Iranian Air Defense Systems

[DoubleYouSee]

Deputy of defense minister:
Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.


جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است

About 1 week ago they said it has 400km range

 

[AmirPatriot]

Deputy of defense minister:
Bavar-373 can cover from low to 65km altitude and has a range of 300km.


جزئیاتی از سامانه پدافندی «باور۳۷۳»/ برد باور ۳۰۰ کیلومتر است

This is completely out of the blue, at least from official channels. Wow.

I presume the 6 target intercept is for this seemingly ABM configuration.

 

[skyshadow]

I will give you a more detailed answer on the bi-static effect of the Bavar later, but for now: American stealth PR is also made to mislead adversaries to invest in dead end systems and technologies.
Only sober nations who only follow physics won't fall into such a economical traps.
There are solutions to degrade stealth effects into a region where they loose their relevance.
Russia was the pioneer in this field, but Iran has also developed unique counter techniques.
Today Mersad 2 has been made anti-stealth.
3rd Khordad has been made anit-stealth
Sayyad-2 IRGC was the first anit-stealth system
S-200 Talash-3 is anti stealth to some degree
And Bavar is now the leading anti-stealth system.

PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has active and semi-active radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??

Some observations and ideas:

1- It is not clear why since the introduction of S-200VE system to Iran, the maximum engagement altitude (service ceiling) for all Iranian made AD systems has been limited to 27 km? Is it only a misleading information for media? Or 27 km is a threshold above which a different technology will be required? Or really there is no demand for an AD system to be designed for higher elevations? Just as a reminder, SR-71 could climb up to 26 ~ 27 km easily; while MiG-25 and A-12 could climb even beyond 27 but for a very short period of time. So, 27 km was a good top-off set point for Vega system.
Any consideration for anti BM missions?

2- S-200 VE still rocks with its magnificent +240 km engagement range! Apparently, Russia has recently delivered Dubna version to Syria (S-200M with +300 km engagement range). Is Bavar-373 also capable of guiding S-200 VE missiles, similar to Tombstone?

3- Almost in all S-300 test videos available on internet, the system is tested for double- fire killing probability; which has not been the case for Iranian AD systems, where always a single missile is fired against a no-maneuvering target. I am not sure if Karrar is a good simulated target for advanced AD systems, or not?

4- To me Zafar 8824 is nothing but a renovated Babr-400 which itself was a renovation of the very old versions of MAZ-537 Iran purchased 100 of them during the Shah era. It is completely different and inferior to MAZ-7910 used by older versions of S-300. Unlike its magnificent semitrailer load, Iranian versions are very limited to heavy flatbed off-road loads especially after Iran messed up with its engine / transmission (Iveco). So, maybe that is the reason they had to use Zoljenah for heavier 48N6E-like missiles. Russian TELs have been also switched from flatbed loaded MAZ-7910 to semitrailer loads for newer and heavier canisters.

And the most important thing:

5- How is a Bavar-373 complex itself protected against air attacks? I do not see any short range AD system in Iran’s doctrine to protect its new long range AD systems such as 15- Khordad or Bavar-373. Even older Iranian S-200 systems are vulnerable to air attacks by cruise missiles and gliding bombs.

well it has altitude up to 65 KM and not 27km and 300 km ( which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range so i will say it has 400 km range ) range and not 200 km.

This is completely out of the blue, at least from official channels. Wow.

I presume the 6 target intercept is for this seemingly ABM configuration.

they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars??

 

[DoubleYouSee]

PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has active and semi-active radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??



we it has altitude up to 65 KM and not 27km and 300 km ( which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range so i will say it has 400 km range ) range and not 200 km.

even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km

 

[skyshadow]

even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km

exactly my point well said, well said.

 

[mohsen]

About 1 week ago they said it has 400km range

No, they didn't.
Previous official info stated it's range is 1,5 times more than S300 (which was 200km), so it meant 300km. yet 65km altitude for radar was new.

 

[AmirPatriot]

No, they didn't.
Previous official info stated it's range is 1,5 times more than S300 (which was 200km), so it meant 300km. yet 65km altitude for radar was new.

That's a good point... maybe these specs are for the radar, not the missile?

even they had said that 3rd khordad has the range of 50km..........but it intercepted global hawk at range of 80km

That was for the early version of 3rd Khordad, even before the shootdown there was a parade where they said one of its newest missiles had a 105 km range.

they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars?

