Israeli sources: Iran missile strike a ‘flop,’ with most missing target

[That Guy]

What is so difficult about tracking across borders? Bear in mind Iran has long range detection capabilities, with some large OTH radars.

The further away a target goes, the harder it is to track. Both the US and Russia get around this by using satnav, Iran (to my knowledge) does not have this capability. Going across the border also means that Iran would have to deal with any sort of defenses that are there, it would also have to deal with potential detection of the missile, and deal with unknown terrain conditions (provided that the missile is hugging the ground to avoid detection, both visually and by radar, though radar isn't really an issue with Iraq).

I don't know. It looks like they were too busy with all the terrorist attacks, elections, US constitutional crises and whatnot.

But they still have covered it, their coverage just hasn't made the headlines.

The coverage only extends to what Iran is saying, nothing really more than that. I don't really buy that those other events were more important to the media to present over this, as this is a huge deal, if true.

We have to make out own guesses I think, free from bias. In all likelihood the 1-2 Qiams missed their targets, they are quite an old design and their guidance is not very advanced, hence they have a large CEP.

This could very well be true.

But I see no reason why the Zolfiqar, which has displayed incredible accuracy, would fail to hit the target, let alone land in Iraq.

Both American and Russia missiles, which you have to admit are more advanced, have shown system failures. I don't see why this particular missile couldn't fail either.

Good point, but really we aren't going to get any leaks from Iran's government (it's just not common), especially with national security issues that the government takes very seriously.

Maybe not leaks, but we could very well see an official complete video, or ground evidence from a third party. Iran has shown previously that it is willing to show evidence of its claims, for example, the video that showed Iran had successfully hacked the RQ170.

Anything from other countries is speculation, since they can't even know the targets. And leaking (rather than propagating) information of other governments isn't really a thing.

On the other hand, it is also unhealthy to simply believe someone, just because they're the primary source. A healthy amount of skepticism must always be exercised.

 

[Blue In Green]

The further away a target goes, the harder it is to track. Both the US and Russia get around this by using satnav, Iran (to my knowledge) does not have this capability. Going across the border also means that Iran would have to deal with any sort of defenses that are there, it would also have to deal with potential detection of the missile, and deal with unknown terrain conditions (provided that the missile is hugging the ground to avoid detection, both visually and by radar, though radar isn't really an issue with Iraq).


The coverage only extends to what Iran is saying, nothing really more than that. I don't really buy that those other events were more important to the media to present over this, as this is a huge deal, if true.



This could very well be true.


Both American and Russia missiles, which you have to admit are more advanced, have shown system failures. I don't see why this particular missile couldn't fail either.



Maybe not leaks, but we could very well see an official complete video, or ground evidence from a third party. Iran has shown previously that it is willing to show evidence of its claims, for example, the video that showed Iran had successfully hacked the RQ170.



On the other hand, it is also unhealthy to simply believe someone, just because they're the primary source. A healthy amount of skepticism must always be exercised.

I personally had my doubts on ALL missiles hitting their intended targets since both the US and Russia and other countries have missile malfunctions all the time (it is quite common place for Tomohawks to just wind up in a field somewhere far from the target).

If one hit then I'm happy, it's progress.

 

[WordsMatter]

Analysis sucks as always



Ooooor

Your *** is on fire ?



I think some people in the thread are unbelievably dumb !

Their hate about Iran made them blind about the truth !



For example this retard !

He knows shit about missiles and still dares to talk about something he knows nothing about ...

The Retard on this thread is you and your ignominious, self-righteous, and believe-anything-that-Press-TV-says self. Who died and made you, a know-nothing retard, a missile expert?!

 

[AmirPatriot]

I don't mean to pry, but can you give me a link to the source saying that Iran fired three Shahab-3s?

Even assuming Iran would fire older ballistic missiles for a surgical operation is insane.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-launches-missile-strike-into-syria-for-tehran-attacks/

Times of Israel quoting an Israeli news channel quoting an unnamed "Israeli intelligence" source

The further away a target goes, the harder it is to track.

Iran has a 1100 km ranged Ghadir OTH radar in Khuzestan province, and the distance between it and the location of the strikes is approximately 900 km, making it detectable with the Ghadir. There's also the Sepehr 3000 km OTH but we don't know if that is operational yet.

