Iranian Space program

[Sapei]

Iran:​

View attachment 953327



Since 2007, six of the country's top nuclear scientists and researchers have been killed and one has been wounded under mysterious circumstances. Additionally 1 Top Rocket Scientist (Father of Irans Missile program Shahid Tehrani Moghaddam) killed and 17 other of his companions in 2011.

List of Sabotage Actions:

Iran's Missile Industry:

1. Explosion at Missile Base near Tehran (2011) - Impact: High: Caused significant damage to the missile base and its infrastructure.
2. Explosion at Parchin Military Complex (2014) - Impact: High: Caused damage to a facility suspected of being used for missile development and testing.
3. Cyberattacks on Iran's Missile Program (Various) - Impact: High: Disrupted Iran's missile development and testing programs.
4. Assassination of Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam (2011) - Impact: Very High: Killed a prominent missile scientist and disrupted missile development efforts.
5. Explosion at Khojir Missile Production Complex (2020) - Impcat: High: Caused significant damage to a missile production facility.
6. Explosion at Natanz Nuclear Facility (2020) - Impact: Normal: While primarily a nuclear facility, it also housed missile research, but the missile program impact was not the primary target.
7. Cyberattacks on Iran's Missile Program (2021) - Impact: High: Ongoing cyberattacks disrupted missile development and testing efforts.


Iran's Nuclear Industry:

1. Stuxnet Cyberattack (2009-2010) - Impact: Very High: Significantly disrupted Iran's uranium enrichment program.
2. Explosion at Natanz Facility (2010) - Impact: High: Caused damage and temporarily halted enrichment activities.
3. Explosion in Isfahan Facility (2011) - Impact: Normal: Limited information available on the impact.
4. Cyberattack on Iranian Nuclear Facilities (2012) - Impact: Normal: Specific impact details not widely disclosed.
5. Fire at Natanz Nuclear Facility (2020) - Impact:High: Caused significant damage to the Natanz enrichment facility.
6. Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (2020) - Impact: Very High: Eliminated a key nuclear scientist and disrupted research.
7. Cyberattack on Iran's Ports and Infrastructure (2021) Impact: Normal: Disrupted non-nuclear infrastructure.
8. Explosion at Natanz Enrichment Plant (2021) - Impact: High: Caused damage and disrupted enrichment operations.
9. Drone Attack on Karaj Nuclear Facility (2021) - Impact: High: Targeted a nuclear facility outside Natanz.
10. Attack on Iran's Natanz Nuclear Facility (2021) - Impact: High: Caused damage and disrupted enrichment activities.
11. Drone Attack on Iran's Bushehr Nuclear Plant (2021) - Impact: Normal: Limited information available on the impact.

Conflicts Iran defending against Western Plans and hegemony in the Region:

1. Fighting against a Syrian overthrow in favour of a western friendly ally by West
2. Fighting in Iraq US troops (nearly pulled them out with help of resistance)
3. Support in Yemen against the Saudi Led Invasion
4. Kurdish insurgents and Groups in Syria and specially North Iraq
5. Fight Against ISIS and decisive Victory
6. Support of Palestinian Resistance against Israel
7. Dealing with frequent Israeli Airstrikes against Iranian Infrastructure
8. Dealing with US Navy in the Gulf of Oman, Persian Gulf and Hormuz
9. Dealing with Panturkism on the northern borders
10. Supported taliban in the end game of Afghanistan war which lead to the total defeat of US forces in Afghanistan
11. Support of Hezbollah in Lebanon

Turkey​

Sanctions:
Limited number of sanctions against turkey


List of Sabotage Actions:

Turkeys Missile Industry:

1. No Sabotage: technological access to Western technology

Turkeys Nuclear Ambitions:

1. No Sabotage: limited technological access to Western and World technology

Conflicts Turkey defending against Western Plans and hegemony in the Region:

1. Refugee Problem from Syria
2. Northern Syria border control
3. Kurdish insurgents and Groups in Syria and specially North Iraq
4. Defending Interests in Lybia
5. Greece border disputes

Conclusion:

Iran owns the most advanced missiles due to all these enemy actions in military field and is going to develop high payload Vehicles in the near future. Irans Space program was nearly shut down for some years due to financial issues but for now Iran is going for another attempt. This is the reason why Iran had no progress over a certain period.

