Iranian Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile

Khairul Alam

New Member
Iran tests anti-ship missiles
Published: Feb. 9, 2011 at 1:08 PM

TEHRAN, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- Tehran announced that it is mass-producing ballistic missiles that can travel three times the speed of sound and hit naval targets on the high seas.

Cmdr. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who heads the elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards, said the missile had a range of 186 miles, cannot be tracked and can hit targets with high precision.

"Iran is mass-producing a smart ballistic missile for sea targets with a speed three times more than the speed of sound," state news agency IRNA quoted Jafari as saying about the new missile.

He didn't elaborate but footage of the test-launch on state television showed a missile being fired from a mobile launcher from a desert terrain.

The announcement of the new missile comes as Iran has celebrations to mark the 32nd anniversary of its Islamic revolution, which toppled the U.S.-backed shah.

Jafari said the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps was also in the process of developing radar with a range of 310 miles. He said longer-range radar would be produced beginning March 21.

Military officials said the projects constituted a "long leap" in maintaining the security of Iran.

The announcements sound a day after the chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard warned it would close the Strait of Hormuz if Iran were to be threatened.

Experts estimate about 40 percent of all oil shipments transit the strait, which is basically the mouth of the Persian Gulf.

The announcement also follows Iran's unveiling of new satellites, which it said were domestically engineered and manufactured.

Details of that project are also scarce but should the Islamic republic proceed with its deployment in space it will signal substantial improvement in its missile guidance capability.

Tehran has tried to allay concerns, saying that the project remains on a scientific level.

"Every now and then they get the idea of testing new missiles," said Ali Nourizadeh of the Center for Arab and Iranian Studies. "Once we discovered that they had used Photoshop to show seven missiles simultaneously."

It remained unclear whether military officials in the United States and Israel were dubious of Iran's announcement.

Meir Javedanfar, author of "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran" was quoted by Fox News as saying that Iran's test-firing signaled that Tehran "takes the threats against its nuclear facilities seriously."

The United States and Israel haven't ruled out the option of military strikes against Iran to stop its nuclear program.

Iran tests anti-ship missiles - UPI.com

Link to the video:
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8911/Video/891118/891118V0708958.wmv

The weapon shown is a modified Fateh-110 missile, which was better known as a short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile. In the video however, the missile's nose looked different as it lacked a pointed tip, replaced by a rather circular edge. One website claims that this missile actually uses electro-optical guidance in the terminal phase (stumbled upon it in a defense-related blog: Iran... Posing A Credible Threat To The U.S. Navy (Missile) : Satnews Publishers). Other than the different nose, which might explain the incorporation of an optical guidance kit, the video footage also seems to show the missile's own-view as it homes into the target. Electro-optical terminal guidance or not, I must admit that I was startled by this "ballistic" missile's deadly accuracy. However, we must take note that the target was a stationary barge. A 300km range missile travelling at Mach 3 (as claimed by IRGC) would take approximately 5 minutes to reach its target. A target warship travelling at standard 30 knots would be able to cover around 5 kilometers in that time. Whether or not this fact limits the missile's capability is open to debate.

But here is my take on it: Let's assume, the missile indeed uses some sort of an optical guidance for terminal homing, which takes control of the foreplanes once activated. As far as my understanding goes, the limiting factor for such a "ballistic" turned "guided" missile would be the difference in the actual target position and the position calculated during missile launch. As I have already mentioned, a target warship can only travel a maximum of 5km in a straight line from its first position when the missile is launched. For the missile to achieve its maximum possible range of 300km, I reckon it has to have an angle of attack of 45 degrees as it approaches the target. Putting some simple geometry to work, the minimum distance by which the guidance system needs to kick-in would be approximately 12-13km. To me, at such distances, the effectiveness of an electro-optical guidance system is already stretched. What do you guys think?
 

Kirkzzy

New Member
:pope FUUUUUU

Well I think it just means for the entire world "Not to $%@! with Iran!" It is as simple as that, or if invading you can't use ships (aircraft carriers).
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Iran tests anti-ship missiles
Published: Feb. 9, 2011 at 1:08 PM

TEHRAN, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- Tehran announced that it is mass-producing ballistic missiles that can travel three times the speed of sound and hit naval targets on the high seas.

Cmdr. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who heads the elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards, said the missile had a range of 186 miles, cannot be tracked and can hit targets with high precision.

