Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Missiles & WMDs
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

ExPB14_JAS-39_Gripen.jpg

ExPB14_Mirage2000.jpg

6_EXPB14_20140729_088_3_RSAF_F16s.jpg

5_EXPB14_20140729_143_3_RSAF_F-15SGs.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





IRAN'S powerful missiles

This is a discussion on IRAN'S powerful missiles within the Missiles & WMDs forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Hello.iran is one of the 10 powerful countries in misslile field in the world.if you want to know more about ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 1.00 average.
Old August 9th, 2009   #1
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
IRAN'S powerful missiles

Hello.iran is one of the 10 powerful countries in misslile field in the world.if you want to know more about that.you can come here.
no external forum links
thank you

Last edited by SABRE; August 17th, 2009 at 01:56 AM.
khatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2010   #2
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 25
Threads:
Yes, I would like to know more about Iran's missile capabilities

Quote:
Originally Posted by khatar View Post
Hello.iran is one of the 10 powerful countries in misslile field in the world.if you want to know more about that.you can come here.
no external forum links
thank you
I would like to know the answer to a few questions, if you can answer:

1. How many heavy missiles does Iran have capable of hitting Israel?

2. How accurate are they?

3. What size payloads (in kilograms or lbs.) can they carry?

4. How many minutes does it take for a missile to hit Israel from Iran?

5. Do you think they can knock out Israeli runways, military bases, and missile installations?

If you know the answer to this or any other related questions, I'd love to know.

Thank you.
jgarbuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2010   #3
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
Iran

Admin:

Text deleted. Unacceptable content

You need to read the Forum Rules before posting again

1st Warning

Last edited by gf0012-aust; April 22nd, 2010 at 07:57 AM.
khatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 8th, 2010   #4
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 11
Threads:
The Israelis would absolutely obliterate the weapons with their arrow Anti-Ballistic Missiles. [Mod Edit: Text deleted, as Taiwanese weapons are not a subject of this thread]. So, essentially, bad!

Last edited by OPSSG; June 17th, 2010 at 10:27 PM. Reason: Stop trolling and stick to the topic
Bergerpollm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2010   #5
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 25
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerpollm View Post
The Israelis would absolutely obliterate the weapons with their arrow Anti-Ballistic Missiles [Mod Edit: Text deleted, as Taiwanese weapons are not a subject of this thread]. So, essentially, bad!
I am familiar with the Arrow ABM program. I wish you were right, but no ABM system can overcome barrages of THOUSANDS of cheap ballistic missiles that can hit Israel in 6 minutes. the Iranian strategy, unfortunately, is a good one, from their POV. What Israel needs is a second strike capability of more submarines with SLBMs.The Iranians must be made sure that no matter what they do, even if they strike every square inch inside Israel, that they will be destroyed by Israeli missiles from under the sea.

Last edited by OPSSG; June 17th, 2010 at 10:28 PM.
jgarbuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2010   #6
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergerpollm View Post
The Israelis would absolutely obliterate the weapons with their arrow Anti-Ballistic Missiles [Mod Edit: Text deleted, as Taiwanese weapons are not a subject of this thread]. So, essentially, bad!
Israel could not do anything to HEZBOLLAH small missiles.Iran new missile SEJIL 2 is invisible.arrow or any other system can do nothing against it.Iran has SHAHAB 3,SHAB 2,SHAHAB 1,ZELZAL,NAZEAT,SEJIL 1,SEJIL 2 and the other missiles.IRAN has more missiles than what you can imagine
you can not forget the missiles that Iran has not shown.

Last edited by OPSSG; June 17th, 2010 at 10:29 PM.
khatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13th, 2010
Chief of staff
This message has been deleted by AegisFC.
Old June 17th, 2010   #7
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by khatar View Post
Israel could not do anything to HEZBOLLAH small missiles.Iran new missile SEJIL 2 is invisible.arrow or any other system can do nothing against it.Iran has SHAHAB 3,SHAB 2,SHAHAB 1,ZELZAL,NAZEAT,SEJIL 1,SEJIL 2 and the other missiles.IRAN has more missiles than what you can imagine
you can not forget the missiles that Iran has not shown.
I've been around quite a few defense forums, and the one thing I have always come across are claims that Iran possesses invisible fighters, subs, ships, torpedoes, tanks, and now missiles. Shoot.........I'm starting to wonder if Iran’s technology is so advanced, they can make their entire country invisible!!!