I think the lack of support plays a larger role than sanctions. Surely, Iran is a tech powerhouse in the middle east. If they had wanted, they would have a far more capable SLV.

Space is not cheap and require significant investments. For now Iran seems to be more interested in investing in ballistic missiles.

 

[HGV]

But haven't we been hearing this for years now? What vehicle and when?

Indeed, Iran has been on the cusp of that since 2016 (with the Simorgh SLV with 150-200kg LEO capability). A confluence of financial neglect and launch failures have led to the appearance of no significant improvements since then. However, since then, Iran's launches of the Simorgh have progressively got closer to success (while experimenting with multiple satellites in one payload), and Iran has developed the similarly powerful but much smaller and simpler Zoljanah SLV (200kg LEO capability, currently undergoing test launches).

In addition, the IRGC started their own space program in 2020 and have already successfully launched 2 military satellites into LEO and are currently testing Iran's first fully solid-fuel SLV (Qaem-100 with 80kg LEO capability), which uses the cutting edge Raafe and Salman motors. The IRGC has also outlined plans for a Qaem-105 (200kg LEO capability), Qaem-110 and Qaem-120 (c. 1000kg LEO capability). Iran is also ramping up building of the massive Chahabar space launch facility (the first of three phases is expected to be launched next year).

Simorgh, Zoljanah and Qaem-100 are one launch away from success. The Qaem-105 is promised for next year. In any event, Iran is in a good position to achieve LEO launch capabilities for a c.200kg payload by 2025 (this is well below the goals of ISA but it is a more conservative/realistic goal IMO).

Iran also continues to improve the imaging resolution of its own satellites (aiming to reach 1m resolution within a few years) while simultaneously working with Russia on the series of larger Khayyam satellites.

1) More powerful SLVs (Zoljanah, Sarir, new Sarir, Soroush-1/2, Qaem-100/105/110/120)
2) More advanced satellites with greater imaging resolution (two tier goals of reaching 2m then 1m resolution)
3) A future proof spaceport that can handle heavy launches (huge Chahabar space station)

All of these things are developing in parallel and once they start to kick in, huge leaps will suddenly be seen.

Obviously, a lot of things can go wrong. However, they've had multiple successes with validating the launch vehicles technologies. Last month they tested the vehicle itself in a sub-orbital flight.

Sub-orbital launches are comparatively simple. Let's reserve your praise for when they launch a 100kg satellite into 300km orbit, 4 months to go.

 

[LegionnairE]

Expected is a big word. I have been asking about that claim in the Turkish Space thread a lot, but have not received any answers or updates.

Because I'm not a brainwashed propaganda bot like %90 of Iranians here, I will go even further. Turkey isn't serious about SLVs. It's %99.9 propaganda. %00.1 actual work.



That being said,

Turkey isn't serious about ballistic missiles either but as a sideshow we still develop them.

 

[TheImmortal]

Because I'm not a brainwashed propaganda bot like %90 of Iranians here, I will go even further. Turkey isn't serious about SLVs. It's %99.9 propaganda. %00.1 actual work.



That being said,

Turkey isn't serious about ballistic missiles either but as a sideshow we still develop them.

View attachment 953361

Turkey is all in on drones and TFX project. Not a whole lot of funds to go to other military projects when your facing hyperinflation. Turkey like Iran is limited by its military budget.

Space isn’t important since Turkey has access to NATO space based assets. Missiles are tricky since they traditionally lead to deaths of scientists (especially solid fuel technology) as a country’s learns the technology the hard way. Not to mention intelligence agencies (Mossad assassination) and the stigma around longer range BMs make it a geopolitical headache.

Not to mention Turkey doesn’t have a natural enemy that would justify a large BM arsenal. Greece? Saudi Arabia? Iran? I don’t see what the point for Turkey would be other than maybe sell short range BMs to other country as a source of $$$ like the Israeli LORA missile that Azerbaijan bought.

Nonetheless, mass producing long range conventional BMs at a cost effective price is a challenge for most countries especially when they already have a large Air Force.

