Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

Persian Gulf said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

On which problems he is referring ?
Only ones i noticed are gauged missile bases and apparently low stocks of missiles which is debatable.
 
Persian Gulf said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

That would just show that Iran isn't willing to fight back at all. Any weapon isn't a deterrent if you aren't willing to use them.
 
Persian Gulf said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

It would've made no difference in the outcome though.
Had Iran not retaliated then, they would've still hit us harder each time because they would've concluded that we weren't able to retaliate.

This is assuming that they didn't have intel on our missile technology, which is wrong in my opinion.
 
ShapurII said:
It would've made no difference in the outcome though.
Had Iran not retaliated then, they would've still hit us harder each time because they would've concluded that we weren't able to retaliate.

This is assuming that they didn't have intel on our missile technology, which is wrong in my opinion.
Click to expand...
It is dubious analysis, it was not total war and time span is to short to draw such conclusions, this is just biased wishful thinking in favor of attack. Iran just need to have longer attrition capability which in theory it should have due nature of used weapons.
I remember that people who are familiar with missile forces of Iran explained rather well that large chunk of used missiles are older ones and within operational expire date.
Although Iran has two main problems internal security challenges and actual number of missiles is relatively small if estimations are true that you have only 3000 thousands ones of longer ranges, that complicate operational planning to achieve maximum impact and retain ability to fire last shot.
 
mulj said:
On which problems he is referring ?
Only ones i noticed are gauged missile bases and apparently low stocks of missiles which is debatable.
Click to expand...

Did you read the thread?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Iran built its entire deterrence policy on Israel around Hezbollah and missiles. But Iran fired 600+ missiles between operation TP 1 & 2 and didn’t do much damage.

That is what emboldens the US/Israel today.
 
Immortals said:
Did you read the thread?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Iran built its entire deterrence policy on Israel around Hezbollah and missiles. But Iran fired 600+ missiles between operation TP 1 & 2 and didn’t do much damage.

That is what emboldens the US/Israel today.
Click to expand...

I did and my reply to you is same as to @ShapurII
 
Liquidator said:
Both of these 2 are dubious characters
Best to ignore list them.
Click to expand...
I see that their views are often controversial but they also provide sometimes rather valuable insights and are emphasizing some objective short comes of IRI which is necessary in avoiding internal eco chambers and correcting those if possible.
 
mulj said:
I did and my reply to you is same as to @ShapurII
Click to expand...

2020 Iranian missiles were assumed to have high accuracy from the Al-Assad attack

2023-2024, it was shown that Iranian missiles are vulnerable to space tracking assets and statistically their accuracy and QA issue meant that you would have to fire many to score direct hits. But the more you have to fire at once, the easier it is to detect by the enemy’s.

This is not a sustainable deterrence because Iran would need tens of thousands of LR missiles to be able to fight Israel/US who can use CMs and PGMs instead. So just as Israel has an interceptor supply issue, Iran has a missile production/dispersion issue.

This is one reason why instead of producing 15 different sub sonic drones, Iran should have focused on a building supersonic high altitude bomber drone that can drop PGMs and enter and exit enemy airspace quickly.

Because relying only on missiles and slow drones to hit your opponents is not a strategy that works in a conflict that lasts longer than a few weeks.
 
My opinion is that maybe China will notice the big opportunity. The American carriers are a clear target for Iran, China would have the opportunity to sink 1/3 of the American carriers by using the Iranian proxy. This option is an unmissable opportunity. The other thing is, the Iranian missiles should already be at the launch sites with the coordinates entered so that they can be launched immediately.
 
mulj said:
It is dubious analysis, it was not total war and time span is to short to draw such conclusions, this is just biased wishful thinking in favor of attack. Iran just need to have longer attrition capability which in theory it should have due nature of used weapons.
I remember that people who are familiar with missile forces of Iran explained rather well that large chunk of used missiles are older ones and within operational expire date.
Although Iran has two main problems internal security challenges and actual number of missiles is relatively small if estimations are true that you have only 3000 thousands ones of longer ranges, that complicate operational planning to achieve maximum impact and retain ability to fire last shot.
Click to expand...
When you fire 600 missiles in TP III, but your success rate is less than 20% and of those 20%, you hardly hit anything of strategic value to the Israeli war machine, you lose your deterrence completely.

Even 3,000 missiles is a large stockpile for a middle power like Iran.

It had been stated, times and times again, that MRBMs are not meant to be taken as the main offensive tool in your military strategy. MRBMs with only inertial navigation and ring-laser gyroscopes will not be able to reach a CEP better than 50-100m. Iran needed satellite navigation but Iran's space program was halted in 2013. Another wonderful concession to get that damn JCPOA signed.

This is why global powers do not count on MRBMs for offense and still maintain large air forces. To equalize the capability of a modern air force like the IAF, I once calculated that Iran needed well over 50,000 MRBMs with satnav, and Iran never even got close to that number. And my assumption was that our success rate would be 50%. With 20% success rate, Iran needed over 100,000 MRBMs!
 
Immortals said:
Did you read the thread?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Iran built its entire deterrence policy on Israel around Hezbollah and missiles. But Iran fired 600+ missiles between operation TP 1 & 2 and didn’t do much damage.

That is what emboldens the US/Israel today.
Click to expand...

no, real metric for IR missile deterrent is, no. of upper atmosphere interceptions, used to take down missiles at that altitude.


accuracy is'nt a concern, AD penetration is!
 
Meengla said:
The Iranian attack on Qatar as a retaliation was certainly part of an arranged event to defuse the situation then; the casualties you are referring to were indeed sad but happened before that.
Details matter.
Click to expand...
The attack on Qatar didnt kill anyone, was a retaliation and Iran didn't instigate that event to begin with...so yes, details do matter!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 4 more.
    • Total: 379 (members: 32, guests: 347)

    Pakistan Defence Latest

    Country Watch Latest

    Latest Posts

    Share this page

    Back
    Top