|
|
Iran: Defense Missile System more Advanced than S-300 is Underway
By: cosmo on: 09.02.2010 [01:36 ] (808 reads)
|
This was announced by Iran many months ago, the capacity to produce the equivalent of the S300 system.
Now its a fact.
|
|
(1553 bytes) [c]
|
|
http://www.almanar.com.lb/NewsSite/NewsDetails.aspx?id=123463&language=en
Iran: Defense Missile System more Advanced than S-300 is Underway
08/02/2010 Iran announced on Monday it is manufacturing a home-built air defense missile system which would be better than the Russian S-300, which has been ordered by Tehran but yet to be delivered by Moscow.
"Today, we are building all our air defense weapons by ourselves ... the only thing we wanted to import was the Russian S-300 which so far they have not delivered for some unacceptable reasons," senior air force commander Heshmatollah Kasiri was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.
"But our air defense experts and scientists found a way and in very near future we will produce an air defense system which has the capabilities of the Russian S-300 or even more."
Kasiri's comments come after Iran in late November threatened to take legal action against Russia if it fails to honor a deal to supply Tehran with the S-300, an advanced air defense missile system. Russia, Tehran's sole ally among world powers, has so far not delivered the system, in a delay which Iranian officials blame on growing pressure on Moscow from Washington and Iran's arch-foe Israel.
Under the contract, Russia would sell Iran five batteries of S-300PMU1 missiles for around 800 million dollars (530 million euros), Interfax reported. The S-300PMU1 — codenamed the SA-20 Gargoyle by NATO — is a mobile land-based system designed to shoot down aircraft and cruise missiles.
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 09.02.2010 [13:20 ]
|
|
|
Until I saw Hizbollah give Israhell a bloody nose in the summer of 2006.
That was done with Syrian and Iranian help, I'm sure.
Now, I believe that Iran can back up this claim about producing an advanced SAM system.
|
by Syrian on 09.02.2010 [13:58 ]
|
|
|
Undersell Russia.
Send Russian arms suppliers bankrupt.
|
by Ghengis on 09.02.2010 [18:14 ]
|
|
|
There are some good electronic engineers in Iran, and the Russian military engineering is not that advanced any more..., but after looking at the shown samples of the recent Iranian military hardware, I think it is a complete BS. What Iran produces is not simply outdated, it does not look serious at all, it is of another class than the weapons of a serious army. Iran simply does not have the industrial might and the war experience to deliver it. I do not think that their propaganda statements would help, CIA surely knows what they really have and what they are able to do.
Hisbollah was bombarding Israel with the rockets that Russians initially developed in 1930's. Not much of a technology, but a good evidence of Israeli weakness. Hisbollah faced not the modern professional army, but incompetent Israeli commanders and cowardly, poorly trained and demoralized Israeli army. If they were attacked by the States, in an open all-out war they wouldn't stand a chance.
If Iran is attacked by the West, its existing military technology would not help them much. It seems most of it just the amateruish vaporwave that would not perform well in the conditions of the modern war.
|
by cosmo on 09.02.2010 [18:23 ]
|
|
|
some do know better! Believe me.
|
by Deathtodubya on 09.02.2010 [19:05 ]
|
|
|
Despite all the bravado here about how Iran has all these surprises and will sink US carriers, blow up bases, shoot down hundreds of aircraft etc. and that the US is feeble and poor quality with old equipment and so on, the harsh reality is that if there's an aerial bombardment, there's little Iran can do to defend itself.
The US is NOT some feeble force in a CONVENTIONAL WAR. True, their wars of occupation have worn out already aging equipment and their cost and different priorities have meant that the US has not been able to upgrade or replace it's elderly weapons, but the bitter truth is that the even the old weapon systems they have(along with the few new ones) are still more than enough to defeat ANYONE in a conventional war, even Russia which has it's advanced weapons as only prototypes or just a handful of examples.