Often radars are less capable against certain targets, like ballistic missiles for example.

 

[skyshadow]

That's a good point... maybe these specs are for the radar, not the missile?


That was for the early version of 3rd Khordad, even before the shootdown there was a parade where they said one of its newest missiles had a 105 km range.


Often radars are less capable against certain targets, like ballistic missiles for example.

yes but not in half, that's big setback or that they are lying.


and they said Sayyad 2 has 75 km range but two days ago they said it hit the drone like what 90 km away? that's why im saying that they do not give us real numbers.

 

[925boy]

agreed but Iraq and Lebanon need some air defense system as soon as possible Israel is already attacking Iraq i hope Iraq gets some air defense systems soon be it from Iran or Russia but i hope they chose Iran's offer.

The pattern seems to be that Iraqi govt needs serious pressure or embarrasment from US or/and ISrael before Iraqi govt will take action to help Iraqis.

Also, Iraqi govt probably interpreted Iran's AD offer as an AD offer for Iraqi groups that Iran supports. lol. Just sayin...there's what people say and there's what people mean..

Iraq won't risk US sanctions, even after 2021 the US will do everything in their power to prevent Iran from acquiring modern weapons. They did this back in the early 90s after the fall of the Soviets, when Russian arms were going for cheap because of their weak economy.

But remember that if US sanctions IRaq, Iraq will kick all US troops out too, so sorry, US doesnt hold all the leverage in its dance with Iraq. Iraq might be a bit disabled now, but its not a puppet state. Oil is still insurance. Dont you see it saving Maduro?

They probably figured 3rd Khordad is more than enough to deter the enemies

I think its because US stopped further escalation.

 

[skyshadow]

 

[arashkamangir]

what a beauty. I want to see test footage, cant wait for more content tomorrow.

 

[925boy]

Aug 22 can't come soon enough.

HOw do you even know Iranian govt / MOD will give actual full specifications of this Bavar system?

 

[Smarana Mitra]

well it has altitude up to 65 KM and not 27km and 300 km ( which i think its lie it had bigger range than that as Iran will never say the real range so i will say it has 400 km range ) range and not 200 km

It is really surprising that is developed such complex Staten which even countries like China, India, France and UK are finding it hard. Only is and Russia has comparable system.

I find this a bit suspicious as Iran didn't have any previous teach record of development it's own seekers and AESA radar needed for such powerful missile

 

[AmirPatriot]

yes but not in half, that's big setback or that they are lying.

Also possible that it's for the engagement radars.

HOw do you even know Iranian govt / MOD will give actual full specifications of this Bavar system?

There's an article here which released a new video and gives specs as:

https://www.u-news.net/fa/news/30/2...یی-فوق-پیشرفته-باور-373-پرده-برداری-میکند.htm

Maximum detection Range: 320 km
Maximum tracking range: 260 km
Maximum missile engagement range: 200 km
Maximum missile engagement altitude: 27 km
Minimum radar cross-sectional area detectable: 0.001 m²
Number of simultaneously engaged targets: 6 goals
The number of simultaneous guided missiles: 12
Launch System: Hot Launch VLS
Number of launchers per battery: 6 TELs

We can't 100% believe these figures but they come from a source that posted a previously unseen HD video of testing. I would say these figures are smaller because they are for the 2 radars that are specifically for Bavar. As @PeeD has said the Meraj-4 isn't necessarily an integral part of Bavar but it's a higher level asset that Bavar interacts with.

The HD video was on telegram (non-HD version on their website for some reason) so I uploaded the HD version to YouTube.

 

[PeeD]

1. Could the Bavar's twin radar arrangement also designed to make use of this bi-static concept? If so, how?

Not bistatic but multi-aspect yes. The would need to operate in the same band to be able to set up a kind of bi-static system but their benefit is that they operate in two different bands simultaneously in real-time.
A bi-static effect happens with the likely SAGG guided Sayyad-4, like it theoretically happens with the S-300 and Patriot.
The Bavar can hover use multi-aspect effect agaist stealth targets: For that the radars need to be placed at distance. The VLO platform will try to put its lowest RCS aspect toward the closest threat emitter and by doing so it can't control the RCS level reflected to the second threat emitter. However if the X-band engagement radar is the second emitter, it may successfully evade it because U.S stealth peaks in effectiveness at X-band. A complex situation... to point the lowest RCS, the location/direction of the threat emitter must be known, but the Bavar radars should have very low side lobes and LPI techniques applied.

