What's new

Zionist Analysts: No Systems Able to Hit Fattah

Zionist Analysts: No Systems Able to Hit Fattah

TEL AVIV (Dispatches) --
Media analysts and commentators in Occupied Palestine have been discussing Iran’s new hypersonic missile that was unveiled on Tuesday by chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, Major General Hussein Salami. It is said that the Fattah missile gives Iran a “significant” military edge in the region.
According to Nir Dvori, a military commentator on Israel’s Channel 12, the missile will be “difficult to detect, observe and intercept.”
The channel’s Arab affairs commentator, Ohad Hamo, said that Iran’s missile is another step towards “deterring” the Zionist regime from launching any sort of military strike against the Islamic Republic. He also pointed out that the Fattah missile will be difficult to intercept because of its speed — Mach 13 — and maneuverability.
“No missile defense system will be able to hit it.”
The U.S. does not possess hypersonic missiles, he added, only China and Russia do.
“Iran’s unveiling of the Fattah hypersonic missile is a message to Israel,” noted Maariv newspaper.
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi told those present at the missile’s unveiling ceremony on Tuesday: “We know these achievements anger our enemies, but we say to them, die in your anger, because these achievements make the Iranian people happy. What the IRGC’s Air Force is accomplishing is scientific and local work far from foreign pressure.”
Raisi insisted that Iran’s deterrence force is purely defensive, never offensive.
“It is a point of strength that contributes to establishing security in the region. This missile means that the region will be safe from evildoers and foreign aggression. The message to those who are thinking of attacking Iran is that the Islamic Republic is a powerful country and its power aims to support the people of Iran and the oppressed people of the world.”
Hypersonic missiles are projectiles that can move at a speed of at least Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound. That is 1.7km (1.05 miles) per second or 6,174km (3,836 miles) per hour.
Some ballistic missiles already reach these speeds, but this new class of weapon separates itself from the pack as it can take a more random path to its intended target after plunging back into the earth’s atmosphere.
This makes it far more difficult to be detected by radar systems and to be destroyed by defense shields.
More countries are pursuing hypersonic weaponry in hopes they will provide them with a military

edge, but the challenges remain formidable.
For one, friction from the upper atmosphere produces extremely high temperatures, while the intense speed of the missile produces superheated particles surrounding it that make it harder for radio communications to get through.
So far, Russia and China have displayed an array of hypersonic weapons, with Moscow being the only one thought to have tested them in combat. The United States has also tested hypersonic missiles but lags behind its two rivals.
Several months after the IRGC first announced in November that it had a hypersonic missile, the Fattah was displayed on Tuesday.
Iran says the projectile has a range of 1,400km (870 miles) and can move at a massive speed of up to Mach 15 (5.1 km or 3.2 miles per second) before hitting its target.
It is also said to feature a moveable secondary nozzle and employ solid propellants that allow for high maneuverability within and outside the atmosphere, which top IRGC commanders have said means no missile defense system in the world is a match for it.
Iranian authorities have also praised a “generational leap” in missile technology on the back of the Fattah, which they have said will give Iran new levels of deterrence.
They have dismissed Western skepticism of Iran’s development of hypersonic missiles, saying the truth will be revealed “on the day” such arms may be used, and that the U.S. is only skeptical as the technology undermines its efforts to sell arms to the region.
Fattah’s current range is just short of the distance between Tehran and Tel Aviv, but IRGC aerospace chief commander Amir Ali Hajizadeh suggested on Tuesday that the force could look to hypersonics with a range of 2,000km (1,242 miles) in the near future.
At the claimed speeds, Fattah could theoretically reach Israeli targets in under seven minutes. That will leave little room for detection and interception, even for the Zionist regime’s Iron Dome missile defense system.
When covering news of the missile’s unveiling, Israeli media widely focused on a previous threat by Iranian media that an Iranian hypersonic projectile could reach Occupied Palestine in 400 seconds.
The U.S. introduced a new round of sanctions on Tehran after the unveiling, including sanctions around its ballistic missile program.

 
Thrust vectoring jets changes direction but not necessarily to MAINTAIN current speed. So if the vehicle was not designed to carry sufficient fuel to maintain whatever maximum speed, every maneuver decreases current speed.
the engine is how it separate itself from kheybar shekan . its designed to keep the speed in hyper sonic range
 
@WebMaster would you mind explaining why I have recieved a troll warning in this thread?

