Iranian missiles v western navy

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

I will only read a big article like that If its published by the Iranian military itself...

 

[Mosamania]

I will only read a big article like that If its published by the Iranian military itself...

Then I rest my case.

 

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

edittttttttttttttttttttttt

---------- Post added at 10:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 PM ----------

I cant come to the last page mossa, It wont let me, when I try to come to the 5th page it stays on the 4th sorry.

 

[gambit]

gambit try not to be annoyed by the fact AAM and RAM and Machine Guns are not suited for countering Ballistic missiles for that you need something else and the defense that US ships have against Ballistic missiles is geared against the ICBM missiles not missiles with the range of 200-300 km

Why should I be 'annoyed'? You brought up something that have been clearly defined as defense against aircrafts, cruise missiles, and enemy combatant ships.

by the way who want to defeat battle-group with some dingies (by the way those dingies have sharp tooth and claws) what you must be careful about will come from the shore .

Whatever there are on shore, they must be careful about what comes from above from US. You are being another 'Baghdad Bob'.

about the source you bring a source that these systems can counter Ballistic missiles

Sure. The AEGIS ballistic missile defense system.

 

[Hack-Hook]

An ICBM reenters atmosphere at a steep angle and at a much faster speed compared to IRBM or a Scud.What you are saying is against the law of physics.If a system can stop an ICBM,it would be a child's play for that system to stop your Scuds.

no you are wrong the flight pattern is very important ,
it's why that for example Arrow can't intercept Hezbollah
Rockets and they had to invest on Iron dome

 

[PacificBeach]

edittttttttttttttttttttttt

---------- Post added at 10:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 PM ----------

I cant come to the last page mossa, It wont let me, when I try to come to the 5th page it stays on the 4th sorry.

Trying using Internet Explorer if you are currently using Firefox.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Sure. The AEGIS ballistic missile defense system.

well when you comment a post you must check what's that post is
about . the post you commented had nothing to do with AEGIS it
was an answer to a comment that said some system that have been
designed to counter cruise missile or airplanes can be used to counter
Ballistic missiles

another thing is that you said AEGIS system can be used to defend the ship
but as I said this system has it's limitation when that system is designed they
didn't design it to defend the ship itself they designed it to use those ships
as counter against missile like Scud-C or Shahab not missiles like Fateh-110
or Persian Gulf . they wanted to made some sort of Anti ballistic Missile network
not to defend the carrier group against short range ballistic missiles like persian gulf.

If I'm not wrong you need 2 missile to defend against each coming missile .
let put the situation like this persian Gulf is a relatively expensive missile for
it's size but Iran for 20 year is making another missile that has the same size as
Persian Gulf that is called Zelzal that missile in fact is just a big artillery rocket
but the fact is you cant distinguish those two missile from each other on RADAR
just consider Iran fire 20 zelzal and 2 persian Gulf at he same time then don't
you think that certainly overwhelm AEGIS system

 

[Mosamania]

Trying using Internet Explorer if you are currently using Firefox.

Did you just recommend Internet Explorer? Get out of my Internet

 

[anonymus]

no you are wrong the flight pattern is very important ,
it's why that for example Arrow can't intercept Hezbollah
Rockets and they had to invest on Iron dome

Israeli's did not intercepted Hizbollah's rocket because of economic impracticality.Hizbollah had thousand of Crappy inaccurate rockets while Israel had only few battery of arrows.The cost of Intercepting Hizbollah rockets with Arrow was prohibitive and would have depleted Arrow's Batteries leaving them underequipped for strategic Threats.Also the Accuracy of Hizbollah's rockets is awful (Hit ratio of 44:4000)and they did not caused any real damage and most of the rockets need not be Intercepted.Iron Dome consist of a new missile which is a lot cheaper even though still costlier than Grads.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

I love reading the bravado by Iranian nationalists. makes for good coffee time reading. Thanks all of you.

 

[anonymus]

Double Post

 

[Hack-Hook]

Israeli's did not intercepted Hizbollah's rocket because of economic impracticality.Hizbollah had thousand of Crappy inaccurate rockets while Israel had only few battery of arrows.The cost of Intercepting Hizbollah rockets with Arrow was prohibitive and would have depleted Arrow's Batteries leaving them underequipped for strategic Threats.Also the Accuracy of Hizbollah's rockets is awful (Hit ratio of 44:4000)and they did not caused any real damage and most of the rockets need not be Intercepted.Iron Dome consist of a new missile which is a lot cheaper even though still costlier than Grads.

not exactly, If your system designed to intercept the enemy missile
at ab altitude around 50 km then it's not suited for a missile that only
go up to 30km .

It's why every defensive system must be made of several layer and several
different defensive solution to be able to answer different threats .

as I said AEGIS Anti Balistic missile defence was not designed to defend the
navy itself but they designed it as a portable Anti ICBM & IRBM defense system
not to defend against short range missile like Iskandar OR Fateh 110 or Persian Gulf
these missiles have very low altitude (compared to other IRBM or ICBM) and have a
very short flying time another capability of such missiles is that they are not
completely follow a trajectory path and when they come down or at the flight time
can do some maneuver and change their flight pattern so it would be very hard to
determine where it come down to fire the defensive missile .

 

[Oldman1]

You got an odd number of balls? o_0
You got 14 balls if you mean your air craft carriers. But once a several Billion dollar asset visits the bottom of the Persian Gulf you'll see that even losing one of your balls hurt.

No one's planning on winning the US navy here, we're just planning on giving you the maximal damage at any cost. How much the maximal damage would cost for you? It'll be understood if you attack us, so I prefer not to make any predictions and just be patient and wait.

How can we have 14 when we only have 11? You are thinking like the Japanese when they hope to inflict maximum damage when in reality you sank a couple of ships and we still had carriers out to sea to fight another day. You sink an American carrier and you still have others to contend with. Don't think sinking a carrier is going to deter retaliation.

 

[Oldman1]

not exactly, If your system designed to intercept the enemy missile
at ab altitude around 50 km then it's not suited for a missile that only
go up to 30km .

It's why every defensive system must be made of several layer and several
different defensive solution to be able to answer different threats .

as I said AEGIS Anti Balistic missile defence was not designed to defend the
navy itself but they designed it as a portable Anti ICBM & IRBM defense system
not to defend against short range missile like Iskandar OR Fateh 110 or Persian Gulf
these missiles have very low altitude (compared to other IRBM or ICBM) and have a
very short flying time another capability of such missiles is that they are not
completely follow a trajectory path and when they come down or at the flight time
can do some maneuver and change their flight pattern so it would be very hard to
determine where it come down to fire the defensive missile .

The Aegis system is designed to all threats. It was built against cruise missiles and now ballistic missiles as well as aircraft. They have missiles for all threats.

 

[Arian]

How can we have 14 when we only have 11? You are thinking like the Japanese when they hope to inflict maximum damage when in reality you sank a couple of ships and we still had carriers out to see to fight another day. You sink an American carrier and you still have others to contend with. Don't think sinking a carrier is going to deter retaliation.

somewhere I read the USA had 14 air craft carriers, or the correct number is 11?
Sinking a carrier won't deter retaliation for sure, but it would be a great loss for the USA.