"Iran is mass-producing a smart ballistic missile for sea targets with a speed three times more than the speed of sound," state news agency IRNA quoted Jafari as saying about the new missile.

He didn't elaborate but footage of the test-launch on state television showed a missile being fired from a mobile launcher from a desert terrain.

The announcement of the new missile comes as Iran has celebrations to mark the 32nd anniversary of its Islamic revolution, which toppled the U.S.-backed shah.

Jafari said the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps was also in the process of developing radar with a range of 310 miles. He said longer-range radar would be produced beginning March 21.

Military officials said the projects constituted a "long leap" in maintaining the security of Iran.

The announcements sound a day after the chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard warned it would close the Strait of Hormuz if Iran were to be threatened.

Experts estimate about 40 percent of all oil shipments transit the strait, which is basically the mouth of the Persian Gulf.

The announcement also follows Iran's unveiling of new satellites, which it said were domestically engineered and manufactured.

Details of that project are also scarce but should the Islamic republic proceed with its deployment in space it will signal substantial improvement in its missile guidance capability.

Tehran has tried to allay concerns, saying that the project remains on a scientific level.

"Every now and then they get the idea of testing new missiles," said Ali Nourizadeh of the Center for Arab and Iranian Studies. "Once we discovered that they had used Photoshop to show seven missiles simultaneously."

It remained unclear whether military officials in the United States and Israel were dubious of Iran's announcement.

Meir Javedanfar, author of "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran" was quoted by Fox News as saying that Iran's test-firing signaled that Tehran "takes the threats against its nuclear facilities seriously."

The United States and Israel haven't ruled out the option of military strikes against Iran to stop its nuclear program.

Iran tests anti-ship missiles - UPI.com

Link to the video:
http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8911/Video/891118/891118V0708958.wmv

The weapon shown is a modified Fateh-110 missile, which was better known as a short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile. In the video however, the missile's nose looked different as it lacked a pointed tip, replaced by a rather circular edge. One website claims that this missile actually uses electro-optical guidance in the terminal phase (stumbled upon it in a defense-related blog: Iran... Posing A Credible Threat To The U.S. Navy (Missile) : Satnews Publishers). Other than the different nose, which might explain the incorporation of an optical guidance kit, the video footage also seems to show the missile's own-view as it homes into the target. Electro-optical terminal guidance or not, I must admit that I was startled by this "ballistic" missile's deadly accuracy. However, we must take note that the target was a stationary barge. A 300km range missile travelling at Mach 3 (as claimed by IRGC) would take approximately 5 minutes to reach its target. A target warship travelling at standard 30 knots would be able to cover around 5 kilometers in that time. Whether or not this fact limits the missile's capability is open to debate.

But here is my take on it: Let's assume, the missile indeed uses some sort of an optical guidance for terminal homing, which takes control of the foreplanes once activated. As far as my understanding goes, the limiting factor for such a "ballistic" turned "guided" missile would be the difference in the actual target position and the position calculated during missile launch. As I have already mentioned, a target warship can only travel a maximum of 5km in a straight line from its first position when the missile is launched. For the missile to achieve its maximum possible range of 300km, I reckon it has to have an angle of attack of 45 degrees as it approaches the target. Putting some simple geometry to work, the minimum distance by which the guidance system needs to kick-in would be approximately 12-13km. To me, at such distances, the effectiveness of an electro-optical guidance system is already stretched. What do you guys think?
"Borrowed" from Galrahn...

Information Dissemination: Iran Continues to Improve Their Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Capability

" ...Iran demonstrated today a new type of short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) based on the Fatah 110 platform, capable of hitting targets at a range of up to 250-300 km with high precision. During an operational demonstration the missile was fired at a target vessel floating in the Persian Gulf, scoring a direct hit. Accordingly, the new missile was named ‘Persian Gulf (Khalij Fars).

The missile apparently uses mid-course inertial guidance (INS) and an electro-optical homing seeker to achieve terminal attack precision. Previous versions of the Fateh 110 (also designated M-600 in Syrian use) used a tipped nose, while the current model has a rounded nose presumably housing the guidance kit. As the new version demonstrated in this test, the accuracy of the new missile is far better than the 0.3% of the range, attributed for the earlier model of Fateh 110 which relied only on inertial guidance. This type of solid-rocket propelled missile can carry a 450 kg warhead.

