Iranian UAVs | News and Discussions

[skyshadow]

Wasn't it Saeghe?

Saeghe has a big air intake in front

another day another drone

 

[Messerschmitt]

This "Samavat" is the cloud seeding variant of the Shahed-161.

 

[Messerschmitt]

Shahed-141: 40% the size of the RQ-170, piston engine
Shahed-161: 40% the size of the RQ-170, jet engine
Shahed-181: 60% the size of the RQ-170, piston engine, used in Operation Laylat al-Qadr (2017)
Shahed-191: 60% the size of the RQ-170, jet engine
Shahed-171: Same size as the RQ-170 (1:1)

 

[raptor22]

Saeghe has a big air intake in front

another day another drone

It is the first time I hear it's called Mersad ... there are 2 types of Saghe with different air intake and the bigger one which is Simorgh.

 

[Blue In Green]

Shahed-141: 40% the size of the RQ-170, piston engine
Shahed-161: 40% the size of the RQ-170, jet engine
Shahed-181: 60% the size of the RQ-170, piston engine, used in Operation Laylat al-Qadr (2017)
Shahed-191: 60% the size of the RQ-170, jet engine
Shahed-171: Same size as the RQ-170 (1:1)

Jesus H. Christ....Iran made THAT many versions of the Rq-170?!

Has Iran posted a picture of the Shahed-171?

 

[Messerschmitt]

Jesus H. Christ....Iran made THAT many versions of the Rq-170?!

Has Iran posted a picture of the Shahed-171?

 

[skyshadow]

It is the first time I hear it's called Mersad ... there are 2 types of Saghe with different air intake and the bigger one which is Simorgh.

they are too many

 

[jauk]

The sheer amount of cost-effective, drone inventory in Iran, will likely be replacing our conventional airforce. Just observing Azerbijians use of Turkish drones tells us how effective they are even in contested airspace and also how vulnerable they are.

While the drones have been effective at destroying Armenian positions, a larger number of these extremely expensive drones have been shot down indicating that a small fleet of expensive drones is likely not the best option, but instead a large number of cost-effective drone swarms will be the future. We can see despite the importance of their drones strikes, their inventory is depleting fast through satellite images of their airbases, and the cost of purchasing each are in the millions.

Iran can deploy hundreds of drones to a small battle space like NK without much discomfort to any losses. I'm very happy that we are taking this route instead of building aircraft. Focus should be 100% on drone warfare as many other nations are stuck in their old ways of conventional airforce, we can go full speed on bomber and interceptor drones

Exactly. I indicated that repeatedly in IMF over a decade ago. Any effort to purchase or build a manned/conventional 'airforce' is outright stupid. One can argue a limited turnkey purchase (ONLY with an unlikely TOT) to close 'gaps'. IRI's strategists have been brilliant. Kudos.

 

[Mithridates]

The sheer amount of cost-effective, drone inventory in Iran, will likely be replacing our conventional airforce. Just observing Azerbijians use of Turkish drones tells us how effective they are even in contested airspace and also how vulnerable they are.

While the drones have been effective at destroying Armenian positions, a larger number of these extremely expensive drones have been shot down indicating that a small fleet of expensive drones is likely not the best option, but instead a large number of cost-effective drone swarms will be the future. We can see despite the importance of their drones strikes, their inventory is depleting fast through satellite images of their airbases, and the cost of purchasing each are in the millions.

Iran can deploy hundreds of drones to a small battle space like NK without much discomfort to any losses. I'm very happy that we are taking this route instead of building aircraft. Focus should be 100% on drone warfare as many other nations are stuck in their old ways of conventional airforce, we can go full speed on bomber and interceptor drones

drones are good for destroying enemy equipment but for infrastructures, you need heavier payloads thus bigger birds.

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

drones are good for destroying enemy equipment but for infrastructures, you need heavier payloads thus bigger birds.

That is what Ballistic and cruise missiles are for.

 

[TheImmortal]

That is what Ballistic and cruise missiles are for.

Ballistics are good for fixed targets, not small moving mobile units.

CMs require pinpoint targeting info which again would mean a drone in the air if your trying to target a mobile unit.

CMs and BMs against mobile units (tanks, infantry,etc) on a rapidly changing battlefield is not ideal.

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

Ballistics are good for fixed targets, not small moving mobile units.

CMs require pinpoint targeting info which again would mean a drone in the air if your trying to target a mobile unit.

CMs and BMs against mobile units (tanks, infantry,etc) on a rapidly changing battlefield is not ideal.

That was in reply to Mithridates comment about infrastructure targets.

 

[Mithridates]

That is what Ballistic and cruise missiles are for.

there was an estimation of how many BM are needed to destroy US bases around us, for 5-6 base we should launch almost 1700 BMs. that is a big chunk of our stockpile.
i say we should focus our BMs to cripple enemy's war machine and economy and use the simple and cheap means to destroy their bases.

 

[TheImmortal]

there was an estimation of how many BM are needed to destroy US bases around us, for 5-6 base we should launch almost 1700 BMs. that is a big chunk of our stockpile.

i say we should focus our BMs to cripple enemy's war machine and economy and use the simple and cheap means to destroy their bases.

1 missile is comparable to 2-3 500LB bombs in destructive power potentially more if you factor in kinetic energy from a Mach 7+ impact.

It would likely need 75-150 missiles to adequately DISABLE a large US base as well as account for inaccuracy, failure, and interception. Al Assad was done with 7-10 missiles. So a factor of 10 should be sufficient.

Though I agree with your point that it cannot be the only firepower. Hence why I have long advocated for high altitude UAV supersonic bomber that can carry 4 x 500lbs.

As the Azeri vs Armenia conflict has shown, UAVs can wreck havoc on fixed and mobile targets now imagine a supersonic high altitude UAV bomber that can quickly approach an airspace and drop a PGM from 50-75KM away.

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

there was an estimation of how many BM are needed to destroy US bases around us, for 5-6 base we should launch almost 1700 BMs. that is a big chunk of our stockpile.
i say we should focus our BMs to cripple enemy's war machine and economy and use the simple and cheap means to destroy their bases.

Iran does not need to destroy their airbases with TBMs, they just have to suppress them. We saw how long the Americans were hunkered down in their bunkers in AL Assad airbase just from 11-13 TBMs. lucky for Iran it has an Airforce + UCAVs + Cruise missiles that can spring into action while enemy's Airforce and Air Defense systems are Suppressed by TBMs and Anti radiation TBMs. the only real threat to this scenario would come from VTOL capable F-35s operating away from airbases.