 

[Hack-Hook]

We discussed this briefly but and not many people want to understand but SARH is an outdated mode of guidance so those missiles need urgent upgrades as well. In a few years Fakour could be receiving a PESA/AESA seeker itself.

@SalarHaqq

I was talking about Iranian Navy C-802 missiles

fakour already can recieve data from the fighter radar , its not AIM-54 clone its more an upgraded MiM-23 in the body of AIM-54 , because that body is more fighter compatible

 

[LegionnairE]

fakour already can recieve data from the fighter radar , its not AIM-54 clone its more an upgraded MiM-23 in the body of AIM-54 , because that body is more fighter compatible

Unfortunately that's not good enough in today's world. If Fakour receives a PESA or AESA seeker, that would be a different story.

At that size I would prefer a ramjet engine too but that's a minor gripe, guidance is the main issue.

 

[LegionnairE]

Space isn’t important since Turkey has access to NATO space based assets. Missiles are tricky since they traditionally lead to deaths of scientists (especially solid fuel technology) as a country’s learns the technology the hard way. Not to mention intelligence agencies (Mossad assassination) and the stigma around longer range BMs make it a geopolitical headache.

Turkey has access to other countries' launch systems is a better way to phrase it, we still make our own satellites. And already SpaceX is so cheap so currently there are no issues.

But still, it doesn't justify the lax attitude. of Turkey's space program. The government just doesn't give a shit and it's embarrassing.


As for ballistic missiles, how many BMs did Russia throw at Ukraine? It hasn't been very effective, and it's very, very expensive. Don't get me wrong it's nice to have the option for shock & awe purposes but aside from that, number of targets in a country that justify BM strikes is very, very low. Can you think of a target in Iran so important that if it got hit it would cripple the country?

Buildings, runways, power plants etc. Can all be repaired probably much cheaper than the ballistic missile thrown at them.

 

[Blue In Green]

Turkey has access to other countries' launch systems is a better way to phrase it, we still make our own satellites. And already SpaceX is so cheap so currently there are no issues.

But still, it doesn't justify the lax attitude. of Turkey's space program. The government just doesn't give a shit and it's embarrassing.


As for ballistic missiles, how many BMs did Russia throw at Ukraine? It hasn't been very effective, and it's very, very expensive. Don't get me wrong it's nice to have the option for shock & awe purposes but aside from that, number of targets in a country that justify BM strikes is very, very low. Can you think of a target in Iran so important that if it got hit it would cripple the country?

Buildings, runways, power plants etc. Can all be repaired probably much cheaper than the ballistic missile thrown at them.

The entire point of Iran’s Ballistic Missile centric strategy is to use them in both a tactical and strategic capacity, comprehensively. Domestic supply chains allows for cheap/economical production of Ballistic Missiles as they are meant to be used en masse. Granted, they’re not as efficient as a traditional airforce which can offload strike packages easier and more economically, but Iran has chosen this path regardless.

Take a cursory look at the current arsenal and see just how specific and nuanced these missiles can get. All ranges can be outfitted with specific strike packages (cluster, MaRV, unitary warhead, anti-radiation, Anti-ship, HGV). But the idea is that thousands are to be expended in a very short time period with production capacity to refill stocks during wartime. Russian missile numbers/use during conflict aren’t comparable due to doctrinal constraints. Ru-Forces have many sectors they need armed and equipped, putting significant importance on what can and cannot be fabricated in a certain timeframe. Iran’s offensive approach is much more specific and focuses heavily on drones and ballistic missile systems. There is a stringent doctrinal policy at play here. If I remember correctly, the opening salvos from Russian forces using BMs was rather paltry. IRGC AEROSPACE missile forces will be operating on a much larger scale with considerably higher intensity.

So yes, Iran can continue to obliterate regional targets (any static target) using drones, cruise and ballistic missiles for as long as they want really. The enemy can keep rebuilding to their own detriment: the attacks won’t stop.

 

[Mehdipersian]

Turkey has access to other countries' launch systems is a better way to phrase it, we still make our own satellites. And already SpaceX is so cheap so currently there are no issues.

But still, it doesn't justify the lax attitude. of Turkey's space program. The government just doesn't give a shit and it's embarrassing.


