Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[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

Nov 22-26 NOTAM

seems like ICBMs but who knows

 

[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

 

[Tijani]

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

Iran is definitely testing something unknown, i hope this is a BrahMos 2 like missile

Hopefully a overtly announced intercontinental?

 

[Han]

Wrong again. You somehow have mistaken an advanced Radial-RCS system (like in K-4's Bus) for an ACS which is technically wrong or lack of understanding of guided Radial-RCS system against a simple ACS!

K-4's PBV has an onboard independent navigation system, it can perform roll+yaw+pitch+Velocity Kill+XYZ corrections which an ACS does not do. Watch the video again, they showed how the PBV changed its trajectory radically and navigated independently before positioning itself for deploying submunitions or (possibly MIRVs) from designated XYZ. ACS does not do that. ACS stabilizes the bus but K-4's Radial-RCS performs trajectory corrections, maneuvers, and independent navigation.



Forget PBV or any MaRV, Iran regularly uses solid-fueled TVC kick-off stages in its SLVs to execute precise exoatmospheric corrections independently. These capabilities exceed the much simpler requirements for PBVs in ballistic missile systems. Both ISA and IRGCAF have used TVC Kickoff stages for years. Thus adapting a PBV is well within their capability for years.

These are some 10-12 years old systems of Iran.

Please explain to us how an advanced Radial-RCS PBV carrying 80+ clustered submunitions (or possibly MIRVs) with onboard navigation performing roll+pitch+yaw+V kills+altitutde corrections loaded on a hypergolic fueled vehicle for a ~3000 KM strike is "cost-effective"?

I've got a simple question how much do you think a K-4 will cost?.
Its between 700k to a mil. Depending upon warhead. So yeah its hella cost effective for a country that does have the luxury of long range bombers.
Again you do not understand anything related to military domain, I will stand by my word on K-4. You will figure it out on your own soon enough, i was going to respond technically but some how you made it a comparison between pakistani and chinese missiles, Just keep one thing in your head, they use nuclear warheads, not some conventional warheads, i will leave the sophistication of the missiles of both the countries to your imagination, if iran can do all that for their conventional warheads imagine what they will do for their Nuclear warheads. Bye!.

 

[ToddE]

I've got a simple question how much do you think a K-4 will cost?.
Its between 700k to a mil. Depending upon warhead. So yeah its hella cost effective for a country that does have the luxury of long range bombers.

Your post makes no sense at all. A single Fattah or Kheybar-Shikan (Skip-glide / Endoatmospheric MaRVs) costs something like ~200K and they in bulk have gone past Arrow-2/3, Davids Sling ABM IADS with ease. Thats Cost-effective because they can be deployed in higher numbers like in True Promise II, will still produce results in mid MRBM domain.

A million USD worth K-4 with an Exoatmospheric Radial-RCS PBV Bus with an on-board independent Navigation system is not cost-effective, it is designed to carry special missions at borderline IRBM ranges hence your entire claim of "crude PBV" + "Cost-effective" is just illogical.

Again you do not understand anything related to military domain,

Thanks for confirming you are another "Trust me bro" and "I have seen the videos myself" type of online "inside scoop guy" who claimed stupid things like calling a Radial independently Guided RCS PBV an ACS system and then backing out of technically supporting the claim. You also claimed to have seen videos of missiles hitting 10 m CEP but failed to produce a single shred of evidence. If that makes you a "military expert" then I am thankful I am not one.

I will stand by my word on K-4. You will figure it out on your own soon enough, i was going to respond technically but some how you made it a comparison between pakistani and chinese missiles, Just keep one thing in your head, they use nuclear warheads, not some conventional warheads, i will leave the sophistication of the missiles of both the countries to your imagination, if iran can do all that for their conventional warheads imagine what they will do for their Nuclear warheads. Bye!.

What are you even rambling about? I did not even say the word "Chinese" or "Pakistani" in my posts nor did I discuss any missile other than K-4.

Why dont you just provide evidence of your "10 m CEP videos"? If I claim I have seen K-3/4, Sejjil-II, Fattah-1, Kheybar-Shikan etc hitting targets within 10 M CEP then I already have posted the pics of their tests.

 

[Immortals]

Your post makes no sense at all. A single Fattah or Kheybar-Shikan (Skip-glide / Endoatmospheric MaRVs) costs something like ~200K and they in bulk have gone past Arrow-2/3, Davids Sling ABM IADS with ease. Thats Cost-effective because they can be deployed in higher numbers like in True Promise II, will still produce results in mid MRBM domain.

A million USD worth K-4 with an Exoatmospheric Radial-RCS PBV Bus with an on-board independent Navigation system is not cost-effective, it is designed to carry special missions at borderline IRBM ranges hence your entire claim of "crude PBV" + "Cost-effective" is just illogical.



