Peter Cairns Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Nice system and not bad piece of video, SA-15 variant, not much use for high altitude, but could well have been high up the shopping list as it has excellent antiUAV performance. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted December 5, 2005 Author Share Posted December 5, 2005 web page Sorry folks lets try that again shall we. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 I wonder what the range on that is. Might be hell on helos too if it can reach out 8km or more. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 There are so many other AA systems out there that this isn't going to make much difference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 12km up to 6000m. One of it's main usages actually seems to be Anti-Missile and Anti-Guided Bomb usage. The Israelis are not going to like this. Makes flattening any nuclear power plants very uncomfortable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 All those spinning dishes are magnets for HARMS or AAMRAMS, is the tracking system active or passive? I seem to recall missle control radar and tracking equipment being prime targets during the Iraqi no fly zone days. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Originally posted by Nidan1: All those spinning dishes are magnets for HARMS or AAMRAMS, is the tracking system active or passive? The point is that the Tor-M1 system is expected to engage anti-radiation missiles targeted at it. Whether this means that it will actually be able to shot down multiple HARMs in a few seconds is another question... Regards, Amedeo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Originally posted by Amedeo: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nidan1: All those spinning dishes are magnets for HARMS or AAMRAMS, is the tracking system active or passive? The point is that the Tor-M1 system is expected to engage anti-radiation missiles targeted at it. Whether this means that it will actually be able to shot down multiple HARMs in a few seconds is another question... Regards, Amedeo </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 If there were any kind of shooting war, they would inevitably end up as scrap metal. By their very nature they have to be in a place to shoot an ac and that place isnt going to be in a cave. Remember in effects based warfare, you dont have to kill them all, just the ones in your ingress zone and that invariably means only a few with many HARM/ALARM fired in their direction. Even if they shut down, the ALARM climbs to 40000 feet and descends on its shute, tracking all the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Originally posted by Nidan1: Aha, then the Iranians will need an integrated air defense system. Or aircraft would just target the Tor-M1 sites with unguided iron bombs or cruise missles, and then go after the more dangerous SAM sites as they do now. Somehow I don't see the Iranians being any more effective than the Iraqis were in the air defense department, especially with the terrain being very similar. Similar terrain? :confused: Anyway, while I won't hold my breath expecting Iran to decisively defeat US forces in case of direct armed confrontation, I think that Iran already has an integrated air defence and is a far more dangerous opponent than Iraq in that respect. Regards, Amedeo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 This is not about an all-out war. This is about denying Israel the option to use a small strike force of just a few planes in order to destroy the nuclear facilitys Iran has. Of course you could overcome the air defenses with a mixed package of "Wild Weasels" and Bombers, but then, if you also add the iranian Airforce as a factor, this would turn into quite a large air battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Originally posted by Amedeo: Similar terrain? :confused: Anyway, while I won't hold my breath expecting Iran to decisively defeat US forces in case of direct armed confrontation, I think that Iran already has an integrated air defence and is a far more dangerous opponent than Iraq in that respect. Regards, Amedeo Yes, similar terrain to Iraq, built up areas in mostly flat featureless desert where things like weapons systems can be spotted easier. Unlike Yugoslavia, for example where direct visuals of targets was much more difficult and therefore more dangerous for the pilots. Iran could have a better air defense system than Iraq deployed, but who really knows these days. Syria, I would imagine probably has a mix of air defense systems similar to what Iraq had. Iraq's considerable air defenses proved ineffectual in GW1 and during the years leading up to the US invasion. Isreal bested the Syrian version in and around Lebanon and in the Bekka Valley. Iran has not been seriously tested since the Iran-Iraq war, so they are still an unknown. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted December 6, 2005 Author Share Posted December 6, 2005 Nidan1, Flying from Israel before you get to Tehran you need to cross this. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted December 6, 2005 Author Share Posted December 6, 2005 Sorry done it again, i'll get the hang of this one day.... http://www.ecotour-iran.com/glance_zagros.htm Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted December 6, 2005 Author Share Posted December 6, 2005 Heres a good image, Peter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homo ferricus Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 wow, us Russians are sons a bitches for selling em that, o well, i cant blame the government, the Russian economy isn't exactly booming right now, and its not like you guys weren't expecting them to sell MORE arms around the world. I doubt its going to be of any high tactical advantage in a real battle situation, but in te raids you mentioned, it does seem like quite the butt-itch for the Isreali Airforce. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronic Max Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 This is about denying Israel the option to use a small strike force of just a few planes in order to destroy the nuclear facilitys Iran has.I was under the impression that this idea was a non-starter. A friend of mine, who was interning with a senator, sat in on hearings regarding Iran, and the universal opinion expressed by those called to testify was to the effect of, "Yeah, um, the only way to be sure we get their nuclear capability is to use ground troops." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Originally posted by Nidan1: All those spinning dishes are magnets for HARMS or AAMRAMS...AAMRAMS? Those are for air-to-air combat. Do they have a secondary anti-radiation mission now? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted December 7, 2005 Author Share Posted December 7, 2005 Iron_man, And just why shouldn't the Russians sell an ally and friend Medium altitude air defence systems. The Russian arguement is that these are defensive and will only be used if someone attacks Iran, which is pretty hard to argue against. Under the UN charter Iran has the same right to defend itself as anyone else. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I believe the AAMRAM has a home on radar or jam capability but I have never heard of it being used as an anti-radiation missile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nidan1: All those spinning dishes are magnets for HARMS or AAMRAMS...AAMRAMS? Those are for air-to-air combat. Do they have a secondary anti-radiation mission now? Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Originally posted by Nidan1: Yes, similar terrain to Iraq, built up areas in mostly flat featureless desert where things like weapons systems can be spotted easier. Unlike Yugoslavia, for example where direct visuals of targets was much more difficult and therefore more dangerous for the pilots. Mostly flat featurless desert? If you look at a map you'll immediatly find that Iran, unlike Iraq, is a montainous country. Originally posted by Nidan1: Iran could have a better air defense system than Iraq deployed, but who really knows these days. Syria, I would imagine probably has a mix of air defense systems similar to what Iraq had. Iraq's considerable air defenses proved ineffectual in GW1 and during the years leading up to the US invasion. Isreal bested the Syrian version in and around Lebanon and in the Bekka Valley. Iran has not been seriously tested since the Iran-Iraq war, so they are still an unknown. The systems that Iran is currently fielding are more diversificate and modern than the ones that were available to Iraq or Serbia. As I said, I don't think that Iran may "defeat" the US military, but I do think that it's too easy to dismiss their capability to wage modern air warfare. During the Iran-Iraq war the IRIAF managed to score many successes, even if at the time the press said thay they were not even able to let their Tomcats fly without US assistance... yea right! Regards, Amedeo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Isreal? No such thing. It's written <font size="5">ISRAEL</font>, for Lord's sake. If you have any respect for them, anyway. Now do that again, and I'll growl & show my teeth... P.S. Lybia is not a country either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: P.S. Lybia is not a country either. Lybia, aren't those the things in a woman's nether regions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I believe Lybia is more of a tourist attraction as well. {cue rimshot} 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.