As for ballistic missiles, how many BMs did Russia throw at Ukraine? It hasn't been very effective, and it's very, very expensive. Don't get me wrong it's nice to have the option for shock & awe purposes but aside from that, number of targets in a country that justify BM strikes is very, very low. Can you think of a target in Iran so important that if it got hit it would cripple the country?

Buildings, runways, power plants etc. Can all be repaired probably much cheaper than the ballistic missile thrown at them.

When your infrastructure destroyed its your end at war.

Power plant, bridges, military bases, companese, railways, airports,... Are easy targets.

Iran can easily destroy targets around it's border in range of 2500 km With thousands of drones and ballistic missiles.

Our drone are cheap and it's not a big deal for our war budget.also we can produce missiles very cheaper than others.

And at same time our great air defence systems defend us.

 

[tsunset]

When your infrastructure destroyed its your end at war.

Power plant, bridges, military bases, companese, railways, airports,... Are easy targets.

Iran can easily destroy targets around it's border in range of 2500 km With thousands of drones and ballistic missiles.

Our drone are cheap and it's not a big deal for our war budget.also we can produce missiles very cheaper than others.

And at same time our great air defence systems defend us.

As enemies can do on Iran with (depends of the situation) more firepower

Hitting targets without getting hit, is nearly impossible in a war

Thus the need of complement and backup IADS

For example take the UAE, their economy relies strictly on two airports and a bunch of ports, if struck would make the country disapear without backup, same can be said for Qatar, Bahrein, Aserbaijan, Israel, SK, NK and even UK and some other European countries, small insignificant bunch of lands dependant on imports/racketeering of resources from 3rd world countries that if has no backup are doomed to disapear in such a scenario of targeting airports and ports

As opposite to Ukraine, a vast country as Russia and Iran/Turkey/Pakistan/India/US/China are, it is another story

 

[LegionnairE]

The entire point of Iran’s Ballistic Missile centric strategy is to use them in both a tactical and strategic capacity, comprehensively. Domestic supply chains allows for cheap/economical production of Ballistic Missiles as they are meant to be used en masse. Granted, they’re not as good as a traditional airforce which can offload strike packages easier and more economically, but Iran has chosen this path regardless.

Take a cursory look at the current arsenal and see just how specific and nuanced these missiles can get. All ranges can be outfitted with specific strike packages (cluster, MaRV, unitary warhead, anti-radiation, Anti-ship, HGV). But the idea is that thousands are to be expended in a very short time period with production capacity to refill stocks during wartime. Russian missile numbers/use during conflict aren’t comparable due to doctrinal constraints. Ru-Forces have many sectors they need armed and equipped, putting significant importance on what can and cannot be fabricated in a certain timeframe. Iran’s offensive approach is much more specific and focuses heavily on drones and ballistic missile systems. There is a stringent doctrinal policy at play here. If I remember correctly, the opening salvos from Russian forces using BMs was rather paltry. IRGC AEROSPACE missile forces will be operating on a much larger scale with considerably higher intensity.

So yes, Iran can continue to obliterate regional targets (any static target) using drones, cruise and ballistic missiles for as long as they want really. The enemy can keep rebuilding to their own detriment: the attacks won’t stop.

What I'm trying to explain is that ballistic missiles are strategic weapons, Their tactical use has to be considered a last resort option. I think you realize the fact that this is wasteful. And when I look at Iranian economy, and Iranian military budget, it doesn't strike me as a country that can afford to be wasteful.

When your infrastructure destroyed its your end at war.

Power plant, bridges, military bases, companese, railways, airports,... Are easy targets.

Hurts the economy, sure, but doesn't really stop the military. In Ukraine, all of these were hit. Ukrainian army survives.

 

[Mehdipersian]

What I'm trying to explain is that ballistic missiles are strategic weapons, Their tactical use has to be considered a last resort option. I think you realize the fact that this is wasteful. And when I look at Iranian economy, and Iranian military budget, it doesn't strike me as a country that can afford to be wasteful.



Hurts the economy, sure, but doesn't really stop the military. In Ukraine, all of these were hit. Ukrainian army survives.

Ukraine is alive because of nato support. Without infrastructure every country will fall.