The US has THOUSANDS of cruise missiles, a dozen carriers, thousands of aircraft etc. The US may not have the stomach or quality for real 'man to man' warfare, BUT THEY DO NOT NEED TO!!! They have ALWAYS relied on brute strength of aircraft, artillery, naval fleets to do the work their cowardly troops could not do. This is how they will 'fight' against Iran too.
They will sit their carriers out of range of any Iranian missiles and just methodically blast targets. First with cruise missiles to take out air defenses, radars etc. then aircraft to blast anti-shipping missiles, naval forces, bases individual vehicles etc. Iran will use up it's limited air defense arsenal trying to fend off the cruise missiles and aircraft(which will fly too high for effective interception as happened in Serbia), and then be at the mercy of bomber aircraft until they give in or their capabilities for defense are destroyed anyway.
The US will not do a land invasion because they'll feel that it would be enough to destroy the Iranian military for the immediate future, and if Iran tries to rebuild, they'll just be bombed later.
THE ONLY THING IRAN CAN DO IS TRY AND GOAD THE US INTO A LAND ATTACK. They'll still lose conventionally, but they'd really tear up an invasion and occupying force and would eventually 'win'. This goading would have to be full on, with a full Shia uprising in Iraq, and real support for the Taliban in Afghanistan, along with attacks against Israhell. In fact it's Israhell that is the biggest draw to get the US to invade Iran. If Iran can damage Israeli interests by actively helping and arming the Palestinians, then it would be more effective than blowing up a US base in Iraq.
|
by flashball2 on 09.02.2010 [19:48 ]
|
|
|
By 2012 an Iranian colony will land on Mars.
|
by honeycomb42 on 09.02.2010 [20:38 ]
|
|
|
I think Iran is showing signs of desperation. As another article on this site explains US is building huge penetration bombs that will cause devastating casualties. Stealth B2s will deliver them and at the moment Iran is a sitting duck.
I cant believe Obama has turned into such a stooge of the Pentagon and Israel.
|
by gmmonko on 09.02.2010 [23:51 ]
|
|
|
...if this story is true stop the stupid war rhetoric! No rocket defense system on Earth stand alone or combined could fend off a massive cruise missile attack of 5000-10.000 missiles.
|
by cosmo on 10.02.2010 [07:16 ]
|
|
|
Iraq was bombed into oblivence before it was attacked. Fact
A simple question, why didn`t the ziowest attack Iran and has been zioBarking for the past years if Iran is just another walk over?
In my opinion, Iran has nuclar weapons bought from the USSR days, thus they don`t need to produce them.
Further, Iran bought a lot of know how, if memories are still fresh,
after the fall of the USSR when many or most technicians became unemployed.
If the oligarchs could buy most of the Russian industry for a billion ziogreenbacks then, Iran had the resources to satisfy its needs after the lessons it experienced during the Iraq war, which its did.
The outcome of any war with Iran will be the Total Devastation of the middle east Including the gullible rogue zioentity.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [12:03 ]
|
|
|
I'm sorry to disagree with you Deathtodubya, gengish.
Iran produces great weapons systems. There's absolutely no "vaporware". It will take them a long time to match the capabilities of the S-300 but the fact that you can doubt that they're working on it is hilarious to me.
Keep doubting guys. Just don't be shocked when all that is left of the US military in the middle east is a smouldering mess. The USA can launch as many cruise missile P.O.S Mach 0.5 it wants. The platforms it launches them from would be non-existent by the time the war starts — they'll be at the bottom of the gulf.
Its easy enough to launch.
Its not as easy to shoot down.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [12:12 ]
|
|
|
>Hisbollah was bombarding Israel with the rockets that Russians initially developed in 1930's.
They call them katyushas but the missiles were all of hezbollah's junk. The bombardment was meant to be a reprisal attack, not a military strike. In that sense it was successful, more IsraHellis left israel or died as a consequence than lebanese when you sum these two. Hezbollah only used a small portion of Iranian missiles, far superior to their messy cache.
They also sunk a boat using a Chinese cruise-missile, possibly sourced from Iran or Syria.