Both the US and Russia get around this by using satnav, Iran (to my knowledge) does not have this capability.

Missile analysts like Jeffrey Lewis of Armscontrolwonk have asserted that the accuracy of the missiles suggests combined INS and GPS guidance.

Going across the border also means that Iran would have to deal with any sort of defenses that are there, it would also have to deal with potential detection of the missile, and deal with unknown terrain conditions (provided that the missile is hugging the ground to avoid detection, both visually and by radar, though radar isn't really an issue with Iraq).

Iraq and Syria gave full authorisation for the missiles to fly in their territories, so defences are not an issue.

And these are ballistic missiles, hugging the ground is not an issue nor a possibility. They are also generally detected quite easily even when flown in Iran (the US deploys spy ships with massive radars to observe Iranian missile tests. Obviously they have satellites too).

I don't really buy that those other events were more important to the media to present over this, as this is a huge deal, if true.

I've noticed media like the BBC seem to (understandably) focus on domestic issues, for example in the UK there was the massive Grenfell tower fire and the terrorist attack on the mosque.

Both American and Russia missiles, which you have to admit are more advanced, have shown system failures. I don't see why this particular missile couldn't fail either.

System failures are more an indication of poor reliability rather than advancement. But I get your drift, though the US doesn't really count as it doesn't use TBMs, Russia does and AFAIK the Iskander is highly regarded (the old Scud is not more advanced than Iranian missiles).

On the other hand, it is also unhealthy to simply believe someone, just because they're the primary source. A healthy amount of skepticism must always be exercised.

Sure, but there is a difference between being skeptical and wanting proof of missile effectiveness and believing claims - lacking proof - of 14% success rate.

 

[KediKesenFare3]

I actually believed the article until the author claimed that Hezbollah can do better than Iran. At this point, you simply cannot overlook anymore how unreliable this article is. It's a propaganda piece.

 

[The SC]

BS article: "Even Hezbollah can do better".. with what ? Iranian missiles?

 

[SOHEIL]

The Retard on this thread is you and your ignominious, self-righteous, and believe-anything-that-Press-TV-says self. Who died and made you, a know-nothing retard, a missile expert?!

Millions Of Americans Think Chocolate Milk Comes From Brown Cows

http://www.iflscience.com/plants-an...s-think-chocolate-milk-comes-from-brown-cows/

No comments !

Says a lot ...

 

[HannibalBarca]

I actually believed the article until the author claimed that Hezbollah can do better than Iran. At this point, you simply cannot overlook anymore how unreliable this article is. It's a propaganda piece.

Since when TimesofIsrael is a well balanced-serious outlet?

 

[SOHEIL]

It means, they lied multiple times on missile quantity, quality, stealth aircrafts and what not.
This Photoshop-ed image just proves my point

You can use it as wallpaper ...

Helps you to feel safer

 

[Blue In Green]

Since when TimesofIsrael is a well balanced-serious outlet?

Curious, whats your thoughts on the recent Iranian missile strike?

You were originally skeptical of the performance, just wanted to get an update.

 

[DavidSling]

You can use it as wallpaper ...

Helps you to feel safer

My purpose in life doesn't have anything to do with Iran, nor I care for it so why should I make it a wallpaper.
Unlike some Iranians, I don't burn flags and call for destruction of other countries for fun.

 

[SOHEIL]

My purpose in life doesn't have anything to do with Iran, nor I care for it so why should I make it a wallpaper.
Unlike some Iranians, I don't burn flags and call for destruction of other countries for fun.

So you created Isis for what?

 

[DavidSling]

So you created Isis for what?

More PressTV propaganda please.
Muslims kill muslims and then blame the rest of the world for it, pathetic.

 

[Blue In Green]

Keep posts on subject gentlemen. This is about the strike on ISIS.

 

[SOHEIL]

More PressTV propaganda please.
Muslims kill muslims and then blame the rest of the world for it, pathetic.

It's the truth ... Isis created for the purpose !

Destruction of Muslim countries with bunch of monkeys ...

You will face the consequences ...