Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[Persian Gulf]

If Russia used an IRBM then of course that would have a higher terminal speed than Iranian MRBMs.

Some of the other factors may be that unlike the purely ballistic trajectories with a single warhead of Russia, Iran is using terminal warhead separation, glide trajectories(HGV) and release of bomblets etc.

you think the Russian missile had a single warhead?

iran didn't use any HGV warheads yet. the missiles impacting in the video I shared are clearly single warheads from Iranian missiles with MaRV not bomblets

 

[UKBengali]

you think the Russian missile had a single warhead?

iran didn't use any HGV warheads yet. the missiles impacting in the video I shared are clearly single warheads from Iranian missiles with MaRV not bomblets

Do the technicalities matter as Iran proved it could slice through Zio-US defences on October 1st?

Difference seems to be that Russia intends to cause real damage but Iran wants to limit the destruction it causes for various reasons.

 

[LongLiveIran]

If Russia used an IRBM then of course that would have a higher terminal speed than Iranian MRBMs.

Some of the other factors may be that unlike the purely ballistic trajectories with a single warhead of Russia, Iran is using terminal warhead separation, glide trajectories(HGV) and release of bomblets etc.

Yes Russia is more advanced in some ways than Iran but remember Russian missile attacks are still being defended at about the same rate as that what happened to Iranian missile attack on the entity.

The entity has better ABM defences(when combined with USN ships and that huge US ABM radar in Negev) than Ukraine and so let us not downplay Iranian capability.

I think you missed his point. He is talking about the visible difference in terminal velocities which looks noticeably significant.
Russia has said that it used an MRBM. Obviously, the classification itself is of little significance. At the end, terminal velocity depends on initial velocity, altitude (trajectory) and aerodynamic drag. Because the distance it has traveled is not in the ICBM range, one can safely conclude that the Russian ballistic missile has higher initial velocity, i.e. stronger engine or better fuel efficiency or aerodynamics.

 

[Persian Gulf]

Do the technicalities matter as Iran proved it could slice through Zio-US defences on October 1st?

Difference seems to be that Russia intends to cause real damage but Iran wants to limit the destruction it causes for various reasons.

Iran showed with c. 180-200 BM salvo including many newest missiles it can have c. 25% success rate

in early stages of exchange against near peak Israeli ABM shield, that is not bad

but the effectiveness of the missiles that impacted was very bad, the accuracy and destructive impact is lacking in GNSS denied environment

I doubt IRGC is confident enough in ability to hit specific targets in Israel now, better to adjust strategies than waste 200 missiles to hit 3-5 buildings on an air base

 

[UKBengali]

Iran showed with c. 180-200 BM salvo including many newest missiles it can have c. 25% success rate

in early stages of exchange against near peak Israeli ABM shield, that is not bad

but the effectiveness of the missiles that impacted was very bad, the accuracy and destructive impact is lacking in GNSS denied environment

I doubt IRGC is confident enough in ability to hit specific targets in Israel now, better to adjust strategies than waste 200 missiles to hit 3-5 buildings on an air base

Ok, we don’t know Iran’s exact intentions and so cannot make accurate assumptions.

However we saw around 5-7 hits out of 35 on something “useful” at Nevatim.

Statistically you would not get so many without CEP of 10-30m with at least some of the missiles. Remember CEP is the radius that 50% of the missiles will hit from the centre of the target.

If Iranian missiles had 100m+ CEP then maybe one would have hit something “useful” at most.

At least some Iranian missiles are pretty accurate but the unknown is just how many of these does Iran have and is manufacturing every month.

 

[Persian Gulf]

Ok, we don’t know Iran’s exact intentions and so cannot make accurate assumptions.

However we saw around 5-7 hits out of 35 on something “useful” at Nevatim.

Statistically you would not get so many without CEP of 10-30m with at least some of the missiles. Remember CEP is the radius that 50% of the missiles will hit from the centre of the target.

If Iranian missiles had 100m+ CEP then maybe one would have hit something “useful” at most.

At least some Iranian missiles are pretty accurate but the unknown is just how many of these does Iran have and is manufacturing every month.

I only saw 2-3 direct hits on something useful

one destroyed hangar building at Nevatim

one hangar hit in the roof but not seriously damaged at Nevatim

one building possibly destroyed at Tel Nof

the rest seem to hit runways or empty areas (one hit the side of a road 500m from Mossad HQ)

from c. 40-50 impacts this does not suggest 10m CEP. even assuming small 300kg warhead with mach 5 terminal velocity, these missiles should have blast radius of 50-100m. I think the average accuracy was worse than 100m CEP but we need more information on the breakdown of missiles used for a better analysis

 

[UKBengali]

I only saw 2-3 direct hits on something useful

one destroyed hangar building at Nevatim

one hangar hit in the roof but not seriously damaged at Nevatim

one building possibly destroyed at Tel Nof

the rest seem to hit runways or empty areas (one hit the side of a road 500m from Mossad HQ)

from c. 40-50 impacts this does not suggest 10m CEP. even assuming small 300kg warhead with mach 5 terminal velocity, these missiles should have blast radius of 50-100m. I think the average accuracy was worse than 100m CEP but we need more information on the breakdown of missiles used for a better analysis

Like I say we do not know what Iran’s exact targets were.

