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 would use 'smart' bomb on enemies

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Why is this even news? Like we don't use smart bombs against our enemies? In the world of real politik its tic for tack.




posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:43 AM
link   
I'm sorry, Iran's air force can't hold a candle in the wind to USA. We have the best planes in the world, and some of the best pilots (Israel's pilots are insanely good). If, in fact, the Iranians are using F-4's and F-5's to fight their air battles, they'd just be throwing money/equipment away.

For those who aren't super familiar with Fighter Jets/Bombers, pitting an F-4 against an F-16 or F-22 would be about the equivilent of trying to win the Daytona 500 on a John Deer lawn mower. If Iran scrambled their air force, either us, or Israel would turn them into smoking holes in the ground long before they got in range to do any real damage.

Unless you're in the military, and have a security clearance and a need to know, you have NO CLUE what the United States Air Force has in its arsenal....trust me on this one.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Iranian air force is a joke. Even with pretty good outdated american equipment, they would be absolutely decimated. Our ground troops are in Iraq yes, but our planes and navy are ready to go. Iran would be wiped up very quickly without the US having to put one boot on the ground there.
Of course you are correct princeofpeace.What continues to surprise me is even after the demonstrated lethality of the US airforce and navy in desert storm and iraq some posters here still dont get it.I laugh everytime anyone here talks about how formidable the iranian toys are!In reality all if not most of iranian military as well as civilian infrastruture would be wiped out within a week.Just like iraq's in desert storm.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Well if it is that simple, and Iran is GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY, than why has nothing happened hmmm??

In any case, if Iran has developed its own fighter, they should start selling it in Central and southeast asia for an added revenue source. Of course doing so would practically be giving it to the US for an engineering study, but might as well make some extra income on the side.

Either that or they could replace their old fleet and sell those off to poorer countries.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to west coast:

heres a link that shows some there hardware
www.iranmilitaryforum.com...

one iran has tor m1 air deffence which can blow cruise missiles and jets out the sky they also have a intergrated air deffence with sa7s and more the kosar anti ship missile they have or the raad anti ship they also have chiniese cruise missiles the silkworm and have copyied them to make there own.
also the noor cruise missile also the Missagh-2 man pad anit air weapon.
also to get the sa19 air deffence weapon,iran has a new stealth drone.

b2s oh yes them yea they can do damage but iran does have eyes in the sky and possibly no were these ducks are sitting all they would need is a strike group or airstrike to wipe them out on the ground.
iran has made there own jets and is developing advance jets.
f22 there isnt many in the region most planes used would be the f18 from carriers or f16.15s.

iran knows were america is if there is a escalation iran knows were americas airfields and ships are so they could hit back hard.
take pakistan for example a nuclear power that relies so much on america for weapons iran is doing perfectly without americas halp infact they are making there own advanced weapons be sure to check out this link

www.iranmilitaryforum.com...



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Iraq's SAMs:

ZSU-57-2 SPAAA (Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
ZSU-23-4 Shilka SPAAA (Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
NIIP\Vympel 2K12 "Kub" SA-6a Gainful Self-Propelled SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
Antey 9K33M Osa-AK SA-8b Gecko Self-Propelled SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
Nudelman 9K31 "Strela-1" SA-9 Gaskin Self-Propelled SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
ZRK-BD 9K35 "Strela-10" SA-13 Gopher Self-Propelled SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
AMX-30 Roland 2 Self-Propelled SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
Lavochkin OKB S-75 Dvina SA-2 Guidline SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
Isayev S-125M "Neva-M" SA-3b Goa SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
Roland 2 SAM (Surface-To-Air Missile) Launcher
ZPU-1 14.5 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
ZPU-2 14.5 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
ZPU-4 14.5 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
ZU-23-2 23 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
M1939 37 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
S-60 57 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
S-60 Twin 57 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)
KS-19 100 mm Towed AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery)

Iran's SAMs:
I-Hawk (Improved version of the original US Hawk system)
Tigercat
SA-2 Guideline / Sayyad-1 (copy of the SA-2 Guideline under the name of Sayyad-1 & Sayyad-1A)
SA-3 Goa / Pechora-2A (Russian upgrade of the basic SA-3)
SA-5 Gammon / Ghareh (copy of the SA-5 Gammon with 250 km range)
SA-6 Gainful / Kub
SA-11 Gadfly / Buk-M1 (Citation Needed)
S-300 (aka SA-10) [1] [2]
SA-15 Gauntlet / Tor-M1
Shahab Thaqeb (copy of the Chinese FM-80 Feimeng system)

Iraq was unable to down many (if any) of our planes using their SAM sites. Judging by these lists, I don't think Iran will fare much better.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Whatever Iran Has, advanced or not, it's not enough to destroy multiple carrier groups. even if they destroy 1 group, they could have 10 more to deal with... i don't think the us would send more than 5 groups.

Frist strike from the US would be communications, military & civilian power, AA, and air bases. The country would become very unstable. Iran's attack window is very small. I'm sure they could inflict some losses on the us side giving them a day of popularity on the news, but after that they have no chance.

Also need to factor in US would be making attack runs from land bases from europe and middle east while multiple carrier groups are going at it.

this is why these countries attempt to develop nuclear weapons. It's really the only option against the US.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 12:23 PM
link   
That this is even a news story is absurd.

This is a conventional guided bomb, a staple munition for just about every military on the planet.

What's the issue?



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by manzoor
reply to west coast:

b2s oh yes them yea they can do damage but iran does have eyes in the sky and possibly no were these ducks are sitting all they would need is a strike group or airstrike to wipe them out on the ground.


what eyes in the sky? Tell me how the iranian military is going to detect at B2 on a night run before they let a payload go off that has the ability to strike 16 targets at once?

It's not radar. b2's are only SLIGHTLY visible on radar when they drop bombs, then they go black again when the bomb doors close. Radar is useless against stealth. Tests show they when stealth gets detected, its always too late at that point. An you wount see them in the sky, they only run night missions with them

Do you really think the US would not move f22's into the area if something happened?



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by psperos

Originally posted by manzoor
reply to west coast:

b2s oh yes them yea they can do damage but iran does have eyes in the sky and possibly no were these ducks are sitting all they would need is a strike group or airstrike to wipe them out on the ground.


what eyes in the sky? Tell me how the iranian military is going to detect at B2 on a night run before they let a payload go off that has the ability to strike 16 targets at once?

It's not radar. b2's are only SLIGHTLY visible on radar when they drop bombs, then they go black again when the bomb doors close. Radar is useless against stealth. Tests show they when stealth gets detected, its always too late at that point. An you wount see them in the sky, they only run night missions with them

Do you really think the US would not move f22's into the area if something happened?



i said on the ground read on the ground not the air eyes in the sky hmmm the russians will be willing to give there allies and arms buyer some intel im sure of that and saddams aa remeber the 1st gulf war wasnt half his army wiped out so the numbers of his air deffence network would off been far less america launching first strikes dont forget iran can launch counter attacks there army is spread and heavily trenched in the boarders look at israel war on hezbollah they did nothing just made hezbollah stronger you can do alot just by digging in.

im not saying iran will win the war what im saying america will make a huge mistake they will loose alot iran will give them a run for there money iraqs army had no morale maybe because of the regime



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

The only anti-missile system I was aware of was THEL, which was cancelled in 2004. It worked pretty well, by all accounts, but for whatever reason it was shelved. So I doubt you'll be finding it on any carriers.



They have anti missile systems which include both missles and high rpm gattling guns, which have proven very effective.



The NIMITZ-class self-defense measures include: missiles, guns, and electronic warfare. The NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System is comprised of two launchers with eight missiles each. Sea Sparrow is a radar-guided, short-to-medium range missile capable of engaging aircraft and cruise missiles. NIMITZ-class also has Close-In Weapon System mounts for short range defense against aircraft or missiles. Each mount has its own search and track radar, and a six-barrel, 20-millimeter Gatling gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds per minute

Source


I also read somewhere that a new faster gun is or was under concideration that allegedly could fire as high as 10K per minute.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by manzoor
reply to west coast:
one iran has tor m1 air deffence which can blow cruise missiles and jets out the sky


Which is speculation at best. Has this theory ever been put to the test Mr. manzoor? If so, what was its success/failure rate?


they also have a intergrated air deffence with sa7s and more the kosar anti ship missile they have or the raad anti ship they also have chiniese cruise missiles the silkworm and have copyied them to make there own.
also the noor cruise missile also the Missagh-2 man pad anit air weapon.
also to get the sa19 air deffence weapon,iran has a new stealth drone.


Talk about run on sentences... I understand, Iran is infallible..



b2s oh yes them yea they can do damage but iran does have eyes in the sky and possibly no were these ducks are sitting all they would need is a strike group or airstrike to wipe them out on the ground.
iran has made there own jets and is developing advance jets.
f22 there isnt many in the region most planes used would be the f18 from carriers or f16.15s.


One thing about the B2s Mr.manzoor is that they are stationed mainly in the US, There main base is in Whitmans airforce base missouri, which is smack dab in the middle of the US. I believe the longest combat mission ever recorded for a b2 was well over 40 hours straight. I dont see Iran attacking missouri Mr.Manzoor.
that would definitely be grounds for nuclear strikes on Tehran.



iran knows were america is if there is a escalation iran knows were americas airfields and ships are so they could hit back hard.
take pakistan for example a nuclear power that relies so much on america for weapons iran is doing perfectly without americas halp infact they are making there own advanced weapons be sure to check out this link


I think how Mr.jereselah put it is perfect. Before GWI (and even the second GWW) the talk was about how we would lose fighters left and right to Iraqi SAM sites, how we were 'doomed' because russia supplied the Iraqi military with tons of russian hardware just to fight the americans...we were bound to get a swift kick in the butt, and yada yada yada.. What people here are doing is underestimating the richest, most powerful country, in the world. Do not underestimate the worlds sole superpowers ability to wage war.

And yes, Iran has achieved alot considering its isolation from the rest of the world, you show me those sites of Iranian weaponry, but keep this in mind, Irans base salary for military spending is 5 billion dollars, and they have all of that? Now, try and wrap your mind around what a $500B, to nearly $600B defense budget has in terms of weapons.
Go to DARPAs webiste and snoop around to see what the United states defense department is working on to keep the US ahead of everyone else, you will find, in these regards, that the US is second to none.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
haha americas ability to wage war what from what i see its a mess in iraq they cant even control the green zone so much for the worlds super power


youtube.com...

heres a link to the tor m1 and there are others.
thinking us would attackiran dont think so america has to much at stake vunrable to a counter attack and hell breaking loose in the mid east

yea 500billion alot but in iraq that money doesnt seem to do much us tech destroyed by a $20 ied so much for a world super power untouchable

[edit on 27-8-2007 by manzoor]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by stumason

The only anti-missile system I was aware of was THEL, which was cancelled in 2004. It worked pretty well, by all accounts, but for whatever reason it was shelved. So I doubt you'll be finding it on any carriers.



They have anti missile systems which include both missles and high rpm gattling guns, which have proven very effective.



The NIMITZ-class self-defense measures include: missiles, guns, and electronic warfare. The NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System is comprised of two launchers with eight missiles each. Sea Sparrow is a radar-guided, short-to-medium range missile capable of engaging aircraft and cruise missiles. NIMITZ-class also has Close-In Weapon System mounts for short range defense against aircraft or missiles. Each mount has its own search and track radar, and a six-barrel, 20-millimeter Gatling gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds per minute

Source


I also read somewhere that a new faster gun is or was under concideration that allegedly could fire as high as 10K per minute.


I was talking about lasers in response to West Coast saying they probably had some on their carriers. Nice way to quote out of context, Shots.

I know that other CIWS systems are fully operational, as they have been for the best part of 30 years. They, unfortunately, have flaws anyway and are also incapable of intercepting a missile doing Mach 3 or whatever it is the Sunburn is claimed of doing.

[edit on 27/8/07 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Phalanx is being replaced/complimented with SEARam to counter supersonic threats... Thanks Raytheon.

Phalanx is cool, but does not have the range to deal with supersonic cruise missiles... cannot engage and if it does the KE of the missile will still hit the ship.

www.raytheon.com...



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by psperos
It's not radar. b2's are only SLIGHTLY visible on radar when they drop bombs, then they go black again when the bomb doors close. Radar is useless against stealth. Tests show they when stealth gets detected, its always too late at that point. An you wount see them in the sky, they only run night missions with them


That's not entirely true.

LW Radar (such as a system the Russians employ) can see stealth aircraft fine. what it lacks is targeting precision enough for SAM's. It could, however, give enough information for an intercept, but I doubt Iranian aircraft will be able to achieve this, although, you never know....

Also, new developments in a technology called CELLDAR uses the passive radio waves from cell towers and TV broadcast stations. Again, I doubt Iran has much in the way of anything close to this. There are only a few countries working on this. UK, US, Germany and China spring to mind, although Russia probably has as well.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
I was talking about lasers in response to West Coast saying they probably had some on their carriers. Nice way to quote out of context, Shots.

I know that other CIWS systems are fully operational, as they have been for the best part of 30 years. They, unfortunately, have flaws anyway and are also incapable of intercepting a missile doing Mach 3 or whatever it is the Sunburn is claimed of doing.


SEARam can engage and destroy multiple incoming\ supersoinc threats at a safe distance... there are no ship based laser interceptors unless they are a secret that you cannot see when looking at the ships as I see them all of the time up close.

Part of the reason we are playing "carrier group go round" in the Gulf is to fit our ships with SEARam.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by manzoor
haha americas ability to wage war what from what i see its a mess in iraq they cant even control the green zone so much for the worlds super power


Well Mr.manzoor. Your type tends to cherry pick such scenarios to fit your view/agenda. 3 weeks, 3 weeks is all that it took to bring the Iraqi military to its knees. And just before you say Iraq was in shambles, it was provided with some decent russian equipment, some russian generals were quoted as saying "the americans will be slaughtered in baghdad". That wasnt the case.



heres a link to the tor m1 and there are others.
thinking us would attackiran dont think so america has to much at stake vunrable to a counter attack and hell breaking loose in the mid east


And how would such a device fair against a defense mechanism that has the speed of light on its side?




yea 500billion alot but in iraq that money doesnt seem to do much us tech destroyed by a $20 ied so much for a world super power untouchable


You have no argument still, good bye Mr. monzoor.

[edit on 27-8-2007 by West Coast]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie
Phalanx is being replaced/complimented with SEARam to counter supersonic threats... Thanks Raytheon.


That's cool. when do they hope to get it into production? Didn't say on there and my other searches don't appear to say.


Originally posted by Pootie
Phalanx is cool, but does not have the range to deal with supersonic cruise missiles... cannot engage and if it does the KE of the missile will still hit the ship.
www.raytheon.com...


Apparently, SeaRAM has it's drawbacks as well. A limited kill radius and an inability to engage erratically moving missiles being two big ones'.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Apparently, SeaRAM has it's drawbacks as well. A limited kill radius and an inability to engage erratically moving missiles being two big ones'.


1. It is already being deployed/is deployed.
2. It is a rolling airframe missile that is far more agile than the cruise missiles it is engaging. It does not teed to score a direct hit because of the blast radius.
3. Its can hit anything it can acquire in an 18Km radius.

the pop up manuver that the Oniks/Sunburn/Mosquit/Brahmos use is not effective in avoiding SEAram... The "pop up" occurs over miles and though "violent and erratic" for a cruise missile going mach 3, it is not for an AIM-9x missile.

Remember, the AIM-9x is used all of the time to take out supersonic fighter jets WITHOUT the assistance/early detection of AEGIS.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join