There is no record of a ballistic missile attack on any Saudi city on 3/28/20 in CSIS chart:

BUSTED

CSIS has not concealed any FAILED intercept in its chart.

The photo is useless as well. If a warhead was missed from this direction, it was taken down from another direction. It depends upon which system caught it.
Yes, busted. but you, not me.

A very simple search in google on that date would confirm the missile attack news:


That footage is not a photo, but a video, showing two pac3 patriot missiles around Riyadh missing Houthis missile, video of the failed interception is in the following link:

غافلگیری بزرگ برای پدافند عربستان در آسمان ریاض / شکست به‌روزترین نسخه پاتریوت در برابر موشک جدید یمن+فیلم و عکس - مشرق نیوز


2753512.jpg

2753513.jpg

debris of pac3 missile which fell on residential area and Saudis falsely claimed Yemeni's missile


or if you are more comfortable here is one of twitter links:

Nonetheless, it's not something which you would find in the American's charts (propaganda)!
 
Last edited:
An Iraqi military base. It was not well-protected at the time of Iranian attack.
It's convenient that the American sites (or sites protected by American AD systems) are never protected when Iran attacks them

Always some excuses
 
@WebMaster would you mind explaining why I have recieved a troll warning in this thread?

You received a strike for your arrogant and accusatory statements. Following:

"And you literally represent American shameless lies and propaganda."

"IS there any other terrorist which you want to support?"


Yes, busted. but you, not me.

A very simple search in google on that date would confirm the missile attack news:


That footage is not a photo, but a video, showing two pac3 patriot missiles around Riyadh missing Houthis missile, video of the failed interception is in the following link:

غافلگیری بزرگ برای پدافند عربستان در آسمان ریاض / شکست به‌روزترین نسخه پاتریوت در برابر موشک جدید یمن+فیلم و عکس - مشرق نیوز


2753512.jpg

2753513.jpg

debris of pac3 missile which fell on residential area and Saudis falsely claimed Yemeni's missile


or if you are more comfortable here is one of twitter links:

Nonetheless, it's not something which you would find in the American's charts (propaganda)!

Those shots fired by Saudi seem to be going after another projectile, not the projectile that passed by.

Patriot interceptors are maneuvering vehicles and will maneuver to engage designated target if necessary:


Intercept attempts will create debris - this is how it is.

Anybody with a functioning brain can see that CSIS chart is not up-to-date. The report was released in June 2020.

You pointed out an incident that is not analyzed and documented in CSIS chart.

I also pointed out an intercept that is not analyzed and documented in CSIS chart because it took place in 2021 (check). Why would "American's charts (propaganda)" miss this on purpose? :rolleyes:

You cherry pick information to make a point but CSIS provides a wider picture of the war. Difference is obvious.
 
but they were used in the video that goes after the body instead of warhead
The video does not show where the two interceptors were going and the projectile they were chasing.

I have posted a video that very clearly shows how a PAC-3 class interceptor functions, it aggressively maneuvered to intercept an incoming MaRV. PAC-3 interceptor has excellent HTK capability and can engage any part of the missile that is detected and tracked in real-time.
 
If the chart is wrong, where is the evidence of death and destruction across Saudi Arabia? OR do you think that Houthi ballistic missiles are made up of plastic and melted before touching the ground?

The chart clearly shows that some of the ballistic missiles got through.

For example: One Houthi ballistic missile struck al-Estiqbal military camp in Marib on January 2020. This strike killed 116 and injured 100 in this sector. This strike is acknowledged and highlighted in RED in the chart.

These incidents gave the usual suspects to harp against Patriot systems in press releases around the world.

A ballistic missile could be missed while operating outside the "engagement envelope" of a Patriot system, or due to a Patriot system undergoing maintenance checks at the time. Anything can happen in a war.

Start using that brain in your head instead of questioning factual sources on illogical grounds.



Iraqi defectors and political dissidents convinced Bush administration to invade Iraq on questionable grounds:





American troops did not find biological weapons in Iraq but hidden cashes of Iraqi chemical weapons in some locations:



Still, I admit that American decision to invade Iraq is a controversial development because it was based on faulty intelligence in part. Saddam regime was brutal but contributed to regional stability in its own way. It was toppled and eliminated on less-than-convincing grounds.

Nevertheless, your beloved honest Russians are a STEP UP from the Americans in the aspect of "lying."

Before the ongoing war in Ukraine, Americans had warned that Russian forces will invade Ukraine:




But Russian officials were openly rejecting reports that Russian forces will invade Ukraine:




Chinese President Xi also knew that Russian forces will invade Ukraine.


