It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran Tests Missile Able to Avoid Radar

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Yes, I have. Ever been sittng in a truck, while a B-52 with a hung missile attached to the wing is sitting on the taxiway pointed at you?




posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 04:07 AM
link   
I bet you were in danger, cause it would SURELY have fired at you.



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aztecatl
Has anyone here ever even TOUCHED a real missile? I have...


yes i have actually - touched , carrier [ done a lot of carrying ]
, fired , been fired at .

i have been there done it , got the tee shirt


but so what - none of that ACTUALLY qualifies me to have a qualified opinion on the state of the art development of 2006 era iranina stealth / anti stealth missiles , reall or imagined
.

OTOH - a friend of mine wporks in the drawing office @ BAE lostok hall - dealling with secret specs for missiles day in and day out - and she is read on the REAL intel of allied and enemy systems - but has NEVER actually toughted a missile


so forgive me if i dont put much stock in the claim to fame of " i once touvhed a missile "



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 04:44 AM
link   
Ape seems to be missing the point. Removed childish comment
Seems like you both are "on the ground" people with no technical knowledge of the missiles except how to bracket them to aircraft, or firing in APE's case.

I asked if anyone had even touched one, to see if you had even seen one in real life, up close, or if you are just pulling your information out of your.. well, you know where I mean.

[Removed silly insult]

[edit on 2/4/2006 by Aztecatl]

[edit on 2/4/06 by JAK]



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 05:05 AM
link   
I do not know if this was said although I am pretty sure Mehran would be happy to also know that the missle is a Fajr-3 multiple warhead missile - meaning that in addition to be a missile that can strike without warning it can also release multiple warheads which the Israeli ARROW anti-missile system cannot intercept.
With that said, the missle will probably notoriously unreliable as a military weapon since it will probably not be guideable after the missile splits up into multiple warheads. This means that like a scud where-ever it lands it lands. This is a terror weapon which will probably hit open areas and residential areas.

With this weapon it makes the attack on Iran inevitable accoring to the British.
Source



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Just curious, but what would keep that kind of missile, one that splits into three, from being guidable? Seems the missile would just have 3 more guidance-systems installed... maybe a more expensive missile but could that not be done?



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   
You could do a GPS guidance, or INS guidance on them, but your missile will be bigger, because the warheads would be bigger to fit the guidance packages into them. And once you start making it bigger, you lose range, you lose speed, and you have to spend more on stealth coating. It's all a trade off.



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You could do a GPS guidance, or INS guidance on them, but your missile will be bigger, because the warheads would be bigger to fit the guidance packages into them. And once you start making it bigger, you lose range, you lose speed, and you have to spend more on stealth coating. It's all a trade off.


Once its bigger it is also easier to intercept so the Patriot 2 or a modification it as well as a modified ARROW system with the nautilus system integrated into it (or ARROW alone) would then be capable of intercepting it.



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   
An Israeili expert claims the new missile could be a long-range variant of Russian Iskander-E missile with clustered warheads, making it completely a new very capable MRBM, however he doubts the picture shown is of the missile described by Salami.



An Israeli missile expert said on March 31 the missiles shown on Iranian television reported to be capable of evading radar did not the match the description, which he said sounded like Russian Iskander-E missiles.

"The description does not match the picture," Uzi Rubin, an Israeli missile expert and former director of Israel’s Arrow missile defense program, told Reuters from Tel Aviv. "They could be bluffing."

If it is true that Iran has such rockets, however, there is no way Tehran could have produced them without outside help, Rubin said. "I definitely don’t believe that the Iranians could cook up such a sophisticated missile indigenously," Rubin said.

He said the description "fits almost word-for-word the way the Russians describe the Iskander-E, with one exception -- the Russians don’t claim the capability to ‘hit several targets’."

Rubin said that the Iranians could mean the rockets had so-called "clustered warheads", which is not something the Iskanders have.

www.defensenews.com...


KEEP IT REAL



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   


Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert at Jane's Information Group, said the missile test could be an indication that Iran has MIRV capability.

MIRV refers to multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles, which are intercontinental ballistic missiles with several warheads, each of which could be directed at a different target.

"But we don't know how accurate the Iranians are able to make their missiles yet, and this is a crucial point," Oppenheimer said.