I would love to see proof! And not doctored up pictures either....
BK101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010
khatar
This message has been deleted by OPSSG.
Old June 17th, 2010   #8
Super Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,496
Threads:
There needs to be a marked improvement in the quality of content in this thread if it's going to stay open...
Bonza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010   #9
Super Moderator
Lieutenant General
SABRE's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,677
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BK101 View Post
I've been around quite a few defense forums, and the one thing I have always come across are claims that Iran possesses invisible fighters, subs, ships, torpedoes, tanks, and now missiles. Shoot.........I'm starting to wonder if Iran’s technology is so advanced, they can make their entire country invisible!!!

I would love to see proof! And not doctored up pictures either....
Invisibility = Non Existent
--------------


Iran does not have any high tech weapon (period). But what ever it has can overwhelm Israel if launched in mass numbers. Thus Iranian strategy is quantitative against Israel's qualitative edge. & no BMD System is mature enough to counter large number of incoming missiles of different ranges and types (i.e. ballistic+cruise).

Submarine based 2nd strike capability is an effective deterrent but the type of regimes in Israel and Iran we cannot be too sure of that. Both take the conflict to brinkmanship - which is suicidal.
________________
"It is better to accept an end with a horror then face horror with no end." - Karl Von Clausewitz
SABRE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010   #10
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
Iran

Quote:
Originally Posted by SABRE View Post
Invisibility = Non Existent
--------------


Iran does not have any high tech weapon (period). But what ever it has can overwhelm Israel if launched in mass numbers. Thus Iranian strategy is quantitative against Israel's qualitative edge. & no BMD System is mature enough to counter large number of incoming missiles of different ranges and types (i.e. ballistic+cruise).

Submarine based 2nd strike capability is an effective deterrent but the type of regimes in Israel and Iran we cannot be too sure of that. Both take the conflict to brinkmanship - which is suicidal.
Iran is not what your governments show you in your TV.A poor country.A weak country.They show you something wrong.you can be sure if Iran does not have a good military It has been attacked by USA and Israel very long ago...
[Mod Edit: Text deleted. Please note that Hezbollah and the 2006 conflict is not a subject of this thread. Trolling and other childish behaviour is not welcomed.]
after that Syria and Iran.but all of that was a bad mistake.My English is not very good.Excuse me for that

2nd Warning - and to remember to read the forum rules. Please note that it is against DT forum rules to encourage or support terrorism/terrorist activity in your posts.

Last edited by OPSSG; June 18th, 2010 at 02:40 PM.
khatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010   #11
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 25
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SABRE
Iran does not have any high tech weapon (period). But what ever it has can overwhelm Israel if launched in mass numbers. Thus Iranian strategy is quantitative against Israel's qualitative edge. & no BMD System is mature enough to counter large number of incoming missiles of different ranges and types (i.e. ballistic+cruise).

Submarine based 2nd strike capability is an effective deterrent but the type of regimes in Israel and Iran we cannot be too sure of that. Both take the conflict to brinkmanship - which is suicidal.
I full concur with your analysis, and indeed has been my opinion for quite some time now. The Iranian strategy of producing huge volumes of relatively inexpensive IRBMs to overwhelm Israeli defenses is a good one from their POV.

And I also agree that Israel has to quickly develop a Triad to include more submarines -with SLMBs like the Trident for assured MAD if Iran is that mad. And there is no present BDM solution to counter an overwhelming deluge of missiles.

And you are right to imply that this is not an ideological conflict, as with materialistic, life-loving capitalism versus communism. Underneath it all this is a theological religious war where Islam cannot countenance a Jewish state, with all the apocalyptic and messianic undertones and overtones. This is the scenario for the Armageddon. And I see no peaceful solution in sight.

Last edited by OPSSG; June 18th, 2010 at 08:49 PM. Reason: amended quote format
jgarbuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010   #12
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 271
Threads:
First off, why this thread is still open despite at least 50% of posts having to be altered or deleted by mods is beyond me. From the start it should have been clear that one person has succumbed to propoganda and is out to troll.

Anyway, on topic. I'd agree with Sabre's analysis, but the idea of trying to develop and SLBM and assoicated SSBN may not be a good idea. These are single purpose vessels and weapons that would mean Israel entirely dropping the premise of ambiguity over nuclear weapons. What the repurcussions for that would be are anyones guess, but I don't see many positive outcomes. And also, how exactly are Israel supposed to afford these? They are by far the most expensive thing that major global powers have in their defence budgets (US could well struggle to afford their replacements for Ohio, Britain has had to fight tooth and nail to keep theirs alive, the Russians are having problems at every turn). The only way for Israel to afford this would be for the US to openly help and either supply cash for R&D or allow Israel into a similar agreement as the UK, which could well be the final nail in the coffin for US foreign policy in the Middle East.