 

[Blue In Green]

What I'm trying to explain is that ballistic missiles are strategic weapons, Their tactical use has to be considered a last resort option. I think you realize the fact that this is wasteful. And when I look at Iranian economy, and Iranian military budget, it doesn't strike me as a country that can afford to be wasteful.



Hurts the economy, sure, but doesn't really stop the military. In Ukraine, all of these were hit. Ukrainian army survives.

Fair assessment, i base my own judgement on what’s been presented thus far and “tactical” ballistic missiles meant to be used in high quantities is a thing for Iran (Fateh 110, Fateh 313, Raad 500, tactical canister based missiles buried underground, etc.,). How long they can actually keep that sort of kinetic engagement regime up remains to be seen but the domestic supply/production chain is there to support large-scale fabrication.

It being wasteful depends on the doctrine and how reliable said weapons are when they’re meant to be used. If we go off what we’ve seen during the strikes against ISIS and Ayn Al Assad, then we know demonstrably that the accuracy is there with destructive precision. Keep in mind, Iran will also use these missiles to open up holes in enemy IADS so cheaper massed produced munitions can make their way in. Essentially Iran has figured out the economical side of weapons production so the overall health of the economy (the second most sanctioned on planet earth) doesn’t seem to have much of an effect (?, chime in anyone I’m not too well versed on this to be completely honest).

Until IRIAF injects dozens of modernized airframes into the fleet to alleviate pressure placed on the missile forces. Things will just remain status quo as they have for quite some time.

 

[jauk]

What I'm trying to explain is that ballistic missiles are strategic weapons, Their tactical use has to be considered a last resort option. I think you realize the fact that this is wasteful. And when I look at Iranian economy, and Iranian military budget, it doesn't strike me as a country that can afford to be wasteful.



Hurts the economy, sure, but doesn't really stop the military. In Ukraine, all of these were hit. Ukrainian army survives.

Actually you’re deeply wrong there. Iran has single-handedly redefined the use of ballistic missiles as TACTICAL weapons.

No country on earth has done or demonstrated the capacity to do so.

Iran has single-handedly redefined the battlefield and introduced advanced and leapfrogging strategies.

Missiles are strategic weapons for you and the western swamp you’re drenched in.

Fortunately, not Iran.

 

[LegionnairE]

Ukraine is alive because of nato support. Without infrastructure every country will fall.

What argument are you trying to win by saying this?

This strategy works against countries that aren't supported by NATO?

Fair assessment, i base my own judgement on what’s been presented thus far and “tactical” ballistic missiles meant to be used in high quantities is a thing for Iran (Fateh 110, Fateh 313, Raad 500, tactical canister based missiles buried underground, etc.,). How long they can actually keep that sort of kinetic engagement regime up remains to be seen but the domestic supply/production chain is there to support large-scale fabrication.

The country with the world's biggest military budget, USA, looked at what's happening in Ukraine and realized they don't have nearly enough 155mm shells.

I don't think you quite realize the severity of the situation here.

Fucking USA, is afraid they don't have enough 155mm shells but Iran is somehow confident that they have enough ballistic missiles for any scenario.



Let me tell you something even funnier. Turkish Air Force has around 240 operational F16s and we're basically begging USA to buy 30 more of them.

Iran is set to receive 30 brand new state of the art Su-35s, 4+ generation fighters that are way beyond anything IRIAF has and the Iranians reaction is "meh... we don't really need them but whatever... can we put Fakour on this thing?"

For example take the UAE, their economy relies strictly on two airports and a bunch of ports, if struck would make the country disapear without backup, same can be said for Qatar, Bahrein, Aserbaijan, Israel, SK, NK and even UK and some other European countries, small insignificant bunch of lands dependant on imports/racketeering of resources from 3rd world countries that if has no backup are doomed to disapear in such a scenario of targeting airports and ports

As opposite to Ukraine, a vast country as Russia and Iran/Turkey/Pakistan/India/US/China are, it is another story

Maybe, but a small country also has a very small airspace to defend, just a few batteries of long range SAMs here and there and the whole country is covered lol.

@jauk

I don't think Iran figured out anything other than economy of scale and cheap labor, even then ballistic missiles are expensive systems.