What's new

Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

It was the national air defence grid that did it with the local 3rd Khordad launching its missile and not even engaging with its own radar. On it own, the system might have been able to do it but it would be at the absolute maximum range of its capabilities and would have to launch a salvo at that.
It was a demonstration of the excellence of the national air defence grid and all of the efforts that made it a reality from nothing just a decade ago.
Third of khordad can engage around 120km away
The engagement happend 75km away so it was not at the limit of the radar. Also 3rd of khordad battalion contain a radar that has the range of more than 400km . so it can operate individually while the method of choice is using it in the national airdefence grid .

The engagement happened at the limit of E/O system that 3rd of khordad is equipped with.
 
. .
@sahureka2
Do you mean that Iran can produce AK-176 and AK-630? Or Just AK-630?

only the local version which seems to have been derived from AK-630.
AK-630 that they had the opportunity to view and study as present on the former Iraqi FAC Bogomol Class / Project 02065.
At the bow there was also AK-176, but Iran already makes the Fajr-27 version of the excellent Oto Melara 76/62 Compact, so I don't think they intend to make a version of the AK-176.

PS:
However AK-176 has interesting capabilities with a firing rate of 120 per minute, it has the possibility of having the gunners in the turret that have a pointing system and a manual loading system from the ammunition depot, this in the event that damage affects the automatic remote control
But it is also of a larger size and weight than the Fajr-27 / Compact 76/62
 
.
Third of khordad can engage around 120km away
The engagement happend 75km away so it was not at the limit of the radar. Also 3rd of khordad battalion contain a radar that has the range of more than 400km . so it can operate individually while the method of choice is using it in the national airdefence grid .

The engagement happened at the limit of E/O system that 3rd of khordad is equipped with.
What about altitude of the drone compared to the #rd Khordad system?
Also, don't forget that by directly engaging the drone, it would have triggered its self defence systems cause the individual units some headaches and possibly not succeeding in downing it at least not with one missile anyway. I think that unit only had one Sayyad 2 and 2 taers; it boils down to how much could the unit's aesa and the S2 missile counter the drone's counter measures.
 
.
What about altitude of the drone compared to the #rd Khordad system?
Also, don't forget that by directly engaging the drone, it would have triggered its self defence systems cause the individual units some headaches and possibly not succeeding in downing it at least not with one missile anyway. I think that unit only had one Sayyad 2 and 2 taers; it boils down to how much could the unit's aesa and the S2 missile counter the drone's counter measures.

The Khordad radar was not strong enough on its own without illuminating the target actively which would trigger operator knowing that Drone is being targeted by radar.

So what the crew did was use EO/IO data to data link to a passive long range radar. That data along with EO data was used to fire the missile into a specific area that the drone was likely in.

The missile did its top attack pattern then turn on its SARH and located the drone from above and went for the kill too fast for operator to do anything at that point.
 
.
only the local version which seems to have been derived from AK-630. AK-630 that they had the opportunity to view and study as present on the former Iraqi FAC Bogomol Class / Project 02065.
At the bow there was also AK-176, but Iran already makes the Fajr-27 version of the excellent Oto Melara 76/62 ...
@sahureka2
Thx for your quick answer.
I know Iran produces Fajr-27 for a while.
In fact, Iran does need neither Fajr-27, nor AK-630, nor AK-176. During this last decade, we were witnessing of fantastic development of modern indigenous Iranian Anti Air defense including missiles and anti-stealth radars with Super Computer. Your high responsible declared recently that Iran is on the verge to develop by its own a new kind of S-400/500, besides its own Pantsir. In this context, the AK-176 would be interesting because Iran could provide its allies in the Middle East to hamper Western air superiority. Such a system in the hands of Hezbollah, or Hamas could create a redoubtable situation against Israel and even the US.
More than any other thing Westerners fears this kind of hardware.
 
.
The Khordad radar was not strong enough on its own without illuminating the target actively which would trigger operator knowing that Drone is being targeted by radar.

So what the crew did was use EO/IO data to data link to a passive long range radar. That data along with EO data was used to fire the missile into a specific area that the drone was likely in.

The missile did its top attack pattern then turn on its SARH and located the drone from above and went for the kill too fast for operator to do anything at that point.
Although the radar of third khordad is AESA and better than that of buk M2E according to the reports, but still struggled to track the RQ-4?
 
.
@sahureka2
................the AK-176 would be interesting because Iran could provide its allies in the Middle East to hamper Western air superiority............

having already in production the Fajr-27 - 76/62, I think it is not convenient to spend money and industrial resources to make a version of the AK-176 that has almost the same military characteristics.
To allies, friends or customers he can offer the Fajr-27 which is already in production.

