missile experts in this forum the Warhead on this missile is considered an HGV warhead.

 

[serenity]

According to our resident missile experts in this forum the Warhead on this missile is considered an HGV warhead.

I recall seeing a file with a table of design shapes for HGVs from a Chinese source. That is of a few (I recall it was something like 4x5 so around 20) HGV designs that were done with some preliminary computing design work and simulation only.

Out of the 20 or so, many very strange geometries and winged ones but a few of those had types of conical shapes but varying geometry. One of them looks similar to what the US calls its common glide body design. It seems this is at least one HGV design type Iran mastered and can make now.

Iran having at least one HGV technology and weapons is quite a step up. The US is still yet to deploy their own types.

 

[aryobarzan]

I recall seeing a file with a table of design shapes for HGVs from a Chinese source. That is of a few (I recall it was something like 4x5 so around 20) HGV designs that were done with some preliminary computing design work and simulation only.

Out of the 20 or so, many very strange geometries and winged ones but a few of those had types of conical shapes but varying geometry. One of them looks similar to what the US calls its common glide body design. It seems this is at least one HGV design type Iran mastered and can make now.

Iran having at least one HGV technology and weapons is quite a step up. The US is still yet to deploy their own types.

Iran has a Mach 8 wind tunnel that they built about a decade ago..It was only a matter of time for them to show some of the work that they have been doing using that facility.

 

[serenity]

Iran has a Mach 8 wind tunnel that they built about a decade ago..It was only a matter of time for them to show some of the work that they have been doing using that facility.

Yeah. I don't think there is too much room for either China or Russia to assist Iran in such a sensitive and strategically important field especially since both are regional and potentially can be attacked by such weapons. I know not possible as things are and how relations are but these are simply things that even close allies do not help with because they do not want even allies to have the technology and ability. If they require it, they may potentially sell and purchase the weapon directly.

So whatever HGV Iran develops I think would be mostly Iran's own development and mastering of the knowledge and technologies involved.

Hypersonic wind tunnel is absolutely necessary for such a thing. Or else a lot of wasted resources in trial and error data collecting.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Iran having at least one HGV technology and weapons is quite a step up. The US is still yet to deploy their own types.

As much as Iranian scientists and military technology is very good considering the circumstances, we can't rule out ToT with China as part of this 25 year deal as being a reason why Iran has developed such an advanced weapon so quickly and quietly.

 

[serenity]

As much as Iranian scientists and military technology is very good considering the circumstances, we can't rule out ToT with China as part of this 25 year deal as being a reason why Iran has developed such an advanced weapon so quickly and quietly.

While China may use this type of conical HGV as well I do not think there was ToT.

This is a sensitive weapon and a strategic weapon. These things are very rarely transferred or even taught. I'm sure Iranian scientists and engineers could master such things quickly if taught but giving ToT on antiship missiles is very different from giving it on strategic ballistic missiles of at least one form of technology that is almost unique in the world.

It would anger and upset USA, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and potentially others. For no purpose. China and Iran can go ahead with cooperations and deals in every sphere without needing to transfer any HGV technology even if a small part of the puzzle.

I also do not think it would be in China's interest to do this even ignoring the regional players and typical allegiances.

There is absolutely no gain for China to transfer strategic weapons technologies. It can potentially even be used against China or its allies and neutral to good relation nations. No country likes even its ally getting a weapon class that they can do themselves, can make themselves and where China cannot control how the weapon is used. No benefit, only risk and potential unwanted attention and responsibility cast on by friendly or neutral nations to China.

 

[StarmanInSpace]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1492534565088468994

Mobin cruise missile:

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

While China may use this type of conical HGV as well I do not think there was ToT.

This is a sensitive weapon and a strategic weapon. These things are very rarely transferred or even taught. I'm sure Iranian scientists and engineers could master such things quickly if taught but giving ToT on antiship missiles is very different from giving it on strategic ballistic missiles of at least one form of technology that is almost unique in the world.

It would anger and upset USA, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and potentially others. For no purpose. China and Iran can go ahead with cooperations and deals in every sphere without needing to transfer any HGV technology even if a small part of the puzzle.

I also do not think it would be in China's interest to do this even ignoring the regional players and typical allegiances.