>Hisbollah faced not the modern professional army, but incompetent Israeli commanders and cowardly, poorly trained and demoralized Israeli army.
No, they faced an army far more powerful than that of the US. They destroyed the "Golan-brigades", they demolished israHelli trash armor which is virtually identical to the M1A2. They shot down a few F-16s, helicopters and sunk boats.
This is all from a military force of 2000 people, LOL.
YOU THINK AMERICAN FLOATING COFFINS CAN STAND A CHANCE AGAINST IRAN? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Please, tell me another good joke.
|
by djandjolik on 10.02.2010 [12:16 ]
|
|
|
and can openly invited and provided "very attractive stipent" to any good Russian Rocket Scientist or Nuclear Engineer from Pakistan to the University seminar in Iran as well as to a closed seminar on the subject of "How to..." as well as buying a handfull of machine tools and selectively providing contract job to Chinese or Russian machinist to train Iranian machinist at the machine shops, to make anything deem important.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [12:16 ]
|
|
|
People please, try and THINK. Cosmo seems to be able to do that perfectly.
|
by djandjolik on 10.02.2010 [12:28 ]
|
|
|
was shot by burning solid rocket propelled every one (1) minute continuously without stopping from US Navy ships for 167 hours or roughly 7 days continously Bhaaaahhhhhhhh come on??? those ships deck will be burned down completely.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 10.02.2010 [12:34 ]
|
|
|
quote:
". . . but after looking at the shown samples of the recent Iranian military hardware,"
I'd like to see those samples too. Is there a link to them?
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 10.02.2010 [12:39 ]
|
|
|
quote:
"Further, Iran bought a lot of know how, if memories are still fresh,
after the fall of the USSR when many or most technicians became unemployed."
That's a fact.
I know that Russian scientists were employed in Iran for a while.
I also know that Iranian students were studying in Russia for a while.
There might still be such exchanges, though I'm not certain of that.
As for Iran purchasing "know how," it wasn't just from Russia, you'll be glad to know.
Iran even clandestinely purchased technology from the Germany, Japan, and other places.
|
by Deathtodubya on 10.02.2010 [13:46 ]
|
|
|
Sorry Syrian but you are deluded. The US will not lose a single carrier. You like many seem to think that somehow Iran will fire all these missiles and the US will obligingly sit on it's arse and wait until they hit their targets.
News for you, Iran has fuck all. A few prototypes of reverse engineered 1960's US aircraft and a few short range anti-ship and anti-air missiles.
The US will sit out of the range of these missiles and just fire off cruise missiles from 1000 km away and obliterate what little Iran has.
Don't take the fact that they haven't done anything to Iran yet as weakness. They know that Iran is no real threat and has no nukes and is not even close to getting them. They can bide their time, trying to overthrow or destabilise the regime, and THIS is what they want. They don't want to bomb if they don't have to because it would strengthen the rulers of Iran.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [13:55 ]
|
|
|
Sorry, I like you but I had to say it.
The US will lose its entire fleet if it gets into a war with Iran.
>News for you, Iran has fuck all.
I'm wouldn't even going to bother reading the rest of your post after reading this, except I will because I know you mean well.
>Don't take the fact that they haven't done anything to Iran yet as weakness. They know that Iran is no real threat and has no nukes and is not even close to getting them. They can bide their time, trying to overthrow or destabilise the regime, and THIS is what they want. They don't want to bomb if they don't have to because it would strengthen the rulers of Iran.
They haven't done anything because they failed in Iraq. Their army is a joke.
Anyway, when you've come back and backed up your bile.
djandjolik understands this, why don't you?
|
by cosmo on 10.02.2010 [13:55 ]
|
|
|
Syrian thanks for the observation.
Iranian-Shi'ite, in 1989 the window of opportuniy opened with the fall of the USSR.
Iran stopped paying any of its banking engagements then, although it was one of the best perfomers regarding banking undertakings.
The reason was that the funds were used for the purpose I mentioned above.