Iran’s Fateh 110 is based on the Chinese DF-11A SRBM
"

The article has Gal's take on things (I'm sure he may even come in & comment personally, so I don't wanna steal anymore of his thunder / article !!), but while this is a credible threat to any naval vessel that might end up in the Gulf around Iran, is such a show really necessary ?

Is it not like bringing a 357 Magnum to a pocket-knife fight ?

After all, how many of these do they have ? Will China be prepared to furnish them with more, or is this just a 'Demonstration of Force', without the teeth or the heart to carry out the task ??

SA
 

Khairul Alam

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
Galrahn rightly points out that the question is not whether US is capable of countering such missile threats, but rather how many other navies have countermeasures against similar threats. The US Navy ships with the AEGIS system have a TBMD (theater ballistic missile defense) lower-tier capability, which makes them potent against these ASBM threats. With this capability, the system can defend possibly an entire navy carrier group from ASBMs.

However, this leap in Iranian missile capabilities can still reap dividends in any event of a war. None of the regional navies have the AEGIS capability. With the purported range of 300km, any ship in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman can be struck. The missiles can be used for taking out off-shore oil rigs and also other oil installations that dot the entire PG coastline. Employing salvo attacks against mobile naval targets will erode the guidance/accuracy limitations. In its land-attack mode (but with similar accuracy), the missile can easily reach the Saudi city of Dhahran (the administrative center of the Saudi oil industry and also site of a large air-base). I am not implying Iranian belligerence here, but rather the options available to her if attacked/provoked.
 

Khairul Alam

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
"Borrowed" from Galrahn...

Information Dissemination: Iran Continues to Improve Their Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Capability

" ...Iran demonstrated today a new type of short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) based on the Fatah 110 platform, capable of hitting targets at a range of up to 250-300 km with high precision. During an operational demonstration the missile was fired at a target vessel floating in the Persian Gulf, scoring a direct hit. Accordingly, the new missile was named ‘Persian Gulf (Khalij Fars).

The missile apparently uses mid-course inertial guidance (INS) and an electro-optical homing seeker to achieve terminal attack precision. Previous versions of the Fateh 110 (also designated M-600 in Syrian use) used a tipped nose, while the current model has a rounded nose presumably housing the guidance kit. As the new version demonstrated in this test, the accuracy of the new missile is far better than the 0.3% of the range, attributed for the earlier model of Fateh 110 which relied only on inertial guidance. This type of solid-rocket propelled missile can carry a 450 kg warhead.

Iran’s Fateh 110 is based on the Chinese DF-11A SRBM
"

The article has Gal's take on things (I'm sure he may even come in & comment personally, so I don't wanna steal anymore of his thunder / article !!), but while this is a credible threat to any naval vessel that might end up in the Gulf around Iran, is such a show really necessary ?

Is it not like bringing a 357 Magnum to a pocket-knife fight ?

After all, how many of these do they have ? Will China be prepared to furnish them with more, or is this just a 'Demonstration of Force', without the teeth or the heart to carry out the task ??

SA

Just to clarify something: the missiles are not furnished by China. Only the ballistic technology had been borrowed from the Chinese DF-11 (or so is claimed). The Iranians are now producing their "Fateh" themselves. To me, incorporating the guidance system was their own innovation.
 

PCShogun

New Member
:pope FUUUUUU

Well I think it just means for the entire world "Not to $%@! with Iran!" It is as simple as that, or if invading you can't use ships (aircraft carriers).
Not true, In the modern age a carrier has no need to get within 186 miles, or 300 miles for that matter, to launch an air strike.

When the United States launched Operation El Derado Canyon, the bombing of Libya, the United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy, as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the Air Force portion of the operation to be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way to the trip from land bases in the UK to Tripoli.

This ballistic missile systems does nothing to prevent an attack from the Arabian Sea, and does little to improve Iran's response to such an attack. It does prevent a possible surprise attack from the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman but it is doubtful that such an attack would ever be launched with potential friendly bases in Iraq, Turkey, Turmenistan, and Afghanistan being much more practical.

