Khorramshahr multi warhead ballistic missile

[AmirPatriot]

View attachment 427106


I saw 3 engines, what a beast

1 main engine, multiple steering engines.

 

[eagle2007]

Raptor22,

If so, that's rather puzzling:

1) If the ground level footage showing the "jink" is the warhead separating, the missile didn't go very far (warhead separation generally according HUNDREDS of miles above the Earth's surface), where as this looks like it happened while fairly close the ground and still visible with the naked eye.

2) When you watch the split screen footage (4 boxes), it's clear the bottom right images is a camera looking down, mounted just above the engine section. Why would we see any "action" there at warhead separation? Generally you look at the warhead section for the separation (explosive bolts or squibs for example).

 

[Stryker1982]

Is this some sort of new engine in use? I've never seen our missiles with such thickness before.

 

[AmirPatriot]

Good stuff finding the video.

Here's my "big question": What the heck is going on at 0:55 in the bottom right image?

We see just before that in the ground-level footage that the missile's exhaust trail seems to "jink" and then at 0:55 (likely a replay of what we just saw but from the 4 onboard cameras), see a large flow of the exhaust plume moving perpendicular to the missile body.

If it's thrust-vectoring of some sort (what I assume since the missile didn't explode immediately afterwards), is what we're seeming typical?

Could be a steering engine, but the angle looks very strange. Then again, if it was a critical failure like the Americans say, I would think it would look much more drastic than this. You can also see the steering engine go back to normal/shut down for a very brief moment at 1:26.

0:55 is just the launch. I don't think that's too important.

At the end of the video I can hear men saying "mashallah" which is a praise. From their voices I cannot hear any concern or hint of a failed test.

Also, good to see you back.

Is this some sort of new engine in use? I've never seen our missiles with such thickness before.

Absolutely, the burn flame is much cleaner than our older missiles.

 

[eagle2007]

Amir,

I should clarify, I meant Raptor's vid @ 0:55 (definitely NOT the launch), not yours. I was posting my response as you posted yours.

 

[PeeD]

Here's my "big question": What the heck is going on at 0:55 in the bottom right image?

We see just before that in the ground-level footage that the missile's exhaust trail seems to "jink" and then at 0:55 (likely a replay of what we just saw but from the 4 onboard cameras), see a large flow of the exhaust plume moving perpendicular to the missile body.

If it's thrust-vectoring of some sort (what I assume since the missile didn't explode immediately afterwards), is what we're seeming typical?

Yes looks strange, such effects can occur with a bus. I could also think of a maneuver to let the first stage land inside the country = steep climb and horizontal ballistic travel.

 

[Muhammed45]

Yes looks strange, such effects can occur with a bus. I could also think of a maneuver to let the first stage land inside the country = steep climb and horizontal ballistic travel.

Imagine if we develop SLBM wow

This missile with it's shape can be deployed inside a submarine

 

[eagle2007]

PeeD,

Was just thinking that myself after watching it again. The last moments of that quadrant definitely looks like a separation (not unlike watching a SLV stage separate or burn out).

 

[Stryker1982]

Imagine if we develop SLBM wow

This missile with it's shape can be deployed inside a submarine

Seems possible with the kind of missile. Its pretty consistent with other SLBM. Certainly hope so. Also its not as tall as our other missiles like Emad. Feels more compact and efficient.

Could be a steering engine, but the angle looks very strange. Then again, if it was a critical failure like the Americans say, I would think it would look much more drastic than this. You can also see the steering engine go back to normal/shut down for a very brief moment at 1:26.

0:55 is just the launch. I don't think that's too important.

At the end of the video I can hear men saying "mashallah" which is a praise. From their voices I cannot hear any concern or hint of a failed test.

Also, good to see you back.



Absolutely, the burn flame is much cleaner than our older missiles.

Would you say the north koreans are move advanced in the technical aspects of engine quality and design? Would it be possible to procure from them? Do we surpass them?

 

[eagle2007]

Remember, there were reports from over a decade ago that Iran imported R-27 based "BM-25s" from North Korea.

There's good evidence that at least some elements on the R-27's propulsion system did make it to Iran's (see the 2nd stage engines of the Safir SLV).

This new missile could either be one of the North Korean BM-25 or Iran's own design utilizing the full 4D10 (R-27's engine) assembly: 1 main engine producing ~25 tons of thrust & 2 steering engines.

 

[sobhan]

I can never believe in the range that they said ...... Just look at the flame ...... Look at the thickness its so cool

 

[Draco.IMF]

I expected a cold launch.

 

[raptor22]

Warhead could be something like this?

 

[eagle2007]

Maybe, but oddly enough, the R-27K's multiple warheads were completely exposed as you see in the graphic. Not exactly a smart idea. You'd want a outer shell to protect them before separation.

Also, keep in mind that unless each of the smaller warheads has it's own terminal guidance mechanism for after separation (just stabilization only but active control), it's not truly a MIRV, just very large "submunitions" as silly as it sounds.

 

[Safriz]

@Stryker1982 I think you're confused about terminology here.

MRV (also called MaRV) stands for Manoeuvring Reentey Vehicle. The key here is Manoeuvring. This means the warhead is seperated from the missile body and can be guided towards a target and can even make random manoeuvres (not dodge) in flight to confuse ABM. The Emad and Zolfaqar have an MRV. But the Shahab, Qiam, Ghadr, Scud etc. do not have MRVs, as the warhead remains attached to the missile, and don't have terminal guidance. The Fateh-110/313 have terminal guidance but the warhead does not seperate.

MIRV stands for Multiple Indepenently targetted Reentry Vehicles. This is the same game as the MRV, just there are multiple on 1 missile. For example, the SS-18 Satan has 10 MIRVs... all nuclear. It could have carried 40, but various treaties meant you could only carry 10 per missile. So it has 10 MIRVs and 30 decoys...

MIRVs are different submunition warheads. Those are basically cluster bombs mounted on missiles. Lots of tiny unguided bomblets.

@PeeD I think shahin is partially right. The Khorramshahr is too small to carry 3 large MIRVs - 650 kg as you say. Though I think it could carry 3 smaller MIRVs, more accurate. If used in a lofted trajectory, you've got 3 very accurate warheads coming down at very high speeds. Great for taking out Israeli/Saudi ABM.

The commander said the warheads are released after 1800 km. Just 200 km from the target. So I would presume, unlike the Zolfaqar, the warheads make a very steep dive toward the target.

You guys should know the diameter of the warhead you think is being used on this missile. Then see if three of those warheads will fit on this missile's alleged dia of 1.4-1.5 meters or not.
The warhead will need shielding and can't come down without it as such misses with 2000 Km range.
Because these missiles rise to altitudes o at least 300 - 400 Kilometers and then come down towards target. At the time o Re-entering atmosphere the warhead is traveling at about Mach-13 (Re-Entry speed of our Shaheen-2). T that speeds atmospheric friction is too much and warhead needs shedding and hence the additional size and weight.