"If the missile is adaptable for nuclear warheads, then they are well on the way, but they have not made a nuclear warhead yet. The current estimates are it could take five years."


a MRBM with MIRV, I don't think so!?

noone seems to have an answer to my question, I'm trying to figure out what aspect of this new warhead allows it to evade radar.

The pictures below are from the original video, I picked up from Iran military forum. 3 warheads could be seen hitting the ground with impressive CEP.







KEEP IT REAL



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   


noone seems to have an answer to my question, I'm trying to figure out what aspect of this new warhead allows it to evade radar.


How about this one = It doesn't exist - It was staged!

I'm not saying that just proposing one 'theory'.
NOTE: I did not see the video.



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 09:29 AM
link   
touchy touchy..

hmmm.. Missiles touched : Let's see. MKI standard loadout:

R-60:


R-73:


Seen the R-27 and R77 amraamski real up close, didn't touch it though.

Besides that:

Seen the Sea Eagle AshM and Magic IIs on the Harrier:

external image



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 09:36 AM
link   
WHAT? WHAT????

what was removed from my post??? I don't even remember putting anything in the places where it says "removed childish comment" and "removed point"!!!!!

Is someone JOKING??????



well ok, i can see the "sleep with" comment now, suddenly remember it. but what was that at the bottom??

[edit on 2/4/2006 by Aztecatl]


Daedalus3: airshows don't count...

[edit on 2/4/2006 by Aztecatl]



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aztecatl

Daedalus3: airshows don't count...

[edit on 2/4/2006 by Aztecatl]


Why?? I never quite understood wht significance 'touching' missiles had anyways.

Also as far as I know (esp in the IAF) they don't keep missiles out on a/c except when there's a wartime situation or there's a Military Exercise on, or there's a weaps test on. And in all of the above cases they don't let anyone except ordanance experts,ground crew and/or the pilots themselves near missiles. So you'd have to be one of the above in my country to see/touch/bond with live munitions.
Also if you go any IAF base (maybe not the fwd ones)during peacetime then you'll never see missiles on the tarmat, in the hangar, attached to a/c hardpoints etc. I haven't and frankly I didn't care less because it was the a/c I was more interested in
!

Anyways, my question is how touching missiles is relevant here? If you're trying to get at the fact that actually seeing em' gives you a better sense of its structural dimensions, warhead size, seeker size, guidance/TVC flaps etc. etc. yeah then you're dead correct. But then I again don't understand why airshows wouldn't give you that?



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Whatever. Nothing you say adds anything.

Now can we move on with this discussion? Or is it expended?



posted on Apr, 2 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by proprog


An Israeli missile expert said on March 31 the missiles shown on Iranian television reported to be capable of evading radar did not the match the description, which he said sounded like Russian Iskander-E missiles.

"The description does not match the picture," Uzi Rubin, an Israeli missile expert and former director of Israel’s Arrow missile defense program, told Reuters from Tel Aviv. "They could be bluffing."

If it is true that Iran has such rockets, however, there is no way Tehran could have produced them without outside help, Rubin said. "I definitely don’t believe that the Iranians could cook up such a sophisticated missile indigenously," Rubin said.

He said the description "fits almost word-for-word the way the Russians describe the Iskander-E, with one exception -- the Russians don’t claim the capability to ‘hit several targets’."

Rubin said that the Iranians could mean the rockets had so-called "clustered warheads", which is not something the Iskanders have.

www.defensenews.com...



the expert is wrong. the iskanders do have multiple warheads/clusters they are used to destroy runway's and millitry bases.




The SS-X-26 appears to have several different conventional warheads, including a cluster munitions warhead, a fuel-air explosive enhanced-blast warhead, a tactical earth penetrator for bunker busting and an electro- magnetic pulse device for anti-radar missions.

link



this expert seems to be confused about this missile and its various warheads also i must mention that if iran did recive a missile from russia its most likely the "Tender" version (i think thats what its called) exactly the same as the "iskander" model but with fursther range and slightly larger warhead which is the non-export version i while iskander is the export version with 280km range to meet missile export treaties but they are basically the same missile. also interestingly china makes a model witht he same/similar guidence system its called the b-611 and its supposed to be based on the iskander but only has 150km range altough china was planning to upgrade it to 250-300km as well so china could possibly have also played a part in transfering this technology.