An example, in 1989 when the DDR fell apart and before the so called west german treuhandel took over the assets of the DDR, a period of a few weeks, the offering of Mig 29s was for 100.000- greenbacks per unit in its crate.
Such was the world then and it seems that the imbecile ziowest think that they were the only ones active.
a video of Iranian SSN4 cruise anti-ship missile successfully, more things are on youtube.
http ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk_yTjSmZeg
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [13:56 ]
|
|
|
When everyone else is fighting the wars of the 21st century.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [14:04 ]
|
|
|
"when you've had a think about it and done a bit of research"
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 10.02.2010 [14:34 ]
|
|
|
I think that there are other aspects to examine here.
If Iran sinks a few ships in the strait of Hormuz, the US will have a harder time resuppling its bases in Iraq.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 10.02.2010 [15:01 ]
|
|
|
US carriers might be able to sit out of reach of Iranian cruise missiles, but what about US resupply ships trying to reach the Shatt alArab?
They must naivigate past sunken ships, travel behind slow moving mine-sweepers, be shieled by frigates and destroyers (which won't be out of range).
Then, getting oil out of the Persian Gulf creates another mess.
Then there are Iranian agents in Kabul and Baghdad, don't you believe?
And even if US carriers sitting in the Arabian sea are out of range of Iranian missiles, what about Iranian mini-subs.
They are small, quiet, and can get as far as Seychelles or the Maldeves probably.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [16:14 ]
|
|
|
Don't forget that cruise missiles can be launched by aircrafts which skim the sea briefly to avoid radar detections. There's no way they can stop their aircrafts getting sunk in this war — the Iranian territory dictates that as fact. One submarine, properly positioned could torpedo a carrier.
Like you say, the moment Iran scores even one hit at the mouth, the Gulf is rendered worthless. Iran's remotely activated mines will take care of things very nicely.
People don't realise that Iran doesn't even publish its latest weapons capability. They've been hiding the fact that they can launch satellites for a long time at the request of Russia — but not from me, if you've read my posts, I actually know their real capabilities. America should damn well know it too, if it has any intelligence agency worth their salt. Unfortunately the majority of them are crack-heads, but the few that aren't have already informed the pentagon. They know that taking on Iran would be their end — that's why they haven't taken it on.
They need Iran to get sanctions, for several years, until it relents and the lack of maintenance would render their military incapable of defence. That's what they had to do to Yugoslavia until they finally grew the balls to attack. Yugoslavia did not have any adjacent coastline though and could not create reprisal attacks against the US Navy.
Scoring a success against the US military bloodies their nose and then they truly become dangerous. They then have the alternative of:
- 1 - Attempting to conquer Iran by land
- 2 - Using nuclear weapons against Iran's major capitals
- 1 will fail, destroying the US military all together. #2 will cause the end of the world as it quickly turns into a free for all (doesn't take much imagination to think about how that will happen)
You are Iranian so you should know what the reaction of Iranians all over the world would be, especially in Iran. If I know them truly, they will fight to the last man. Except for a minority of true patriots, USAns would roll over and take it in their own homeland.
|
by djandjolik on 10.02.2010 [17:20 ]
|
|
|
but most of war strategist perhap forgot that Iran is a "super super big carrier" that cannot be sunk even by nuclear warhead and this super super carrier sit right at jugular vein of the straight of Hormuz as well as the gulf "forever" and it need no for refueling. Thats mean Iran can determine the out come and everything needs by the west, especially logistic supply of Iraq, Kuwait and UAE and oil and gas route by any mean.
|
by djandjolik on 10.02.2010 [17:24 ]
|
|
|
no commercial shipping (oil and gas) transportation want to get into straight of Hormuz and thats mean no oil and gas out of the gulf and no logistical supply will into the gulf.
|
by atheo on 10.02.2010 [20:27 ]
|
|
|
What about the fact that Afghanistan and Iraq are ideal locations from which to mount an attack on Iran? The navy??? Try Herat. This means that Iranian defense would necesitate lobbing missiles on Shias.
|
by Syrian on 10.02.2010 [20:42 ]
|
|
|
Iranians don't care about arabs/afghans. Americans would find no refuge from launching attacks from land. Within a few hours of the start of the war most of their land bases will be smouldering masses of ash, blood and concrete.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 11.02.2010 [02:52 ]
|
|
|
Iran's missiles have improved their guidance and targeting.