US = Correct
China = Silent
Russia (and Belarus) = Liars

Russian forces have committed numerous war crimes and blasted entire cities to ruins in Ukraine. But Russians have denied these reports at every step as well.


Point? The side that you have chosen to trust, is not trustworthy at all. At the least, have the moral decency to condemn both US and Russia in these matters.

Your newfound humanitarian concerns for Iraq ring hollow as well:






Your country is the greatest beneficiary of the American move to eliminate Saddam regime in Iraq in the region. Your country violates Iraqi sovereignty under one pretext or the other as well.



You literally speak Russian propaganda in this matter.

Ukrainian political crisis began in 2013 when then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych rejected EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and opted for Customs Union of Russia instead. This decision did not sit well with a part of Ukrainian population and protests broke out:



Yanukovych ordered crack down on the protestors but the movement grew to such extent that he chose to flee to Russia.


Yanukovych convinced Russia to intervene and Russian forces annexed Crimea as well as engineered a separatist movement in Donbas in 2014:





On the other hand, it is true that the American Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland was in contact with Ukrainian politicians and her leaked call suggests that she was involved in suggesting who is acceptable in the new political setup of Ukraine:




Of-course, Russia took advantage of this controversial call to build its own narrative and make its moves in Ukraine.

Russia invaded Ukraine because it wanted to restore former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych to power in the country.



Other claims are "smokescreen."



I was taking about "rocket sciences."

Drones are machines and can be vulnerable to "cyber warfare" in a conflict zone if lacking in safety standards and protocols.

CIA was using an RQ-170 drone to spy on Iranian nuclear program since 2007. Iran was able to capture this drone 3 years later when it was operated poorly in broad daylight (complacency factor). Still, credit is given where due: this is an achievement of the Iranian security apparatus.

This incident and loss convinced Americans to revisit their drone safety standards and protocols:


So what is the next best thing to do if a drone is found to be not vulnerable to "cyber warfare" efforts but operating nearby? Shoot it down:


But these losses do not affect American surveillance apparatus on the whole:


If you think that an isolated RQ-170 incident over Iran in broad daylight due to one-time CIA complacency is the benchmark of the American expertise in "stealthy sciences," then you are in for a rude awakening.

Post in thread 'B-21 Bomber can penetrate Chinas most advanced air defense systems: US Senator' https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/b-21...fense-systems-us-senator.766341/post-14343917

And speaking of "computer sciences," do you think that "cyber warfare" is an Iranian exclusive domain?



This is but a trailer based on known information on the web.

Step out from that fantasy bubble you seem to keep yourself in.



I am not sure if this is serious, but:


I also happen to know somebody who has visited NASA and seen the evidence up close.

What type of deluded people post in this forum...
Quality. Thanks for these infos, I mean most are known or should be known when talking/writing about this stuff but that's here is a nice bundle of infos at once.
Thank you very much, Legend. :cheers:
 
Fair enough, and I will grant you that. But to say that nothing can intercept is simply being un-scientific. Any vehicle can be intercepted. The issue is whether the interceptor has sufficient time and maneuvering response. Being hypersonic reduces time but longer launched range increases time. Maneuvering response is based on predictive algos, specifically combinants such as these...

Technically even an electron can be intercepted by another electron, anything that has mass can kinetically collide with another mass. I do not see the point here. Offcourse the vehicle coming down can collide with an interceptor but what are the chances? MINIMAL compared to regular missiles courtesy its

1) Hypersonic Speed
2) Glide Trajectory which is hard to predict for the interceptor algorithm
3) Exo/Endoatmopsheric steering which means speed won't be lost since the vehicle will not have to pull drastic lateral acceleration to compromise its speed.



On the other hand, even against a fixed target, any attacker must have a time of stable flight in order to reorient its sensors, if any, and to realign its navigation. So the closer to the target, the less maneuvers the attacker can execute. Close enough, and it might as well a simple ballistic arc.

Is it not the point to do fewer maneuvers and gain as much KE as possible at the terminal phase to bypass the ABM system? You do not understand the point, just because the system has a MaRV-TVC does not mean it's always going to pull high G maneuvers in the sky. This is a multipurpose STATE OF THE ART system that can

1) go HGV hypersonic if glides and just uses exoatmospheric course correction with minimal endo corrections

2) be highly deceptive MaRV pulling more lateral motions with its TVC that can give a hard time to an ABM

3) if lofted at Ballistic trajectory becomes a 2500 KM range bearing MRBM.
 
