Okay, here are some thoughts of the new Iranian missile in the following thread:
The goal of this development is clearly to defeat the PAC-3 interceptors in the first 1,000km range, by a mixture of a depressed trajectory and increased penetration speed.
-
The goal of this development is clearly to defeat the PAC-3 interceptors in the first 1,000km range, by a mixture of a depressed trajectory and increased penetration speed.
-
However, the lack of TVC in the boost phase and the use of cheaper materials means wasting valuable energy due to lack of precision and over-correcting the trajectory with control surfaces, add to this lower TWR.
This is persistent in all the Iranian solid fuel missiles in this class
However, after the separation of their guided warhead, iranian missiles of this class can still glide towards their target in the atmosphere on a depressed trajectory, at extended ranges bleeding more energy
However, after the separation of their guided warhead, iranian missiles of this class can still glide towards their target in the atmosphere on a depressed trajectory, at extended ranges bleeding more energy
Causing a very low terminal velocity in all of them.
Meaning they are incapable of performing any evasive maneuvers, efficient skip glides, or any midcourse trajectory update.
Meaning they are incapable of performing any evasive maneuvers, efficient skip glides, or any midcourse trajectory update.
Some lessons learned from the Houthi usage of faster reentry vehicles like "zolfaqar", which showed the increasing penetration speed against PAC-3 can make it easier to saturate and harder to
Intercept
so what they did to their low tech missiles to better chances at this range?
Intercept
so what they did to their low tech missiles to better chances at this range?
First, lower drag guided warhead (kheybar shekan) then more energy at the terminal phase by using a second stage (fataah).
With this being said, they still have critical weaknesses that make any missile-specific development meaningless in wartime conditions even against peer opponents.
Missiles of this class are still base centric with no independent standalone TELs!! lowering probable launch points, making it easier to find and kill launchers of any type.
ISR platforms like RQ-4 can detect and track areas around launch bases from long ranges continuously, not to mention F-15s & Eurofighters deployed in the Arabian gulf with mission-specific SAR pods.
At best case scenario, this base-centric doctrine will limit the missile launch rate to a point that is meaningless and helpless.
So instead of developing something already done by similar countries since the 50s, they failed, and opted for more problematic solutions that will guarantee a catastrophic failure in wartime.
Like rail launching liquid fueled Nodong and Rodong based missile from the mountains , or making fixed launcher ( not learning from Sadams mistakes) in bases around the Arabian gulf.
I can keep explaining why their missile doctrine sucks till the morning, but let me add one more point that always appealed to me, is how they are needlessly complicating logistics.
none of their solid fuel missiles use a container and they need assembly before any imminent launch.
They basically need the same setup as a team erecting an electricity pole before any launch, launching a solid fuel tactical missile is not supposed to look like a construction project! 😅😅
The announcement of this missile as hypersonic, might lead many to think that its in the same hyped class of HGVs or advanced aeroballistic missiles like the Kinzhal.
Well, IT'S NOT!
Well, IT'S NOT!
It is still just a continuation of the same family of low-tech missiles (like, dezful,kheybar shekan) which suffers the same problems and actually adds more.
جاري تحميل الاقتراحات...