There is absolutely no gain for China to transfer strategic weapons technologies. It can potentially even be used against China or its allies and neutral to good relation nations. No country likes even its ally getting a weapon class that they can do themselves, can make themselves and where China cannot control how the weapon is used. No benefit, only risk and potential unwanted attention and responsibility cast on by friendly or neutral nations to China.

There is a lot of "I think" in your post and not a lot of evidence. Why would China be fearful of "regional players"? Doesn't China also supply some of these "regional players" with lethal weapons as well? Isn't China in cold war with some of these "regional players"? Hasn't China also helped North Korea with their BM program, and they actually have nukes? Sorry but I dont see any logic in why China wouldn't help Iran, considering both Iran and China know full well they won't be used against China but rather against a common enemy. China doesn't particularly care about angering "regional players", when it openly takes very sensitive intellectual property from "regional players" and uses it openly on their domestic goods.

If Iran were to be attacked it would totally be in China's interest for Iran to be able to defend itself so I dont see why ToT of HGV shouldn't happen to a non-nuclear 3rd world country. I know you want to paint a picture of China being forced to deal with Iran, but the fact China has signed a 25 year deal with Iran, defends Iran better than Russia in UNSC and nuclear talks, and is in a cold war with the west pours cold water on this. China and Iran are close allies, whereas China and these "regional players" are merely business partners. Massive difference.

 

[QWECXZ]

You know, now what you're saying seems to be in a roundabout way and wishy-washy. Let me explain in a simple way. 'NO NUCLEAR WAR' as long as no one starts it first. How many ICBMs does the US have 400, 600 or 1000? Iran just needs to equalize the number or even more. Impossible? You are wrong! Iran, unlike the US, produces its missiles at a price 1000 times cheaper. Iran already has thousands of BM (then why can't Iran make thousands of ICBMs?). What's the problem with technology? Are you blind not to see the development of Iranian technology in solid and liquid ICBM rocket engines? Or the problem with nuclear enrichment technology? did you miss it again, Iran has made the advanced IR-9 centrifugal machine. Iran's nuclear enrichment is already 60% and if Iran wants it to quickly increase to 90%. Don't you know there are so many military secrets in Iran's underground. Iran doesn't have to have aircraft carriers, destroyers, heavy bombers, and 5th generation stealth planes to deal with the US, what Iran needs is 'smart sense' how to destroy all of them. The main doctrine of Iran's foreign policy is to 'expel' Israeli Zionists from the Palestinian territories (NOT against the US directly). Iran has a clever war strategy (without having to harm their own territory), Iran will not fight Israel directly (unless Israel attacks Iran first) but when the TIME comes (after actually strengthening its proxies with lethal modern weapons and increasing the number of fighters), Israel will be attacked from all directions by Iranian proxies and plus Iran itself is secretly sending troops from Iraq to Syria. Iran wouldn't be stupid to attack the US first for no apparent reason, it's enough just stupid Nazi and japan. Nuclear war will not make one country victorious, there will only be ashes of death for everyone.

You are joking. Right? Please tell me that you are joking.
You are seriously talking about US ICBMs and equalizing them? As if that mattered? Iran just needs to equalize that? Please tell me you are joking.

Dude, the US has like 80 nukes stationed right here in our neighborhood in Turkey. How much do you think it takes for those missiles to reach Tehran? 5 minutes? The US carrier groups carry Tomahawk missiles which are capable of carrying nuclear warheads if needed. The US has over tens of stealth strategic bombers and tens of other non-stealth strategic bombers that each are capable of carrying a payload of over 20 tonnes. How do you want to equalize that when you cannot mass produce even F-5 at home after decades? Add to this their submarines that are capable of launching nuclear missiles. Are you f*cking kidding me?

Stop talking about equalizing the United States. It's ridiculous. All of these toys that currently Iran possess (and yeah, they are game changing weapons that can definitely hurt US interests in the region) are good only for a regional conflict. The US will remain out of our reach and we can never equalize their military prowess in our life times. Maybe 100 years later, who knows? But certainly not in our life times.

Israel is a different matter though. Israel lacks strategic depth and it's a small nation with limited resources. It doesn't take much to finish them off. But the US is a completely different beast. But even Israel is armed with strategic nukes in the order of hundreds of megatonnes and that gives them complete deterrence against Iran.

