Iranian Missiles | News and Discussions

[Persian Gulf]

Jewsrael's arsenal of expensive Arrow-3 interceptors is depleted due to repeated ballistic missile launches from Yemen

this missile's main problems will be Arrow-2 and David's Sling rather than THAAD or Arrow-3

 

[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

Conventional missiles also hit their targets accurately during exercises.
In these exercises, there is no interception or jamming, and a conspicuous white sheet is laid out in the open desert.
In actual combat, intense maneuvers are required to evade enemy interception, and even at night, one must penetrate through severe electronic jamming and deception to target small buildings.
Indeed, before the low accuracy of missiles in real combat was exposed, this might have been an effective performance.
However, now Israel would not be deterred from bombing Iran by such a display.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iron Dome can't intercept ballistic missiles.

Iron Dome was designed to intercept Grad rockets and mortar shells with predictable trajectories.

Iron Dome can't even intercept cruise missiles, let alone ballistic missiles.

Jewsrael has David's Sling and Arrow for ballistic missiles.

Seems like Iran will overwhelm David's Sling and Arrow with massive salvo of large number of precise ballistic missiles.

Jewsrael's arsenal of expensive Arrow-3 interceptors is depleted due to repeated ballistic missile launches from Yemen. That's why Netanyahu asked US to supply THAAD

Remember, they usually launch two interceptors against one missile

iron-dome spec sheet state sort range ballistic missiles like m600 after it state grad rocket and drones

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iron Dome can't even intercept cruise missiles, let alone ballistic missiles.

if it can intercept drones it can intercept normal cruise missiles

 

[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

 

[Persian Gulf]

Conventional missiles also hit their targets accurately during exercises.

show me long range iranian missiles clearly hitting centre of target like this in past iranian drills

 

[Immortals]

show me long range iranian missiles clearly hitting centre of target like this in past iranian drills

The dimona reactor exercise comes to mind.

IO is not a long term solution, missile has to slow so AI can run optics. It’s nothing new we saw this a decade ago on PG Missiles, the optics have improved but the physics remain the same, a missile with a plasma shroud cannot see, go too fast you cannot see.

It might make more sense to use a high powered laser in the cone to basically “laser designate” the target as it comes down. Same power laser modern laser guns use except without the destructive capacity (obviously).

 

[Persian Gulf]

The dimona reactor exercise comes to mind.

that used Zolafaqar and maybe Dezful (1000km) not MRBMs

 

[Immortals]

that used Zolafaqar and maybe Dezful (1000km) not MRBMs

It is not the range of the missile that makes a difference, it is the re entry speed and shape of the RV.

A 10,000KM could also have a optic warhead if needed.

 

[Hack-Hook]

It is not the range of the missile that makes a difference, it is the re entry speed and shape of the RV.

A 10,000KM could also have a optic warhead if needed.

the range of the missile is very important , the error in guidance system is by degree not speed , the more the range , error will be larger

 

[Immortals]

the range of the missile is very important , the error in guidance system is by degree not speed , the more the range , error will be larger

The longer range missiles can offset this with more powerful gyroscopes (FOG) to keep error rate lower and use I/O in terminal phase.

Like I said there is no roadblock preventing an MRBM or ICBM to use I/O if the guidance system is adequate. It’s the speed that has to be slowed so I/O can actually “see” or provide any degree of assistance in course correction.

But is slowing a Mach 6-8 warhead down to Mach 1-2 worth it in order to get improved guidance at the cost of higher interception rate?

 

[Hack-Hook]

The longer range missiles can offset this with more powerful gyroscopes (FOG) to keep error rate lower and use I/O in terminal phase.

Like I said there is no roadblock preventing an MRBM or ICBM to use I/O if the guidance system is adequate. It’s the speed that has to be slowed so I/O can actually “see” or provide any degree of assistance in course correction.

But is slowing a Mach 6-8 warhead down to Mach 1-2 worth it in order to get improved guidance at the cost of higher interception rate?

The best gyroscope is also prone to error.
And e/o guidance can compensate to some extent it cand magically fix 10km of mistake

 

[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

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

 

[Mehdipersian]

47 Iranian ballistic missiles hit the Navatim base in TP2

 

[Persian Gulf]

47 Iranian ballistic missiles hit the Navatim base in TP2
View attachment 121902

+ 8-12 on Tel Nof
+ 2-3 on Tel Aviv
+ 1-2 in Gaza

new estimate of c. 60-64 missile impacts recorded on camera or satellite imagery (out of claimed 180 missiles launched = 33-35% penetration rate)

unfortunately the accuracy was very poor for the targets selected