You received a strike for your arrogant and accusatory statements. Following:

"And you literally represent American shameless lies and propaganda."

"IS there any other terrorist which you want to support?"
So only mods can be arrogant and accuse others!

here is your own words:
"You literally speak Russian propaganda in this matter."

I gave the exact date of missile attack, yet you didn't even bother to make a simple search in google. You are the one who arrogantly copy paste some link without any investigation.

Copy pasting the links which call the terrorist groups as opposition is the same as supporting the terrorism, no different than saying Iran attacked and killed civilians of ISIS and Al-Qaeda opposition groups!

Those shots fired by Saudi seem to be going after another projectile, not the projectile that passed by.

Patriot interceptors are maneuvering vehicles and will maneuver to engage designated target if necessary:

Intercept attempts will create debris - this is how it is.
So these missiles ignore the projectile which is about to impact and instead go after another, perhaps they are heading for the moon!

Closest target has the higher priority, if patriot was able to track this projectile, no other target have been chosen. you are still refusing to accept it's blunt failure. it's trolls behavior.


Anybody with a functioning brain can see that CSIS chart is not up-to-date. The report was released in June 2020.

You pointed out an incident that is not analyzed and documented in CSIS chart.

I also pointed out an intercept that is not analyzed and documented in CSIS chart because it took place in 2021 (check). Why would "American's charts (propaganda)" miss this on purpose? :rolleyes:

You cherry pick information to make a point but CSIS provides a wider picture of the war. Difference is obvious.
First of all, that chart covers missile attack till next month, but not the one in 28 march which is widely reported by both sides and there are video and picture footages for the incident.

The reason is obvious, the unwanted footage. no more "old version, out of range, out of function" excuses. it's the absolute failure.

I didn't cherry pick this incident, this incident is unique, cause local people were able to film the incident and exposed the lying side.
 
Technically even an electron can be intercepted by another electron, anything that has mass can kinetically collide with another mass. I do not see the point here. Offcourse the vehicle coming down can collide with an interceptor but what are the chances? MINIMAL compared to regular missiles courtesy its

1) Hypersonic Speed
2) Glide Trajectory which is hard to predict for the interceptor algorithm
3) Exo/Endoatmopsheric steering which means speed won't be lost since the vehicle will not have to pull drastic lateral acceleration to compromise its speed.
The odds of being intercepted is increasing.

Am former USAF, F-111 (Cold War) then F-16 (Desert Storm), so am going to use airplanes as excellent example.

Why do I have to maneuver? To avoid 'something'. But in order to avoid that something, such as an opponent, I have to know he is coming, and by knowing, I mean either by radar or by sight. I cannot GUESS that he is coming.

A maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead does not know. It is programmed to maneuver because the programmer ASSUME that there is an interceptor coming. The next assumption is that a series of maneuvers will confuse the interceptor. The ballistic attacker does not know if it is going to be intercepted or not, therefore, it must maneuver nevertheless. In other words, a maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead is essentially flying blind.

On the other hand, the interceptor MUST know what is coming. How it must know is not the point at this time. It could know from its own sensors or from an external source, but either way, the interceptor knows. The problem for the interceptor are the guidance laws which must be adaptive in real time and that it has only one chance.

When people think of the ballistic attacker maneuvering, they assume that the maneuvers are something from 'Top Gun', but in reality, the maneuvers are more like 2D. Older and less complex 'proportional-navigation' (PN) laws will be confused but not today's more complex PN laws supported by more memory enhanced software.

Look at the current Russia-Ukraine war. Ukraine claimed amazing interception statistics against Russia's Kinzhal. But even if we chop %50 off that claim, that would be a generational leap from previous attempts.

 
The odds of being intercepted is increasing.

Am former USAF, F-111 (Cold War) then F-16 (Desert Storm), so am going to use airplanes as excellent example.

Why do I have to maneuver? To avoid 'something'. But in order to avoid that something, such as an opponent, I have to know he is coming, and by knowing, I mean either by radar or by sight. I cannot GUESS that he is coming.

A maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead does not know. It is programmed to maneuver because the programmer ASSUME that there is an interceptor coming. The next assumption is that a series of maneuvers will confuse the interceptor. The ballistic attacker does not know if it is going to be intercepted or not, therefore, it must maneuver nevertheless. In other words, a maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead is essentially flying blind.