 

[Messerschmitt]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1492589466229346304

 

[QWECXZ]

While Iran is in the process of enriching its uranium and is therefore the actor that controls time (through the continuous enrichment of uranium) and is also the one that can vary the pressure at will and at the same time has countries like Russia and China on its side (this is due to the misbehavior of the West in Ukraine, among others), the West has no other option than to accept any condition of Iran that is not worth a war. This is also the reason why the West initially wanted to include militias and missile program in the negotiations and has now reached a point where they are only satisfied that Iran cannot build the bomb in the foreseeable future. So they are satisfied only with their minimum goal and had to deviate from all other points while Iran can hold on to all other points. That Iran is in the stronger negotiating position was also clear before the current negotiations because the West can no longer dictate the pace of the negotiations. Iran controls and dominates the negotiation like a strong soccer team playing against a second division team. Iran knows full well that the West has no leverage except war (which is not even sure of its outcome) and war is an option that the West could only implement if Iran did not meet the West's ultimate demand. Iran controls the time and thus the speed of the negotiations. Iran has all the leverage in its hand while the West has only the ultima ratio leverage which cannot be used for trivialities. And up to this limit, Iran will play the game down to the end.

Now to the military option: I don't have to say much about that, do I? Either you don't have any technical understanding, or you only read the cuddly toy department in this forum or what? But you have to browse around here a bit to read that this option would simply paralyze half the world. My speculation even goes so far that Iran could even build the bomb and even announce this with enough lead time for everyone and yet nobody would consider a military option against Iran. I think the military option is outdated. In the age of Iranian drones, HGV missiles, underground missile cities and massive Iranian allies in the region, Iran might just build the bomb. What Iran now has is militarily more significant than the nuclear weapon, since Iran is not threatening to destroy it (that's what nuclear powers do every time they threaten with nuclear weapons), but Iran's missiles enable Iran to defeat any opponent if necessary, without losing its infrastructure and its country having to destroy it. The aim of a war is actually never destruction but to force the opponent to fulfill his will. And if it needs to be conquered then it would be better for Iran to get its hands on the enemy's infrastructure intact than to destroy it beforehand.
If Iran develops nuclear weapons then this would lead to the USA sending even more troops to the Middle East and, above all, stationing their nuclear weapons there. This would create a Cold War like situation where the slightest mistake could lead to nuclear escalation. This would severely limit Iran's maneuverability in the Middle East. It would create a balance of power, but at the same time the goal of driving the United States out of the region would be a long way off. If necessary, Saudi Arabia and co. also develop nuclear weapons. (Which I don't necessarily believe, since the USA would certainly ensure security in the region with its own nuclear weapons).

So you notice the topic is much deeper than you think and you prefer to keep your propaganda to yourself. Thanks and bye

A bunch of worthless blah blah blah.

First of all, you are clearly clueless if you think time is on Iran's side. It is not. Iran already possesses enough uranium to build several nukes (and we had reached this point months ago) but there's clearly a lack of political willingness for that for unknown reasons. If you have enough uranium but yet you do not have the cojones to go for it and build nukes, then time is not on your side at all because you are stockpiling something that is of no use to you. Iran's stockpile of uranium is quite useless for any civilian purpose as it is too little and insignificant. Iran's enrichment program and stockpile of uranium are nowhere near our civilian needs for even one operational reactor at Bushehr. Bushehr alone requires an enrichment capacity of 190,000 SWU UF6 Kg/year and Iran doesn't possess even one tenth of this at the moment. Bushehr needs about 27 tonnes of 3.5% enriched uranium and again, we're nowhere near this number yet. And this is only for one year. Trump pulled out of JCPOA in what year? 2018? And yet we are not even remotely close to one year worth of enriched uranium for operating Bushehr.

In short, if Iran does not intend to use this enriched uranium stockpile for nuclear weapons, Iran is just being used as Russia's slave to spend money on an energy-intensive enrichment process only to hand it over to Putin at the end for a short period of sanctions relief. That's pretty much the scale of Iran's nuclear program.

So, is time on Iran's side because we are stockpiling something useless only to hand it over to Russia at the end? Nope, it is not because there is no plan here. Khamenei does not seem to have the balls to go nuclear. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, our regional adversary, is enjoying hundreds of billions of oil money sold at $95 per barrel while Iran is left with only China who buys not even remotely the same amount of oil from us than from Saudi Arabia, and even that is at a discounted price.