2. In bi-static operation, would you agree that having a network of AWACS aircraft over the battlespace would help fight off stealth targets?

Bi-static networks are always fragile. Bi-static effect of an illuminating radar and SARH seeker is very robust.
So you best avoid bi-static networks at the core of your kill chain.
You better avoid assets that require runways in the days of the end of the INF threat and the advent of hypersonic weapons.
AEW would certainly help, best against low flying targets. However if you manage to do it without AEW assets than you are on the robust side.

The criticism to this was that missiles have a limited energy and therefore attack vector that they can approach and detect the target at. Modern datalinks mean tactical aircraft can engage targets with their AAMs without using their own radars, just relying on the AWACS.

That criticism is obsolete, I was too conservative/pessimistic back then. In fact the Bavar will operate like this against stealth: Target detected --> SAM launched towards it --> SAM continuously updated via missile up-link --> radar starts to track target in the last seconds --> SARH seeker tries to find a lock and if the target is very stealthy, this X-band lock will only happen in the last 5km, or in other words lat 2-3 seconds. There will be a threshold at which VLO techniques will not be sufficient, especially at distances like below 5km.
A HAWK locks its seeker at 40km with much lower power and aperture levels... a S-200 at 240km... now imagine the Bavar not achieving a lock at 3-5km against the stealth targets and at such close ranges there is a exponential increase in signal strength.
So no, at those close ranges, not even a -50dB VLO system will remain invisible, especially if the bi-static effect kicks in too.
The art here is to first detect the VLO target and somehow guide the SAM towards it. Here Irans art is the use of a separate S-band "engagement" radar that steals away -20dB from the VLO assets stealth budget due to its wavelength. Those 20dB reduction is enough to detect the VLO target at SAM relevant ranges of 200km. The VLO asset still has -5-10dB RCS reduction due to RAM/RAS and 20-30dB reduction due to shaping techniques (plus another 1-10dB due to ECM if available). So it is not useless at all, otherwise the Bavar track to kill it at 400-500km.
Iran could have gone a wrong path too here: Fear stealth performance as much to believe -20dB benefit are not enough and a high degradation of shaping stealth techniques is required --> go for a VHF-band engagement radar to achieve 30-40dB reduction. Luckily testing and physics showed them that 20db reduction is sufficient for the kill-chain and S-band is the right path that brings many other benefits too.

Your idea of bistatic networked AEW would certainly also work well especially against the CM and terrain masking threats, but needs large efforts and is venerable. It is however good in a offensive airpower concept, operating above enemy airspace.

I still want to see a Iranian fighter or bomber RQ-170 that uses stealth techniques: Stealth offers a huge benefit in X-band and higher and if deployed in the right conditions brings a useful advantage. Russians use it for frontal X-band RCS reduction of the Su-57 to improve it's air-to-air performance.

How ?

By that 20dB S-band radars offer against stealth: Give the Mersad a Hafez, the S-200 a Najm-804, the 3rd Khordad a Najm-802B.

PeeD do you think Sayyad 4 has active and semi-active radar homing or it enjoy SAGG??

Hopefully SAGG and I hope not for an active seeker for its normal Sayyad-4 SAM: System economy is of great importance, relying on ARH seekers is the easy way to create a LRSAM. Your system get expensive and you loose bistatic and SAGG benefits. Notching, beaming and self defense barrage jamming becomes possible.
ARH seeker is good for a very long range missile, 250km and above if used for high value targets in low numbers.

they are lying Meraj-4 can track up to 200 targets not 100 maybe they are saying that for those 2 new radars??

6 targets means that the radar must create more than 13 Separate beams: 6 for the missiles, 6 for the targets and the rest for searching. The greatest aspect and biggest breakthrough about the S-400 aside the 350+km SAM component is its capability to attack 12 targets simultaneously. However a less robust que engagement (AEGIS concept) is also possible: You track only the missiles, and begin to track the targets only in the last seconds and then the next ones already on TWS.