What's new

Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

wonder if the armed force at last will be equipped with kheybar-Shekan and Haj Qasem missiles after two years that they were unveiled . (I hope for Kheybar-Shekan as it weight around half of HajQasem missile while can deliver the same payload to the same distant and by design is far more maneuverable .
We have seen footage of a number of TELs carrying Kheybar-Shekan missiles in underground missile bases before. I see no reason to believe that this missile hasn't entered service yet. Regarding Haj Qassem, I think the reason why we didn't get to see the missile again after its unveiling might be its specific use case – that being to be launched from buried containers belonging to "missile farms" rather than being launched from TELs, as is the case with Kheybar-Shekan.
 
.
Looks like old shahab 3s and their warheads.
FwuxvdnXsAAaXOb.jpg

A nice warhead display...


2e87b43a300baea51584.jpeg

A nicer warhead display...

Moral of the story: Its not if, but when
 
.
A nice warhead display...


2e87b43a300baea51584.jpeg

A nicer warhead display...

Moral of the story: Its not if, but when

Every time Iran ‘reveals’ a new combat system, missiles in particular, I always start thinking how long have they had it and then try to extrapolate what they have today.

As for Khorramshahr 4, my guess is that it’s been operational for at least 5 - 10 years. Probably closer to 10 if not even more. The old school shape of the cone belies that.

Soooo, let’s have a practical thought experiment: what do we have in the arsenal today?
 
.
Every time Iran ‘reveals’ a new combat system, missiles in particular, I always start thinking how long have they had it and then try to extrapolate what they have today.

As for Khorramshahr 4, my guess is that it’s been operational for at least 5 - 10 years. Probably closer to 10 if not even more. The old school shape of the cone belies that.

Soooo, let’s have a practical thought experiment: what do we have in the arsenal today?
The warhead on 4th iteration? No, the booster/rocket of the missile? Maybe.
 
. . .
Every time Iran ‘reveals’ a new combat system, missiles in particular, I always start thinking how long have they had it and then try to extrapolate what they have today.

As for Khorramshahr 4, my guess is that it’s been operational for at least 5 - 10 years. Probably closer to 10 if not even more. The old school shape of the cone belies that.

Soooo, let’s have a practical thought experiment: what do we have in the arsenal today?

That's exactly what I've been saying for a long time on this forum. Are you beginning to understand that many people here make erroneous speculations especially in the IRIAF section which is painful to read every day. I have always said here that Iran is 4 to 8 years ahead of their announcement processes and sometimes more than 8 years. Nice to realize that.
 
.
Realism forces us to think this way
Iran announces missiles of a specific quality
North Korea announces missiles similar to the type announced by Iran
So there is a partnership between Iran and North Korea in exchanging experiences
or
North Korea provides Iran with missile technology
I lean towards the second conclusion
Because North Korea is ahead in this field and China and Russia provide it with everything it needs to stand up to the United States
That's it

And
That’s good

Because it tells us about the extent of the development of the Iranian missile industry and the extent of cooperation and partnership between Iran and North Korea, which is advanced in the missile industry

But we cannot know the extent of Iran's development in the manufacture of AESA radars because we do not know the type of relationship between Iran and China or Iran and Russia.
 
.
So
I know that within the next three years, Iran will announce a solid-fuel ballistic missile with a diameter of more than two meters

In the space field, it will announce a missile that works with solid fuel rocket boosters of this type
 
.
So…with the unveiling of K-4 . What does it tell us about the future path of the IRGC-AF ?

Solid fuel engines are getting thicker, liquid fuel engines are getting thicker. Greater payload delivery seems to be the focus. (Which can also translate to range). Better anti-ABM performance is clearly the case in all areas.

The question I ask. Where’s the end game? At a certain point the larger the diameter; you will build an ICBM, even if you advertise it as a sub 2k missile with a massive payload.

Aside from the obvious superior anti-ABM performance, what advantages does this really give compared to any other solid fuel missile or Emad missile which are easier to produce.

In my view, the main goal is range -> but also a missile with high performance in these IRBM ranges.
 
.
The question I ask. Where’s the end game? At a certain point the larger the diameter; you will build an ICBM, even if you advertise it as a sub 2k missile with a massive payload.
i bet my money on MIRV , right know khoramshahr have the ability to be equpped with 4 - 5 smaller warhead , you even can add some decoy without damaging its current capabilities . that made the weapon a lot more economically and militarily intresting.
 
.
So…with the unveiling of K-4 . What does it tell us about the future path of the IRGC-AF ?

Solid fuel engines are getting thicker, liquid fuel engines are getting thicker. Greater payload delivery seems to be the focus. (Which can also translate to range). Better anti-ABM performance is clearly the case in all areas.

The question I ask. Where’s the end game? At a certain point the larger the diameter; you will build an ICBM, even if you advertise it as a sub 2k missile with a massive payload.

Aside from the obvious superior anti-ABM performance, what advantages does this really give compared to any other solid fuel missile or Emad missile which are easier to produce.

In my view, the main goal is range -> but also a missile with high performance in these IRBM ranges.
I wouldn't mind a 2.000-km-range MRBM with a 5 t heavy MIRV.:yay:
 
.
Non-lethal vomiting agent cluster bombs for. Diego Garcia. Chemical weapons aren't ethical but vomiting agent is alright and doesn't serve as mass destruction

K-4 Vomit version, 1500kg of vomiting agents in bomblets. The whole island will be unusable for a certain time
 
. . .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom