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

[Persian Gulf]

Satellite imagery of Nevatim air base from TP2:

Post in thread 'Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions'

Mar 25, 2025

Satellite imagery of Nevatim air base from TP2:

North part of Nevatim air base:



20 missile impacts (6 very far off target)



total destruction of large building



direct hit on concrete F-35 shelter (very limited damage)

South part of Nevatim base:



16 missile impacts (7 very far off target)



Severe damage to non-concrete AWACS shelters

Credit: Project Meshkat

• Persian Gulf

• 

 

[Persian Gulf]

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

this account alleges most of the missiles used were the newer Kheibar-Shekan 2 and the attack destroyed Iranian deterrence due to the terrible accuracy of these missiles despite years of channeling funds into the missile program

 

[Persian Gulf]

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

 

[BigMela2onin]

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

this account alleges most of the missiles used were the newer Kheibar-Shekan 2 and the attack destroyed Iranian deterrence due to the terrible accuracy of these missiles despite years of channeling funds into the missile program

There is a reason most countries use ballistic missiles as a nuclear weapons delivery platform where accuracy is less of a concern. An argument can be made for SRBMs and MRBMs but ICBMs are essentially pointless without nuclear warheads.

 

[Nuffle]

There is a reason most countries use ballistic missiles as a nuclear weapons delivery platform where accuracy is less of a concern. An argument can be made for SRBMs and MRBMs but ICBMs are essentially pointless without nuclear warheads.

Some countries - such as China - use ballistic missiles for anti-ship functions, so accuracy is not really an obstacle that can limit the effectiveness of a BM. Even though there is no proof of the BM's operability yet, a BM can still be a deadly weapon regardless of the inaccuracy. For example, a swarm of BMs converging on the same target could be a very interesting tactic. If Iran really has thousands of BMs as is speculated, it could do good damage to selected targets. According to previous posts, the variety and dispersion of targets limited the effectiveness of TP II.

 

[fitpOsitive]

Dear Iran, negotiations are a trap. Don't fall for it. Just test your device(if you have) and delivery system ( if you have) asap...

 

[BigMela2onin]

Some countries - such as China - use ballistic missiles for anti-ship functions, so accuracy is not really an obstacle that can limit the effectiveness of a BM. Even though there is no proof of the BM's operability yet, a BM can still be a deadly weapon regardless of the inaccuracy. For example, a swarm of BMs converging on the same target could be a very interesting tactic. If Iran really has thousands of BMs as is speculated, it could do good damage to selected targets. According to previous posts, the variety and dispersion of targets limited the effectiveness of TP II.

Wrecking an aircraft carrier's deck knocks it out of operation and that damage can't be quickly repaired out of port. Cratering a airfield runway takes an afternoon to repair. Iran has to balance accuracy with speed and survivability. To ensure penetration, a missile needs to be very fast or perform evasive maneuvers, reducing accuracy, but without it you're going to get intercepted. Iran doesn't have satellites to help guide them and is mostly relying on inertial navigation systems for accuracy. With a nuclear warhead, you drop it in the general vicinity of the target as fast as you can and that is enough. With these conventional warheads you need accuracy to be useful. Throw in long ranges into the mix you are again limiting how much accuracy you can get out of inertial navigation. Most militaries that can use strike jets for these types of operations.

 

[KHORSHIDSIYAH1488]

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

this account alleges most of the missiles used were the newer Kheibar-Shekan 2 and the attack destroyed Iranian deterrence due to the terrible accuracy of these missiles despite years of channeling funds into the missile program

This is correct. It proved the world that Iran's missiles are inaccurate and that Iran does not have the ability to deter or inflict damage. Any assumption of "this was just a warning" is copium. Iran has quantity (not 100K as some idiots believe, but maybe 3-5K) but the quality is worse than North Korea. With proxies shown to be paper tigers (except Hamas and Houthis), Iran has lost any and all credibility and it's shown its hand, now Israel and the US know what they can do, which is why they are on the warpath.