PS:
However, given the larger dimensions of the AK-176 turret and the opportunity listed above to have gunners in turret with related aiming systems, starting from this they could think of creating a system with increased dimensions to receive a higher caliber weapon such as a 100mm or 130mm, to be installed on future heavy destroyers
 
.
Although the radar of third khordad is AESA and better than that of buk M2E according to the reports, but still struggled to track the RQ-4?

One thing is the drone was built using honeycomb and RAM. It was flying at high altitude. The 3rd Khordad detected it, but in order to get a precise coordinate it would have to illuminate the target which would have activated the radar receiver letting operator know and then it could take counter measures.

Thus using the passive EO the air defense team sent the data to a long range passive radar who then sent back telemetry data on the drone. Once the team had the ok they fired the missile into the area that the EO + long range radar was telling the drone was at.

The missile then went into the sky turned down and turned on its radar and scanned the sector and found the drone and went for the kill.

The missile needed a specific area that the drone was in or else it would fly and scan and find nothing and self destruct if the distance or telemetry was wrong beyond margin of error.
 
.
Although the radar of third khordad is AESA and better than that of buk M2E according to the reports, but still struggled to track the RQ-4?
no , it didn't have the problem , they didn't turn it on and used E/O targeting system for hiding the engagement
3rd-BATTALION-F-1600x.jpg

that's 3rd of khordad Ra'ad 2 fire control is capable of 150km of engagement range but what we did was monitoring RQ-4 with bashir Radar and then do the engagement with the help of the E/O system on the 3rd of khordadd the electro optic have a range of around 70km
and the engagement atitude for 3rd of khordad is 27km rq-4 was at altitude of 15km
 
. .
no , it didn't have the problem , they didn't turn it on and used E/O targeting system for hiding the engagement
3rd-BATTALION-F-1600x.jpg

that's 3rd of khordad Ra'ad 2 fire control is capable of 150km of engagement range but what we did was monitoring RQ-4 with bashir Radar and then do the engagement with the help of the E/O system on the 3rd of khordadd the electro optic have a range of around 70km
and the engagement atitude for 3rd of khordad is 27km rq-4 was at altitude of 15km
Wasn't the Ghadir OTH radar involved in the engagement and doing the passive tracking?
 
. .
I just found this pic from a couple of days ago,the interesting part of it is over on the upper right hand side just behind the orange box labeled "mine hunting rov"
E4GGUFtXoAc6RUd

The uuav looks to be based on the italian-swiss pluto-plus uuav,however there are some rather obvious differences just from a brief cursory look at the two.
4390_900.jpg

The two most obvious differences are the design of the rear propulsor ducts,the iranian ones are far wider and look to also taper slightly front to back,whereas the pluto-plus ducts are far more narrow with no taper and a curved edge of both the front and back.
The other really obvious difference is in the number of bolts used to secure the top and bottom halves of the uuav body,in the iranian version it looks like there are at least twice as many bolts used,this could be to provide an extra level of strength should the uuav suffer a near detonation from a mine.
Anyway,its good to see that the navy now seems to be getting a lot more serious about drone tech,both of the uav and uuav variety.

You can see some more pics of the original pluto-plus and its operators console at these links
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/mina030/71192576/4745/4745_900.png
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/mina030/71192576/6741/6741_900.png
 
.
I just found this pic from a couple of days ago,the interesting part of it is over on the upper right hand side just behind the orange box labeled "mine hunting rov"
E4GGUFtXoAc6RUd

The uuav looks to be based on the italian-swiss pluto-plus uuav,however there are some rather obvious differences just from a brief cursory look at the two.
4390_900.jpg

The two most obvious differences are the design of the rear propulsor ducts,the iranian ones are far wider and look to also taper slightly front to back,whereas the pluto-plus ducts are far more narrow with no taper and a curved edge of both the front and back.
The other really obvious difference is in the number of bolts used to secure the top and bottom halves of the uuav body,in the iranian version it looks like there are at least twice as many bolts used,this could be to provide an extra level of strength should the uuav suffer a near detonation from a mine.
Anyway,its good to see that the navy now seems to be getting a lot more serious about drone tech,both of the uav and uuav variety.

You can see some more pics of the original pluto-plus and its operators console at these links
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/mina030/71192576/4745/4745_900.png
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/mina030/71192576/6741/6741_900.png
Interesting find..which brings up the question of if Iran has any sub rescue vessel..considering the large number of subs iran operates, chances are that there will be a technical acciden (hope not but being realistic).
 
.
Back
Top Bottom