On the other hand, the interceptor MUST know what is coming. How it must know is not the point at this time. It could know from its own sensors or from an external source, but either way, the interceptor knows. The problem for the interceptor are the guidance laws which must be adaptive in real time and that it has only one chance.

When people think of the ballistic attacker maneuvering, they assume that the maneuvers are something from 'Top Gun', but in reality, the maneuvers are more like 2D. Older and less complex 'proportional-navigation' (PN) laws will be confused but not today's more complex PN laws supported by more memory enhanced software.

Look at the current Russia-Ukraine war. Ukraine claimed amazing interception statistics against Russia's Kinzhal. But even if we chop %50 off that claim, that would be a generational leap from previous attempts.
People here are uneducated.

For educating yourself read this:
(Other trolls should read these too)

Maneuver in hypersonic speed
=
end of missile defence systems
 
Last edited:
The odds of being intercepted is increasing.

Am former USAF, F-111 (Cold War) then F-16 (Desert Storm), so am going to use airplanes as excellent example.

Why do I have to maneuver? To avoid 'something'. But in order to avoid that something, such as an opponent, I have to know he is coming, and by knowing, I mean either by radar or by sight. I cannot GUESS that he is coming.

and the point is?

A maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead does not know. It is programmed to maneuver because the programmer ASSUME that there is an interceptor coming. The next assumption is that a series of maneuvers will confuse the interceptor. The ballistic attacker does not know if it is going to be intercepted or not, therefore, it must maneuver nevertheless. In other words, a maneuvering ballistic missile or warhead is essentially flying blind.

On the other hand, the interceptor MUST know what is coming. How it must know is not the point at this time. It could know from its own sensors or from an external source, but either way, the interceptor knows. The problem for the interceptor are the guidance laws which must be adaptive in real time and that it has only one chance.

Interceptor does not know, the projectile coming at it will be:

1) Going to Accelerate or De-accelerate?
2) Go Ballistic or Skip Glide, or Just Glide or Quasi Glide?
3) Gonna pull exoatmospheric or endoatmospheric course corrections? By how much?
4) Gonna go hypersonic or supersonic or subsonic?
5) Does it have pen-aids? Is it gonna launch Chaff/Flares?
6) What the if the projectile(s) coming are just mere distractions to find lag in the radar scans while the real weapon is coming from another direction where the scan is not even beaming right now?
7) A fool would think one weapon is fired at one target. The real strike package will be a bunch of loitering Shahed-136 + Arash-2 Suicidal drones +Hoveyzeh Cruise Missiles + Fattah HG-Missiles + 80 x Submunitions launching Post-Boost-Vehicle (PBV) Khorramshahr-4. Read about IRGC attack on Saudi Aramco and at US bases in Iraq, they combine their weapons and never use one type only.
8) What if the warhead is a MIRV bus that's gonna lunch 3-5 IRVs
9) Is the warhead CB-RN? what if its an air blast warhead that's expecting a kinetic hit in the terminal phase?
10) Oh shit, it was a decoy to lit our radars and we gave our positions to passive seeking missiles (Iran has Anti Radiation MaRVs called Hormuz-1/2)

It is not as easy as you think.

When people think of the ballistic attacker maneuvering, they assume that the maneuvers are something from 'Top Gun', but in reality, the maneuvers are more like 2D. Older and less complex 'proportional-navigation' (PN) laws will be confused but not today's more complex PN laws supported by more memory enhanced software.

Fattah uses Exoatmospheric Course corrections and then Endoatmospheric MaRV which is not pulling drastically lateral motions. It has a two-way accuracy achieving mechanism but It's built for hypersonic speed domains not drastic maneuvering, although if speed is comprised then it has a TVC motor for lateral vectoring. Let alone that, it can take GNSS course update during mid phase, the skip motion can be neglected to give it a Ballistic trajectory for max range which will be nothing less than ~2500 KM. Commander will have so many options.

Look at the current Russia-Ukraine war. Ukraine claimed amazing interception statistics against Russia's Kinzhal. But even if we chop %50 off that claim, that would be a generational leap from previous attempts.

Do you mean this successful interception where Zelensky pulled a Bob of Baghdad level stunt by welding a "Khinzal" in his workshop and started claiming it's from Russia? That guy knows how to empty American Taxpayer's pockets for his "war" on Russia.

klicko-pored-betonske-bombe.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom