|
|
Iran tests upgraded missile based on Sunburn
By: India Defence, Fars News on: 26.08.2006 [16:46 ] (4270 reads)
|
Analysts however suspect this missile is based on the Russian SS-N-22 Sunburn missile that Iran is said to have acquired via China in 2004.
|
|
(2150 bytes) [nc]
|
|
Iran tests upgraded surface-to-sea missile
Dated 26/8/2006
Iran is said to have successfully tested an upgraded, indegenious, guided surface-to-sea missile, media reports confirmed on Saturday
The missile was tested at the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman during the 'Blow of Zolfaqar' military exercises which began last Saturday.
Wargames spokesman Habib Sayari told reporters that the missile accurately hit its pre-determined targets. Sayari said that the missile has a suitable range, high shooting power and precision.
He added that the successful testing of the missile showed the strength, innovativeness, scientific and technical expertise of the country's defense forces and equipment as well as the potential and specialized skill of its experts.
Analysts however suspect this missile is based on the Russian SS-N-22 Sunburn missile that Iran is said to have acquired via China in 2004. The Sunburn missile is a Russian missile of the Soviet era and can carry a warhead of upto 300kg and is said to have a range of 100km-120kms.
http://www.india-defence.com/reports/2408
Navy Tests Coast-to-Sea Missile Successfully
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- In another phase of Iran's extensive war games codenamed 'Blow of Zolfaqar', the naval force of the Islamic Republic's army Saturday tested an optimized remote controlled coast-to-sea missile successfully.
According to FNA dispatches, the missile hit and destroyed a prespecified target in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. The operation efficiency (missile destruction capability) was reported to have been one-hundred percent.
Other reports also said that optimization of the missile has been a product of the creativity and innovation of Iranian military experts.
War games spokesman Admiral Habib Sayyari mentioned appropriate range, high striking capability and high flexibility and precision in targeting among the special features of the missile.
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8506040175
by onlyhuman on 26.08.2006 [18:44 ]
|
|
|
when will USan/Israhell attack Iran and Syria?
Like to see these bastards perished in ashes. Amen.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.08.2006 [19:10 ]
|
|
|
If Iran is able to make its own domestically produced varient of the SS-N-22 anti-ship missile, does it not seem reasonable that Iran can make its own indigenous version of the S-300p anti-air missile?
And if Iran is now making its own domestic varients of the SS-N-22 and S-300p, then doesn't it stand to reason that it is only a matter of time before Iran is making its own indigenous varients of the SS-N-25 anti-ship missile and the S-400?
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.08.2006 [19:24 ]
|
|
|
In 2004, Iran tested a radar-evading cruise missile called the Kosar.
It has near-stealth capabillities, and is able to cruise at sea-skimming heights at nearly mach-1.
Iran has an underwater anti-ship missile called the Hut.
A combined and simultaneous attack of super-sonic surface-skimming missiles, sub-sonic radar-evading missiles flying at surface-skimming levels, underwater missiles, air-to-ground missiles fired from jet aircraft, and ballistic missiles fired from the shore, should be able to overwhelm most defense systems.
I think that the USA would be wisely cautioned to not initiate aggression against the soveriegn state of Iran.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 26.08.2006 [19:32 ]
|
|
|
Information on the Kosar radar-evading cruise missile can be found here:
h ttp://www.answers.com/topic/kosar
|
by onlyhuman on 26.08.2006 [19:44 ]
|
|
|
dont scare off these bastards.Whatever happens, muslims all over is hoping the people of Republic of Iran to wipe off Israhell off the map.
God willing. Amen.
|
by vendettauk on 26.08.2006 [20:57 ]
|
|
|
as frightening as sunburn is it has long been replaced in Russian military by the "onyx" also known as super sunburn. Though Sunburn can fly 150 kilometers at Mach 2.1 1,520 mph at an average altitude of 60 feet, Onyx leaves this performance for dead. Using the same launch tubes as Sunburn, Onyx streaks along its extended 200+ kilometer flight path at a blistering Mach 2.9 2,100 mph, while hugging the ground even closer at an average altitude of only 45 feet. Onyx is 100% “Fire and Forget”, meaning that once out of the launch tube, flight management is entirely automatic, and you can forget the doomed 93,000-ton aircraft carrier sitting meekly down range, only minutes away from being converted into environmentally-friendly heat and light.
Though SS-N-25 deployment might seem like giant overkill, this is far from being the case, because Onyx differs from Sunburn in one utterly crucial way. So great is the kinetic energy at the point of impact on the target, that Onyx can sink an American aircraft carrier using only a conventional penetrating warhead. Those boffins who might doubt this should calculate the impact energy of 5,500 pounds of missile striking a carrier at a terminal velocity of 2,460 feet per second. Onyx means that Russia or China can sink American aircraft carriers at will without ever having to escalate to nuclear warfare, which gives both countries a massive strategic advantage.
I am truly pleased that Iranian scientists have re-engineered the sunburn along with most of the russian/chinese hardware they have purchased. They have probably been replacing all parts which the sellers (russia/china) can activate to defuse/detonate or divert the missile. Sadly whenever it comes to the crunch the russians always pull the rug from under their customers feet. Most of the up-to date weapons in Iraqs possession were 'neutralised' before they could be deployed. Only the dated scuds were left for action and even these had been re-0engineered by Iraqi scientists.
It may be wrongly assumed that the Iranians are gambling by showing their weapons early before any conflict in the hope that this will deter us/uk/jew attackers. I suspect Irans enemies have long known of their existance and by 'going public' hope to influence the small anti-war sections of the 'coalition of the killing'.
In the event of any hostilities breaking out the Zionist anti-human so-called state must be obliterated, only then will US/UK see sense. After all in any fight one should always attack the head first.
|
by c_sanyka on 26.08.2006 [21:01 ]
|
|
|
They should the American fleet pre-emptive, since this is the war doctrine of USA, they, the Americans would agree, n'est pas?
|
by c_sanyka on 26.08.2006 [21:02 ]
|
|
|
I wanted to say "They shoud strike the American" instead of "They should the American"
|
by LittleHelper on 26.08.2006 [22:23 ]
|
|
|
Iran's missiles are really useful against warships (or oil tankers), but there is another problem arising:
Israel has bought two german submarines of the dolphin class. They have an action range of about 4'500 km. They can dive several hundred meters below surface. They can be equipped with nuclear missiles, which can be fired from deep below the surface.
In my view, Israel will deploy those submarines, fully weaponized cruizing in the Gulf of Oman, in front of Iran's coasts, one of them will be there all the times, just lurking, just marking israeli presence and alertness.
Submarines of the dolphin class cannot be detected easily, as they have a very silent drive based on electric motors. Electric energy for the drive is generated inside fuel cells, where hydrogen and oxygen react electrochemically, thus generating electric energy very efficiently and silently.
But there is one easy way to detect those submarines: Their motors generate strong alternating magnetic fields, which can be detected from distance by very sensitive magnetic sensors like flux gates and SQUIDs.
It is also possible to manufacture floating anti-submarine mines with an
initiator based on magnetic field sensing. Iran should be aware of this
rising threat and take corresponding measures of precaution.
link: ht tp://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=12323
|
by Crack_Smoke_Republican on 26.08.2006 [23:26 ]
|
|
|
the Neo-Con balls on Bush to shrink a little bit.
|
by Neyaz on 26.08.2006 [23:35 ]
|
|
|
www.irandefence.net , and as reminder to ALL, those who BELIEVE in JUCHE=SELF-RELIANCE, the SKIES are the LIMIT.
Long live JUCHE>>>>>>>>>and the FATHER of JUCHE.
|
by gmmonko on 26.08.2006 [23:36 ]
|
|
|
I hope the sink as many of those American air carrieres as possible. American forces fear nothing more than armed fights. They will die in thousands, and if the Bush Administration will introduce the draft the American people will sweep the off.
|
by CANUKISTAN_VIEW on 27.08.2006 [01:13 ]
|
|
|
If ISRAHELL DEFENSE SYSTEMS COULD NOT STOP ONE SINGLE ROCKET OUT OF 3.400 FIRED BY HEZBOLLAH how in hell they will be able to stop any of those missiles with Mach>1 never mind latest technology!
What happened to the USA Patriots delivered to Israhell to protect themselves from Iraqis'scud? Were they off during the entire Lebanese war? PERHAPS IT WAS JUST ANOTHER SCARY SCAM OF THESE LIARS!
WHAT IS THE MOST INTERESTING FACT TO NOTICE is that powerful armas and military systems ARE MADE BY THE EMERGING COUNTRIES AND THEY SHARE THEIR TECHNOLOGY AND SUPPLIES WITH OTHER EMERGING COUNTRIES! So the human race will be saved this time from those new emerging economic and military powers. So Indonesia, Latin America, Africa, Middle East, WILL NEVER DEPEND AGAIN FROM TRAITOR COUNTRIES LIKE WESTERN EUROPE AND THE USA!
We must never forget that the former Soviet Union and China helped to liberate many countries from former western europe empires and USA domination! So today, the post-cold war era, many thing have been reversed but Russia is still playing a most crucial rol in preventing a new looting of the world by the USA and Western Europe. I hope Rusia, Iran, China, Pakistan, India, Korea WILL STAND TOGETHER AGAINST THE SIONIST-NAZI FORCES BEHIND GLOBALIZATION AND ALL THE TERRORIST SELF=MADE ATTACKS.
PLEASE POST THIS ARTICLE- it shows the thinking of this sionist-nazi bastards for global domination:
- The use of force: Western military power is in crisis!!!
The Israeli military failed against Hezbollah, American and British forces are bogged down in Iraq, NATO is under intense pressure in Afghanistan and France is deeply concerned about its forthcoming involvement in southern Lebanon. Why are the best armies in the world in difficulty against adversaries that 19th-century colonial officers would have defeated?
Fear of risk is the cancer in Europe's security effort. Most Europeans can neither afford advanced equipment nor sufficient numbers of professional personnel. Lack of either increases the risk to those who are deployed. The result? Euro-isolationism, whereby the institutional organization of security is talked up, and operational realism talked down.
The British and French, Europe's only two serious security actors, are rightly wary of such pretense. If Europe is to become a serious security actor, Europeans must invest properly in their militaries. That will mean giving their militaries more people with the right equipment. If not, they should scrap their armed forces and spend the money elsewhere.
The crisis in Western military power ultimately reflects the failure by leaders to understand the use of such power in a fractured world. As such it is a crisis in leadership. Put simply, Western military power must be sharper at the point of contact with the likes of the Taliban and Hezbollah, and yet deeper if it is thereafter to create the security space in which peace can truly be established.
First, Western militaries need more special forces, able to fight anyone on any terms.
Second, the West needs a larger pool of forces capable of creating the security space in which reconstruction can take place.
Third, much better synergies are required between armed forces and civilian agencies and resources to ensure that Western armed forces only visit once.
Finally, Americans and Europeans need to forge much stronger political links with regional powers through NATO and the European Union to legitimize and reinforce the Western presence.
Young Western men and women in foreign fields face daily the consequences of the West's military crisis. It is time their political leaders recognized this.
Julian Lindley-French is a senior scholar of the Center for Applied Policy, University of Munich.
NYON, Switzerland The Israeli military failed against Hezbollah, American and British forces are bogged down in Iraq, NATO is under intense pressure in Afghanistan and France is deeply concerned about its forthcoming involvement in southern Lebanon. Why are the best armies in the world in difficulty against adversaries that 19th-century colonial officers would have defeated?
The American military way is partly responsible. Given the big power challenges now posed by Russia and China, the Americans are right to pursue military supremacy in an instable world. The big U.S. military idea, however, is to put ever greater distance between the force and the enemy. As such, U.S. armed forces are unsurpassed in the use of firepower and manoeuver. But many of the forces that Western militaries currently face can only be defeated by close engagement.
Israel's recent operation in southern Lebanon is a case in point. The military forces of Israel, America's closest client state, receive a great deal of U.S. equipment. Given the complexity of advanced American military equipment, armed forces that use it tend to have to fight the American way.
Moreover, the American emphasis on expensive technological solutions also demands expensive professional forces and only the Americans have a defense budget that can both support high levels of advanced equipment and reasonably large numbers of full-time soldiers.
America's allies have to make a difficult choice between equipment and forces. Therefore, most allies have armed forces with not a lot of anyone, armed with not much of anything. Consequently, where the military capability exists, the military capacity does not - something the British, Dutch and Canadians know all too well as they struggle to subdue the Taliban in southern Afghanistan.
Confusion between conflicting Western values also leads countries to put the wrong forces in the wrong places with the wrong objectives. The French have every reason to be concerned about the quality and capability of a beefed-up UN force in southern Lebanon, given the daunting mission ahead and the gap between what such a force could achieve and what it is being asked to achieve.
Risk is also a problem. Israel has been much criticized for using excessive force in trying to defeat Hezbollah. In fact, military logic would have suggested not only a far more ruthless use of military force to defeat such an enemy, but a very different use. Israel had the power, but used it in the wrong way.
The Israeli military was put in an untenable position: It was not permitted to take risks with its personnel, and it had the wrong equipment, training and way of doing things to win such a conflict. Consequently, Israel could only attack Hezbollah indirectly, increasing the risk to Lebanese civilians and decreasing any chance of success.
Fear of risk is the cancer in Europe's security effort. Most Europeans can neither afford advanced equipment nor sufficient numbers of professional personnel. Lack of either increases the risk to those who are deployed. The result? Euro-isolationism, whereby the institutional organization of security is talked up, and operational realism talked down.
h ttp://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/25/opinion/edfrench.php
IN OTHER WORDS - USA and western europe MUST BE MORE BRUTAL - MUST BE WILLING TO GET HIS TROOPS KILLED IN ORDER TO " STABILIZE THE WORLS" meaning looting the energy resources and base metals and water and all other commodities THEY JUST DO NOT HAVE! The war on terrorism is the excuse to go around the world dominating! THIS IS WHY ALL THESE TERROR ATTACKS END UP BEING SELF-MADE OR QUITE CONTROVERSIAL TO SAY THE LEAST.
GREAT IRANIAN PEOPLE - keep up the excellent work! And BTW I read the president letters and hos blog - GREAT GREAT HUMAN BEING! and thanks for sharing wonderful thoghts and historical facts.
CHEERS FROM CANADA - PEACE PEACE
|
by Don Gaucho Americanus on 27.08.2006 [05:43 ]
|
|
|
"This means that most large navy ships have now become superfluous, as way too vulnerable", wrote the sealion.
Long ago, the gaucho wrote that he hoped the Usans would not learn the lesson taught in Malvinas and that the Iranians are far too likely to reinforce before we Southerns can rebuild or navy: the Usandal navy is utterly obsolete.
And once again, the gaucho gives his classification of vessels in 21st naval warfare:
1. underwater ships
2. surface-skimming ships
3. artificial reef ships
|
by TerraHertz on 27.08.2006 [09:36 ]
|
|
|
@Don Gaucho
You forgot 'hostage ships'.
For example: Iran sinks one US warship every five minutes, starting with smaller, non-nuclear ones. At the same time, they broadcast a demand:
"All US/UK warships in the Gulf will surrender, and sail to our port x, where crews will hand over the ships undamaged, and become prisoners of war." Until this demand is accepted, we will continue to sink one ship every five minutes."
The last thing Iran wants to do, is blow up nuclear powered ships on their back doorstep. Bad for the health.
Yes, I agree, warships are obsolete. As are tanks.
I'm hoping the USA does NOT figure this out until too late. It will be satisfying to watch them learn the lesson by practical demonstration.
Incidentally, 'surface skimming' and 'underwater ships' are both still vulnerable to missiles. So they don't escape.
|
by EnglishWorkingclassDissident. on 27.08.2006 [12:12 ]
|
|
|
What a truly exquisite scenario.........thats made my sunday, thank you TH.
|
by Don Gaucho Americanus on 27.08.2006 [12:41 ]
|
|
|
Good one, that hostage ship idea. Really good one.
I disagree, though, on tanks being obsolete. It is like saying "warships are obsolete". TAnks are esential. I do agree that MBTs like the Abrams and the Merkava are, they are the land equivalent of supercarriers: huge, slow, torpid, conspicuous... and expensive. The land equivalent of underwater ships, i.e. stealthy armored car (low profile, electric transmission, emission controlled) ambushers-hunters, as well as the land-skimming equivalent (lightly-armored, all-teeth-no-bullshit fast armor with heavy directed and OVH fire; light & medium, tanks, tankettes, IFV, armored howitzers and mortars, missile launchers, patrol and scout cars, hovercraft and helicopters, &c.) can win. And cf. soviet doctrine: only mechinf can survive and fight in NQB conditions! But they must either hide and wait and kill, or move fast and always be there to truly support the foot soldier and not try to replace it.
Both in the land as in the water, it is the heavy invulnerable armor mentality that gives you overvalued, expensive giant coffins fielded in small numbers like the supercarrier and the Stryker, that has no place in modern warfare.
|
by ZAM on 27.08.2006 [14:57 ]
|
|
|
Those subs have the S-Club System, me think
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 27.08.2006 [16:42 ]
|
|
|
Saw another article on this site that states that Iran has missiles that fire from under the water towards surface ships.
h ttp://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/100313
That is presumably different than the Iranian Hut missile which acts like a torpedo.
So, Iran has a crusie missile that can be fired from submarines.
Iran has a new anti-ship missile that resembles the SS-N-22.
Iran has an underwater missile that resembles a torpedo.
Iran has a radar evading missile.
And many others.
If Iran can fire hundreds of these at once, the US naval defense systems will be overwhelmed.
Thank God for that.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 27.08.2006 [17:02 ]
|
|
|
I wish Iran would develop its ability to knock out US sattelites.
US GPS navigation and GPS weapons would become useless.
That seems like an easy thing to do.
Sattelites have a predictable course.
Furthermore, you don't need a direct hit.
If you can hit anywhere from 100 meters in front of the sattelite, or 50 meters beside the sattelite, or 10 meters behind the sattelite, you should be able to knock it out.
That gives you a 110 meter by 100 meter area target to hit. Firing 10 or 20 missiles at such a large target should give a good probability of hitting it.
|
by phil_s6 on 27.08.2006 [18:13 ]
|
|
|
it is only a matter of time now before America/Isarel and any other suckers that hang onto the imperialistic coat tails of US/Israel are out gunned out manouvered and out manned in the Middle East.
The sands they are a changing :) The days of pure USRael hegemony are sinking faster than the dollar.
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