Thanks for confirming you are another "Trust me bro" and "I have seen the videos myself" type of online "inside scoop guy" who claimed stupid things like calling a Radial independently Guided RCS PBV an ACS system and then backing out of technically supporting the claim. You also claimed to have seen videos of missiles hitting 10 m CEP but failed to produce a single shred of evidence. If that makes you a "military expert" then I am thankful I am not one.



What are you even rambling about? I did not even say the word "Chinese" or "Pakistani" in my posts nor did I discuss any missile other than K-4.

Why dont you just provide evidence of your "10 m CEP videos"? If I claim I have seen K-3/4, Sejjil-II, Fattah-1, Kheybar-Shikan etc hitting targets within 10 M CEP then I already have posted the pics of their tests.

Brother he is a troll. As soon as he talked highly of Pakistani missiles I realized he had an agenda. Notice he only talks highly about Chinese and Pakistani missiles (only examples he provided), where Iran is the backwards one.

First he says Shaheen-2 is 10 meters accuracy and then he says Shaheen-2 doesn’t need to be tactically accurate because they carry nuclear payloads. So which is it? What tactical nuclear missile do you know that has sub 25 meter accuracy? Not even MinuteMan III has that accuracy or Russian Satan missile.

Second, he claims he is going to share “technical data” then never supplies it and goes back to gaslighting. He doesn’t have technical knowledge he claims to have, he doesn’t argue/debate someone who would have such technical knowledge.

Just don’t bother trying to reason with him.

 

[jauk]

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

 

[Immortals]

One of my theories for strange atmospheric missile seen flying this past month from eastern iran to the north west was a Hypersonic Cruise Missile at 40KM altitude. While Iran is highly unlikely to have mastered an air breathing scramjet engine to use upper atmosphere oxygen as an oxidizer vs onboard supply. There is another pathway that is within Iran’s technical capability today and that India recently tested.

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

Iran footage of mysterious atmospheric object

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

 

[Garcia Sea]

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 is a view of the landing of a missile that Ukraine claims is a Russian ICBM.
It appears to be on a different level of speed and power than the missile used by Iran.
In comparison, the Iranian missile looks like a miniature.
If Iran had such weapons, the attitude of the U.S. and Israel toward Iran would surely be different.
Iran's missile industry still has a lot of work to do.

The U.S. has pointed out that this missile is actually an MRBM.
This difference in power is quite striking, as the missile belongs to the same MRBM class used by Iran in its attack on Israel.

 

[LongLiveIran]

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 is a view of the landing of a missile that Ukraine claims is a Russian ICBM.
It appears to be on a different level of speed and power than the missile used by Iran.
In comparison, the Iranian missile looks like a miniature.
If Iran had such weapons, the attitude of the U.S. and Israel toward Iran would surely be different.
Iran's missile industry still has a lot of work to do.

The U.S. has pointed out that this missile is actually an MRBM.
This difference in power is quite striking for the same MRBM.

How is that surprising? Russia is decades ahead of Iran when it comes to aerospace engineering. Countries like Iran and Pakistan are still pretty much stuck in 1960s. And we're still one of the most advanced countries in missile technology outside of global powers like the US, Russia, China, the UK, France, etc.

 

[Mehdipersian]

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 is a view of the landing of a missile that Ukraine claims is a Russian ICBM.
It appears to be on a different level of speed and power than the missile used by Iran.
In comparison, the Iranian missile looks like a miniature.
If Iran had such weapons, the attitude of the U.S. and Israel toward Iran would surely be different.
Iran's missile industry still has a lot of work to do.

The U.S. has pointed out that this missile is actually an MRBM.
This difference in power is quite striking, as the missile belongs to the same MRBM class used by Iran in its attack on Israel.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles usually have a speed of more than Mach 20
This is because of the high altitude they reach and the massive rocket engines

 

[Flotilla]

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 is a view of the landing of a missile that Ukraine claims is a Russian ICBM.
It appears to be on a different level of speed and power than the missile used by Iran.
In comparison, the Iranian missile looks like a miniature.
If Iran had such weapons, the attitude of the U.S. and Israel toward Iran would surely be different.
Iran's missile industry still has a lot of work to do.

The U.S. has pointed out that this missile is actually an MRBM.
This difference in power is quite striking, as the missile belongs to the same MRBM class used by Iran in its attack on Israel.

I thought Russians didn't have convencional warheads on their ICBMs. But they have. Maybe Iran opened that watermellon.

 

[jauk]

The 'analyses' on the Russian 'ICBMs' is inherently misguided and incorrect. ICBMs by nature (nuclear warhead) do not shoot for accuracy. So not sure what this is all about. Iran is far ahead (and probably the first) in using BMs as tactical high precision systems.

BTW:

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

 

[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

Russian hypersonic ballistic missile RV impact velocity visibly significantly faster than Iranian MRBMs

 

[Liquidator]

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

Russian hypersonic ballistic missile RV impact velocity visibly significantly faster than Iranian MRBMs

The Iranian missiles seemed to manoeuvre, and some appeared to speed up prior impact?

Plus they utilised several decoys...different methodology.