It would, however, be devastating for tankers transiting the Gulf, which would most likely be Iran's use for this weapon. Denying Oil to the West would have a big economic impact

Simply put, we would simply stand off and destroy these missiles on the pad, in the ground, or on its transporter vehicle. 186 miles is not enough to present a serious threat to the U.S. Navy since aircraft, the navy's principle weapon on Aircraft carriers, are immune to this missile, and cruise missiles, the primary land strike weapon on just about everything else in the U.S. Navy above Destroyer class, has a range of 1550 miles.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
:pope FUUUUUU

Well I think it just means for the entire world "Not to $%@! with Iran!" It is as simple as that, or if invading you can't use ships (aircraft carriers).
I'd think twice about your posting style. It shows a disturbing lack of maturity and is reductionist in it's (ridiculous) conclusions to the point of absurdity.
 

Belesari

New Member
Not sure how seriously i could take this. Iran produces a massive amount of fluff for propaganda purposes. Like there destroyer that is about as well armed as some light Frigates and about the same size.

That said any military planner is going to factor the advent of such systems in some ways. Do i think its a silver bullet for our carrier groups in the Red Sea? No i dont believe in silver bullet weapons.....well the nuke.

I dont think this system is really to much of a threat to US ships. Between the Tico's and the Burkes its going to take ALOT of missiles. That doesnt add in the fact that once Iran fires at those ships it will be gone in short order.

Iran could really only strike meaningfully against our troops in afghanistan and Iraq.

I think Iran will for the present decade use its Foregin supported troops Hamas hezzbollah and others in Iraq and Afghanistan to cause trouble. But who knows what might pop up.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Even a nuclear weapon needs a viable delivery systems. Soviet ASMs were thoroughly nuclear (up to 500kt) but they still worked very hard on making them difficult to intercept, and still planned massive strike in order to ensure a couple would get through to the carrier.
 

Khairul Alam

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Not true, In the modern age a carrier has no need to get within 186 miles, or 300 miles for that matter, to launch an air strike.

When the United States launched Operation El Derado Canyon, the bombing of Libya, the United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy, as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the Air Force portion of the operation to be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way to the trip from land bases in the UK to Tripoli.

This ballistic missile systems does nothing to prevent an attack from the Arabian Sea, and does little to improve Iran's response to such an attack. It does prevent a possible surprise attack from the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman but it is doubtful that such an attack would ever be launched with potential friendly bases in Iraq, Turkey, Turmenistan, and Afghanistan being much more practical.

It would, however, be devastating for tankers transiting the Gulf, which would most likely be Iran's use for this weapon. Denying Oil to the West would have a big economic impact

Simply put, we would simply stand off and destroy these missiles on the pad, in the ground, or on its transporter vehicle. 186 miles is not enough to present a serious threat to the U.S. Navy since aircraft, the navy's principle weapon on Aircraft carriers, are immune to this missile, and cruise missiles, the primary land strike weapon on just about everything else in the U.S. Navy above Destroyer class, has a range of 1550 miles.
Agreed, the US military's long-range strike arm cannot be discounted in a scenario when its assets in the Gulf are compromised. Forget the tomahawk cruise missiles. B-2 stealth bombers have a maximum range of about 6000 miles without refueling and these can fly out from the US base in Diego Garcia, bomb their targets anywhere inside Iran and come back with extra fuel to spare.

But I want to stress that it gets a little out of context when we start thinking about Iran's deterrence to be really based on countering the US military head-on. Iran's deterrence basically stems from the inability of the US to deal with the aftermath of a purported attack on Iran. The factors involved are manifold: disruptions in oil supply, regional wars through proxies, and the resulting political fallout in an already unstable region. Most of the hardware in Iran's arsenal is obsolete, for which they make up with their asymmetric strategies.

The new missile simply adds on to their asymmetric warfare capabilities and provides a new avenue to respond to an aggression. We must also realize that the US 5th Fleet is headquartered in a naval base in Bahrain. The base is currently undergoing expansion to increase capacity. Having said that, I cannot imagine the navy suddenly packing its bags and heading home, without ringing some alarm bells in Tehran.

As for hunting down the missiles while they are still on the ground, I think its easier said than done. The "great scud hunt" of Operation Desert Storm did not have a single confirmed scud kill except a few oil tankers and decoys (even with the Joint STARS system that was fielded for this task). If we look at the more recent Summer War between Hizbollah and Israel, the limitations of stopping the enemy from firing missiles at you become more apparent.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
Cmdr. Mohammad Ali Jafari, who heads the elite military force, the Revolutionary Guards, said the missile had a range of 186 miles, cannot be tracked and can hit targets with high precision.
Another untrackable stealth missile! Man, those Iranians are good (for a laugh).
The weapon shown is a modified Fateh-110 missile, which was better known as a short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile. In the video however, the missile's nose looked different as it lacked a pointed tip, replaced by a rather circular edge. One website claims that this missile actually uses electro-optical guidance in the terminal phase. Other than the different nose, which might explain the incorporation of an optical guidance kit, the video footage also seems to show the missile's own-view as it homes into the target. Electro-optical terminal guidance or not, I must admit that I was startled by this "ballistic" missile's deadly accuracy.
Let’s see . . . the Fateh-110 is GPS guided, so it should be able to hit a tightly anchored barge without too much trouble. The optical window in the nose may have just been for the camera.

If it does work it could be a credible tanker killer, but it against modern air defenses it is just another SCUD to kill.
 

Khairul Alam

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Another untrackable stealth missile! Man, those Iranians are good (for a laugh).

Let’s see . . . the Fateh-110 is GPS guided, so it should be able to hit a tightly anchored barge without too much trouble. The optical window in the nose may have just been for the camera.

If it does work it could be a credible tanker killer, but it against modern air defenses it is just another SCUD to kill.
GPS?? Please share your sources here. I hope you understand GPS would be even better than optical, giving it a all-weather capability, although I am highly doubtful about that. Iran can only have access to commercial GPS.
 

Lion8

New Member
Selective Availability was switched off ten years ago.

Not that GPS would be of any use in wartime - there's a reason for GLONASS and Galileo...
You forget China Beidou II..

Galileo is under threat with ballooning budget and under fund.

While Russia GLONASS is in bad condition. Russia effort to upgrade their GLONASS suffer setback when 3 new statelite intended to send up for replacement blow up..

Your best bet will be China Beidou II. China space program is well organised and well funded.

Commercial regional launch will be set next year 2012 but I believe PRC military regional launch has already started given huge variety of GPS depend equipement have spotted in PRC Arsenal from JDAM to ship GPS system.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Beidou isn't running at the moment. GLONASS is. It's definitely the second place in terms of numbers of sattellites.
 

PCShogun

New Member
Agreed, the US military's long-range strike arm cannot be discounted in a scenario when its assets in the Gulf are compromised. Forget the tomahawk cruise missiles. B-2 stealth bombers have a maximum range of about 6000 miles without refueling and these can fly out from the US base in Diego Garcia, bomb their targets anywhere inside Iran and come back with extra fuel to spare.

But I want to stress that it gets a little out of context when we start thinking about Iran's deterrence to be really based on countering the US military head-on. Iran's deterrence basically stems from the inability of the US to deal with the aftermath of a purported attack on Iran. The factors involved are manifold: disruptions in oil supply, regional wars through proxies, and the resulting political fallout in an already unstable region. Most of the hardware in Iran's arsenal is obsolete, for which they make up with their asymmetric strategies.

The new missile simply adds on to their asymmetric warfare capabilities and provides a new avenue to respond to an aggression. We must also realize that the US 5th Fleet is headquartered in a naval base in Bahrain. The base is currently undergoing expansion to increase capacity. Having said that, I cannot imagine the navy suddenly packing its bags and heading home, without ringing some alarm bells in Tehran.

As for hunting down the missiles while they are still on the ground, I think its easier said than done. The "great scud hunt" of Operation Desert Storm did not have a single confirmed scud kill except a few oil tankers and decoys (even with the Joint STARS system that was fielded for this task). If we look at the more recent Summer War between Hizbollah and Israel, the limitations of stopping the enemy from firing missiles at you become more apparent.
Excellent reply and agreed with by myself on many levels. I did not mean to imply that the weapon would not cause a major shift in U.S. deployments in the region, simply that it would be useful against Naval task forces in the region.

I also certainly agree that such a conflict would weigh heavily on the U.S. economy, either from a long term occupation of the area to protect the Persian Gulf transit zone, or due to the loss of major U.S. oil supplies. We thought Iraq was bad? Iranian insurgents and suicide bombers would be much, much worse.

Thank you for a well thought out, and thought provoking reply.
 

surpreme

Member
Agreed, the US military's long-range strike arm cannot be discounted in a scenario when its assets in the Gulf are compromised. Forget the tomahawk cruise missiles. B-2 stealth bombers have a maximum range of about 6000 miles without refueling and these can fly out from the US base in Diego Garcia, bomb their targets anywhere inside Iran and come back with extra fuel to spare.

But I want to stress that it gets a little out of context when we start thinking about Iran's deterrence to be really based on countering the US military head-on. Iran's deterrence basically stems from the inability of the US to deal with the aftermath of a purported attack on Iran. The factors involved are manifold: disruptions in oil supply, regional wars through proxies, and the resulting political fallout in an already unstable region. Most of the hardware in Iran's arsenal is obsolete, for which they make up with their asymmetric strategies.

The new missile simply adds on to their asymmetric warfare capabilities and provides a new avenue to respond to an aggression. We must also realize that the US 5th Fleet is headquartered in a naval base in Bahrain. The base is currently undergoing expansion to increase capacity. Having said that, I cannot imagine the navy suddenly packing its bags and heading home, without ringing some alarm bells in Tehran.

As for hunting down the missiles while they are still on the ground, I think its easier said than done. The "great scud hunt" of Operation Desert Storm did not have a single confirmed scud kill except a few oil tankers and decoys (even with the Joint STARS system that was fielded for this task). If we look at the more recent Summer War between Hizbollah and Israel, the limitations of stopping the enemy from firing missiles at you become more apparent.
I must said that was well said I agree with this point. But Iran do add a lot b@$sh*! with there statement. The Iran talk in fear and that can be dangerous. Its a scary situation in that area don't be surprise if Iran pull a trick out the hat if they are attacked. This anti ship stuff is a joke. Iran is not hi-tech the only thing they got are old missile system. One must not underestimate a nation that motivated like Iran. There inner problem inside Iran will stop if attacked by Israel or the U.S.. Don't be alarm by this information it's just something to make a nation think before stiking which is already on the drawing board or planning stage.f
 
Last edited:

Khairul Alam

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
U.S. intel: Iran developing anti-ship missiles with China’s help

Special to WorldTribune.com

WASHINGTON — Iran has been developing advanced anti-ship missiles
with help from China, a report said.

The U.S. intelligence community has determined that the Iran Navy has
enhanced its missile arsenal over the last few years. In a report, the
community said Iran’s missiles, particularly its anti-ship weapons, were
increasing in range and accuracy.


An Iranian-produced version of the C-802 anti-ship missile, concealed inside a commercial truck.

“Short-range ballistic missiles provide Teheran with an effective mobile capability to strike partner forces in the region,” the report, titled “Annual Report on Military Power of Iran,” said. “Iran continues to improve the survivability of these systems against missile defenses.”

The report, submitted by the Defense Department to Congress, was said to reflect a change in the assessment of the U.S. intelligence community. Until 2012, most of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies had dismissed Iran’s missile arsenal as inaccurate and ineffective against enemy military targets.

Signed by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on June 29, the report said the Iran Navy was developing its anti-ship cruise missile capability. The capability was meant to allow the firing of missiles that could identify and loiter over targets before a strike.

“It is also developing and claims to have deployed short-range ballistic
missiles with seekers that enable the missile to identify and maneuver
toward ships during flight,” the report said. “This technology also may be
capable of striking land-based targets.”

China was said to have played a major role in enhancing Iran’s anti-ship
missile arsenal. The report cited similarities in Iranian and Chinese
anti-ship programs.

Iran has also improved its medium- and intermediate-range ballistic
missiles. Some of these missiles, including the solid-fuel Ashura and the
liquid-fuel Shihab-3, were tested in major Iranian military exercises in
2012.

“Beyond steady growth in its missile and rocket inventories, Iran has
boosted the lethality and effectiveness of existing systems with accuracy
improvements and new submunition payloads,” the report said. “Iran’s missile
force consists chiefly of mobile missile launchers that are not tethered to
specific physical launch positions.”

The Pentagon determined that Israel marked the key target of Iran’s
missile program. Since 2008, Iran has been firing multi-stage space-launch
vehicles that could serve as a test bed for the development of
intercontinental ballistic missile technologies.

“Iran may be technically capable of flight testing an intercontinental
ballistic missile by 2015,” the report said.

http://www.worldnewstribune.com/201...veloping-anti-ship-missiles-with-chinas-help/
 
Top