They should be able to land where they're aimed and avoid civilian casualties.
Furthermore, Iranian and pro-Iranian agents/spies in Iraq and Afghanistan might wreak havoc on US supply lines and patrols and bases.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 11.02.2010 [03:13 ]
|
|
|
"Don't forget that cruise missiles can be launched by aircrafts which skim the sea briefly to avoid radar detections. "
Can AWACS detect a sea skimming fighter plane?
|
by Syrian on 11.02.2010 [11:16 ]
|
|
|
Its almost impossible because the sea will reflect waves randomly, there is so much noise that it is hard to detect even though it has more cross-section than a ground based radar.
The only real solution is using passive radar technology, but using radio silence and anti-ECM, that can be bypassed, ultimately delivering the payload. They'll only know what happened once the ship is already sinking.
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 11.02.2010 [12:31 ]
|
|
|
"Its almost impossible because the sea will reflect waves randomly, there is so much noise . . . ."
Thanks.
That's good to know.
check this out.
Iran makes system to distract missiles
www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=118363§ionid=351020101
|
by Iranian-Shi'ite on 11.02.2010 [12:32 ]
|
|
|
If several Iranian Shahab missiles exploded above US ships, and released aluminum chaff, would that disrupt the ships' radar and communications?
|
by djandjolik on 11.02.2010 [13:06 ]
|
|
|
than US admirals, all about straight of Hormuz and by mining and putting just a couple of mini submarines (locally produced) right at the bottle neck of straight of Hormuz, the straight of Hormuz is closed for good and any US Navy minesweeper come close would be eaten by silkworm and others Iranian missiles. No shipping insurance coys would insure any oil and gas transportation getting in and out of the gulf. This narrowness straight of Hormuz is really pain in the ass for US navy admirals if it wide then there would be no problem.
|
by Syrian on 11.02.2010 [16:47 ]
|
|
|
Like it or hate it, they have geography on their side. When the US is there's they're expected to take possession of the middle east, which is why Russia is failing to deliver what it promises — Iran is its future rival.
|
by Deathtodubya on 11.02.2010 [16:55 ]
|
|
|
You're the fool in this case buddy:)
I remember you all crowing how Baghdad would become a Stalingrad for the invaders as well and look what happened there.
It's you who should study up on modern warfare. Check up how the first gulf War went for the USAn hordes: 150 dead compared to 25,000. This is how the US can and does fight when it's a CONVENTIONAL WAR.
Irans rickety old missiles, the handful that they do have are useless. They are only marginally more effective than Saddam's SCUD's. You don't seem to understand that the US will not be sending in the Navy into the Gulf there. They'll bomb the fuck out of Iran using B-52's and B-1 and B-2 bombers. They'll launch cruise missiles from so far that Iran won't even know there's anything coming until it's too late.
I'm sorry, but your beloved Iranian military will suffer 1000 casualties for every 1 American they kill. This is hard to face but true. Serbia barely did anything to NATO and they are as well trained as any force. Simply their equipment was not up to the quality of the men manning them. NATO flew too high for effective interception. When the US bombs Iran after they use up their cruise missiles they'll come with hundreds of aircraft at a time with ECM aircraft, control aircraft etc. The ancient Iranian airforce what little is left will be swept clear by sheer weight of numbers. Then the US will bomb with impunity.
Remember the Israeli raid on your invincible Syrian nation? They bombed, left and all Syria could do is fart in their general direction. Now multiply that raid by 1000 and you will get what will happen to Iran.
I swear I wish it were not so, but Iran has pissed away it's only chance by not supporting the Iraqi and Afghan resistance when it could, thus tying down the scum and negating their airpower.
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