I have counted runways as targets and so if that is the case my analysis holds that at least some missiles had 10-30m CEP. Statistically that is the only possibility.

There are too many unknowns for anyone to make definite conclusions about accuracy of latest (<5years) Iranian missiles.

 

[jauk]

Do the technicalities matter as Iran proved it could slice through Zio-US defences on October 1st?

Difference seems to be that Russia intends to cause real damage but Iran wants to limit the destruction it causes for various reasons.

Exactly. Unfortunate you had to actually make an effort to type up that obvious response.

 

[jauk]

I only saw 2-3 direct hits on something useful

one destroyed hangar building at Nevatim

one hangar hit in the roof but not seriously damaged at Nevatim

one building possibly destroyed at Tel Nof

the rest seem to hit runways or empty areas (one hit the side of a road 500m from Mossad HQ)

from c. 40-50 impacts this does not suggest 10m CEP. even assuming small 300kg warhead with mach 5 terminal velocity, these missiles should have blast radius of 50-100m. I think the average accuracy was worse than 100m CEP but we need more information on the breakdown of missiles used for a better analysis

Incorrect! I saw more.

 

[jauk]

I only saw 2-3 direct hits on something useful

one destroyed hangar building at Nevatim

one hangar hit in the roof but not seriously damaged at Nevatim

one building possibly destroyed at Tel Nof

the rest seem to hit runways or empty areas (one hit the side of a road 500m from Mossad HQ)

from c. 40-50 impacts this does not suggest 10m CEP. even assuming small 300kg warhead with mach 5 terminal velocity, these missiles should have blast radius of 50-100m. I think the average accuracy was worse than 100m CEP but we need more information on the breakdown of missiles used for a better analysis

Note, the shift from 'speed' to 'accuracy'. False argument.

 

[muhammed45]

I agree

unfortunately there is too much uncritical fanboy hopium here that prefers to find excuses or explanations

What do you really expect man? Iranian missiles perform better than Russian missiles? Instead of leaving non sensical posts and comparing successor of Soviet union with Iran, you could assess this event Professionally. It is only 30 years that Iran has been active in this area of military technology.

The sound before impact proves that Russian missile had an engine still working till touching the ground as if a fighter jet was approaching the target area.

Of course Russian missile technology is best in the world because of insisting on this field by the Soviet union. And Russia has that heritage.

Moreover you cannot claim that speed of Iranian hypersonic missiles was less than Russian equivalent. The scene recorded from impact of Russian missiles is almost from zero distance. The sound is so very clear.

 

[jauk]

Back to earth. What really happened and what Iran has in mind for K-4:

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

Accept third party cookies

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

Accept third party cookies

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

Accept third party cookies

 

[LongLiveIran]

What do you really expect man? Iranian missiles perform better than Russian missiles? Instead of leaving non sensical posts and comparing successor of Soviet union with Iran, you could assess this event Professionally. It is only 30 years that Iran has been active in this area of military technology.

The sound before impact proves that Russian missile had an engine still working till touching the ground as if a fighter jet was approaching the target area.

Of course Russian missile technology is best in the world because of insisting on this field by the Soviet union. And Russia has that heritage.

Moreover you cannot claim that speed of Iranian hypersonic missiles was less than Russian equivalent. The scene recorded from impact of Russian missiles is almost from zero distance. The sound is so very clear.

While I completely agree with you, but your first sentence is exactly what some fanboys here want to believe. Surely, Persian Gulf is aware of the difference between Iran and Russia but go read earlier posts where people said that our missile technology is so advanced that even Russia is interested in our missile technology for the war in Ukraine as if they couldn't make better missiles on their own. I hope now they understand why Russia is Russia and Iran is Iran and Russia didn't "need" our missile technology, but merely wanted to increase their reservoir.

 

[muhammed45]

While I completely agree with you, but your first sentence is exactly what some fanboys here want to believe. Surely, Persian Gulf is aware of the difference between Iran and Russia but go read earlier posts where people said that our missile technology is so advanced that even Russia is interested in our missile technology for the war in Ukraine as if they couldn't make better missiles on their own. I hope now they understand why Russia is Russia and Iran is Iran and Russia didn't "need" our missile technology, but merely wanted to increase their reservoir.

Russian missiles are expensive as a matter of fact. I guess Russian interest in our missile is because of the cost effectiveness of Iranian solutions.

Russia bought Iranian drones along with its production line while Russia had a drone as advanced as Okhotnik. The reason why they opted for Shahed drones was the cost effectiveness of Shahed. Something like Okhotnik can be built in few numbers but you can simply screw Ukraine by thousands of Shaheds and empty their AD systems.

 

[jauk]

Back to earth. Coherent analysis from Pataramesh. This is not an ‘ICBM’. Rather an MRBM. At least behaving like one. Submunitions and exoatmospheric positioning trump guidance (and significant loss of velocity) while achieving high velocity and a CEP of 30-100m and bringing significant destruction while achieving more than enough precision. The pictures we see are boosted submunitions. A far cry from the self-denier screams.

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

Accept third party cookies