 

[Nuffle]

Wrecking an aircraft carrier's deck knocks it out of operation and that damage can't be quickly repaired out of port. Cratering a airfield runway takes an afternoon to repair. Iran has to balance accuracy with speed and survivability. To ensure penetration, a missile needs to be very fast or perform evasive maneuvers, reducing accuracy, but without it you're going to get intercepted. Iran doesn't have satellites to help guide them and is mostly relying on inertial navigation systems for accuracy. With a nuclear warhead, you drop it in the general vicinity of the target as fast as you can and that is enough. With these conventional warheads you need accuracy to be useful. Throw in long ranges into the mix you are again limiting how much accuracy you can get out of inertial navigation. Most militaries that can use strike jets for these types of operations.

But that's why I said that one way to compensate for this inaccuracy disadvantage is to simply change your attack strategy and attack one target at a time in an eventual True Promise III. Even with the BM's inaccuracy, the strategy of converging all missiles launched to the same target is a solution that should really be addressed/discussed.

 

[Liquidator]

This is correct. It proved the world that Iran's missiles are inaccurate and that Iran does not have the ability to deter or inflict damage. Any assumption of "this was just a warning" is copium. Iran has quantity (not 100K as some idiots believe, but maybe 3-5K) but the quality is worse than North Korea. With proxies shown to be paper tigers (except Hamas and Houthis), Iran has lost any and all credibility and it's shown its hand, now Israel and the US know what they can do, which is why they are on the warpath.

So because Iran didn't kill any babies it cannot inflict damage. Gotcha

 

[KHORSHIDSIYAH1488]

So because Iran didn't kill any babies it cannot inflict damage. Gotcha

Way to strawman. No one said babies. I said Iran wasn't able to do any military damage. That matters.

 

[Liquidator]

Way to strawman. No one said babies. I said Iran wasn't able to do any military damage. That matters.

Based on what the Israelis have said. Gotcha.

 

[KHORSHIDSIYAH1488]

Based on what the Israelis have said. Gotcha.

Based on literal satellite photos that @Persian Gulf posted.

 

[Liquidator]

Based on literal satellite photos that @Persian Gulf posted.

Plenty of impacts. TP2 was a limited operation. Several secondary explosions seen at Tel Nof.

The Israelis thought the damage was significant enough to hide...

The blastwave damage won't show in pictures and the Israelis won't tell you what that felt like. But you know who can? Americans:

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

The account from them is very telling:

- high accuracy
- blast effects are devastating

The single hypersonic warning shot 500m from mossad headquarters front door should tell you that Iran is confident in its abilities. Interpret that however you wish I'll end the verbal ping pong after this post.

Also:

- not a single intercept was seen. Not one. Yet, we are lead to believe over 50% didn't get through because there is no video evidence of 180+ impacts. I have my differences with @Persian Gulf on this specific assessment but we choose to keep it civil. The points I've raised are usually brushed to one side. The following comes to mind:

If a tree falls in a forest and there is nobody there is to hear it, does it make a sound?

Remember prior TP1 we were told Iran won't be able to hit anywhere in Israel. I'm glad at least the conversation has shifted to not being able to hit hard enough.

 

[Persian Gulf]

According to previous posts, the variety and dispersion of targets limited the effectiveness of TP II.

this is correct

there are many military targets that are huge and concentrated (IAI, Rafael and Elbit sites).

Mossad HQ is 160m wide and 110m long

IAI industry zone is 330m wide and 400m long

for these targets even 100m CEP is sufficient, particularly if multiple missiles are used for the same target as you suggest. but a massive air base (the size of a small city) with buildings dispersed across the entire place, you need < 10m CEP which you virtually cannot achieve reliably with MRBM in such a strong ABM environment

from TP2 IRGC learned its strategy to destroy air bases with BMs is not feasible. this limits use of BMs somewhat and increases importance of LACMs / drones