i also understand why iran said it made this missile on its own and recived no help from any forign country because its illegle to help iran devolop weopons and if any country does then they will be sanctioned by america so iran has to say russia/china did not help it otherwise they would get in trouble for helping iran. a couple of companies already have been banned from doing buisness in america and have been sanctioned for helping iran with missile tech already.


hey guys also check out my other thread on the iranian fast speed torpedo like the russian VA-111 Shkval:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 2-4-2006 by iqonx]



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mehran
not a surprise since we have already mastered stealth technology



You guys really believe the propaganda you're being fed? You can't just develop stealth technology over night and have an airplane done by the end of the week!



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I am truly amazed at how many people in here believe that Iran is actually going to be able to put up a fight against the American military. So much has been covered in these 4 pages, I'm just going to point out facts....rather than links to websites, and quotes from state run media's.

First off, A few people have mentioned the size and number of people in Iran. (I'm referring to the size of their army and the number of people who are "fit for military service".) Well, take a step back. More specifically to the 1980's.

In 1988, an 8 year war between Iran and Iraq finally came to an end. In 8 years, a country with "15,500,000 men fit for military service" could not defeat a country smaller than the size of Texas. Now, Iraq's military size was not too shabby. At the time Iraq had the 6th largest standing army in the world. 3 years later the United States crushed this Army in 3 weeks. The Iraqi Air Force sent fighter jets up for the first 3 days, after none returned, they buried the remaining fighters in the desert so they wouldn't get bombed by bunker busters.

And people think Iran is going to defend itself from the USA? To be honest, everything I just said is irrelevant. Why? Because the USA will not invade Iran.
1)We can't afford it
2)We are too spread out throughout the world
3)The American public will not allow it

That leaves us with an air war, which...believe it or not...has probably already begun. Iran has a pretty intricate and advanced anit-air radar defense system. The problem with this is they have to turn it on for it to work.

The U.S. is known, although not widely, for playing cat and mouse. We did it to Russia, we do it to China, we did it to Iraq, and we are probably doing it right now to Iran. Basically, a fighter or spy plane flies into Iranian airspace. A radar system picks this up, and Iran responds, usually by turning on their radar and sam sites. American pilots plot these coordinates and those coordinates are programmed into cruise missiles for later use when we actually attack. So those sites are pretty much going to be non-existent before any Israeli or American fighter/bomber comes near their airspace. This will be the first wave.

The second wave will be the F-117's and B2's. The B-2's will go and take out the most heavily defended radar & sam sites as well as command and control centers in and around cities in the central region of the country, while the F-117's take out the targets of oppurtunity that the first wave of cruise missiles miss.

Then come the fighter jets...and let's face it....Iran's Air Force is not up for the challenge. The jets are old and the pilots untrained compared to Israeli and American standards. Combine this with the fact that no F-16 has ever been shot down by another fighter, and a worldwide kill ratio of 70-0, and the F-15....which also has never been shot down by another fighter and a kill ratio of 104-0 world wide. And the scary part....the 27th fighter squadron became "operational" in December 2005. Operational meaning able to deploy and fight.....the 27th fighter squadron is a squadron of F-22's.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by flaguy

That leaves us with an air war, which...believe it or not...has probably already begun. Iran has a pretty intricate and advanced anit-air radar defense system. The problem with this is they have to turn it on for it to work.


They actually don't have too. Iran has actually got advanced Electro-optic and Infrared passive scanning/detection systems as a backup on there SAM defence systems.

Although EO and IR don't work to well in some countries becuase of overcast wheather for EO and limited range for IR. In iran they have clear skies which allows there EO and IR systems to be much more effective then they would for example in europe in Bosnia etc... They could actually be able to see passive EO/IR targets upto 25-35km away on a very clear day/night. Which would mean they don;t need thee radars on all the time.

Also this would mean the "stealth" aircraft are also more vunrable. Becuase although they maybe "immune" to radar they still can't stop EO and IR locks on the aircraft.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   
^^^^ i though Eo targeting systems used Ir and lasers to target. Not to mention that all of our AC have minimal Ir signatures as well. the ranges for these systems will be reduced. Also you can use Eo/IR jamming equipment. Not to mention that weather controld device to mess up Iran's weather.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join