The Israelis already have a fairly decent deterrent in a their SLCM's, which certianly can't be countered until/if Iran ever manages to get S300's, and then it still has ground launched missiles which I suspect could be launched before Iranian missiles struck now that they can detect them at launch thanks to the US X-band.
Grim901 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010   #13
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by khatar View Post
Iran is not what your governments show you in your TV.A poor country.A weak country.They show you something wrong.you can be sure if Iran does not have a good military It has been attacked by USA and Israel very long ago...
[Mod Edit: Text deleted. Please note that Hezbollah and the 2006 conflict is not a subject of this thread. Trolling and other childish behaviour is not welcomed.]
after that Syria and Iran.but all of that was a bad mistake.My English is not very good.Excuse me for that

2nd Warning - and to remember to read the forum rules. Please note that it is against DT forum rules to encourage or support terrorism/terrorist activity in your posts.
The news that I watch does not show a poor Iran at all. I see a country with a rich heritage and culture with very beautiful people. The problem with what you see on the news is State run media showing technology that Iran doesn't possess,
Iran does have many medium and short range ballistic missiles, but they will only have any effect with a massive strike. Even then, the consequences of that would be devastating for Iran.
Thats just my humble opinion.

Cheers
BK101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2010   #14
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 25
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim901 View Post

Anyway, on topic. I'd agree with Sabre's analysis, but the idea of trying to develop and SLBM and assoicated SSBN may not be a good idea. These are single purpose vessels and weapons that would mean Israel entirely dropping the premise of ambiguity over nuclear weapons. What the repurcussions for that would be are anyones guess, but I don't see many positive outcomes. And also, how exactly are Israel supposed to afford these? They are by far the most expensive thing that major global powers have in their defence budgets (US could well struggle to afford their replacements for Ohio, Britain has had to fight tooth and nail to keep theirs alive, the Russians are having problems at every turn). The only way for Israel to afford this would be for the US to openly help and either supply cash for R&D or allow Israel into a similar agreement as the UK, which could well be the final nail in the coffin for US foreign policy in the Middle East.

The Israelis already have a fairly decent deterrent in a their SLCM's, which certianly can't be countered until/if Iran ever manages to get S300's, and then it still has ground launched missiles which I suspect could be launched before Iranian missiles struck now that they can detect them at launch thanks to the US X-band.
I fully agree that the acquisition of submarines costing about $4 billion per copy fitted out with some SLBM version of the Jericho would be expensive and could jeopardize Israel's posture of nuclear ambiguity, but the fact is that massive quantities of Iranian missiles could carpet bomb most of the tiny Israeli land mass within 6 minutes, destroying missile bases, runways and the like crippling Israel's ability to retaliate. But it think it is preferable to acquiring more fifth generation aircraft now approaching $200 million per copy that might not be able to get off the runway or successfully reach Iran even if they do. So I would rather Israel get 1 such sub per year than 20 new vulnerable aircraft per year. The X-band should see the Iranian missiles launch, but that only leaves 6 minutes of decision-making time. Israeli subs in the Mediterranean that the Iranians cannot see and destroy would have to make them think twice about launching in the first place. That's my theory at least.
jgarbuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2010   #15
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
SURB's Avatar
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Islamabad
Posts: 184
Threads:
Iran could fire ‘hundreds’ of missiles on Europe: Gates

Washington—US intelligence has shown Iran could launch an attack against Europe with ‘scores or hundreds’ of missiles, prompting major changes to US missile defenses, Pentagon chief Robert Gates said.

President Barack Obama in September cited a mounting danger from Iran’s arsenal of short and medium-range missiles when he announced an overhaul of US missile defense plans.

The new program, called the “phased adaptive approach,” uses sea and land-based interceptors to protect Nato allies in the region, instead of mainly larger weapons designed to counter long-range missiles.

“One of the elements of the intelligence that contributed to the decision on the phased adaptive array was the realization that if Iran were actually to launch a missile attack on Europe, it wouldn’t be just one or two missiles or a handful,” Gates told a senate hearing.

“It would more likely be a salvo kind of attack, where you would be dealing potentially with scores or even hundreds of missiles.

“Top US generals have said the new anti-missile system was meant to guard against a potential salvo of missiles from states such as Iran or North Korea.Gates made the comment when asked by Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss if he supported deploying improved missile defenses, including plans for an upgraded SM-3 missile by 2020, even if Russia objected.

Gates said he backed the 10-year plan, despite possible resistance from Moscow, saying the new missile defenses “would give us the ability to protect our troops, our bases, our facilities and our allies in Europe.” Gates, along with other top deputies in the Obama administration, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to argue for ratification of a new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia, trying to reassure Republican lawmakers the agreement posed no threat to the missile defense program.—Newswire

Iran is causing a severe headache.
________________
____ "Unity, Faith & Discipline" ____
SURB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:15 AM.