US - Israel - Iran War

LX1111 said:
The Iranians didn't get to the point. The topic of this Indian missile should be that, without solving the bipyramid MARV problem, it achieves gliding capability at the end by using four wing panels to increase lift.
What the Iranians should emphasize is that this method will significantly increase Supersonic shock wave drag. Reduce the speed of the missile..
Click to expand...
This Indian missile MARV using four deployable wing panels for end-phase gliding is not necessarily a weakness...... While it's true this increases supersonic shockwave drag and may reduce terminal speed.....the tradeoff allows for greater lift, extended cross-range, and better maneuverability to evade missile defenses......It's a deliberate design choice that prioritizes survivability and precision over raw velocity in the final phase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CATS @hunter and LX1111
At the place of Israel I would worry considering this :
responsiblestatecraft.org

US lawmakers blast Israel, urge against war with Iran

Politicians across the political spectrum say Washington shouldn’t get more involved than it already is
responsiblestatecraft.org responsiblestatecraft.org

US lawmakers blast Israel, urge against war with Iran​

Politicians across the political spectrum say Washington shouldn’t get more involved than it already is​

Reporting | QiOSK
  1. qiosk
  2. iran

Stavroula Pabst
Jun 13, 2025


Responding to Israel’s attack on Iran last night, which targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, scientists, and key military leaders, U.S. lawmakers across the political spectrum are urging the Trump administration to show restraint and not allow the U.S. to get involved any more than it already is.

“Israel doesn’t need US taxpayers’ money for defense if it already has enough to start offensive wars,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) wrote on X. “I vote not to fund this war of aggression.”

“Netanyahu’s reckless strike risks provoking a wider war and pulling in the United States."

Trump must oppose Netanyahu’s escalation and pursue a diplomatic path to deal with Iran’s nuclear program,” Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) wrote on X. “Trump must not violate the Constitution by involving American troops in Netanyahu’s war without coming to Congress.”

“This is a disaster of Trump and Netanyahu's own making, and now the region risks spiraling toward a new, deadly conflict. A war between Israel and Iran may be good for Netanyahu’s domestic politics, but it will likely be disastrous for both the security of Israel, the United States, and the rest of the region,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in a statement. “As Secretary Rubio stated, the United States was not involved in today's strikes, and we have no obligation to follow Israel into a war we did not ask for and will make us less safe.”

Members are particularly concerned that the U.S. will move to defend Israel if Iran retaliates and furthermore acts in tandem to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Trump told Fox News last night that the U.S. is ready to defend itself and Israel if Iran retaliates.

“The president cannot circumvent congressional war powers and unilaterally send U.S. troops to war with Iran. This is a violation of Article I of the Constitution which requires congressional approval to declare war,” Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D- Mich.) said. “The American people do not want another endless war in the Middle East that will cost lives and tear their families apart.”

“The American people overwhelming[ly] oppose our endless wars, and they voted that way when they voted for Donald Trump in 2024. I urge President Trump to stay the course, keep putting America first, and to not join in any war between other countries,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wrote on X. “Every American should hope and pray for peace.”

Members pointed out that the strikes came as the U.S. was pursuing diplomacy with Iran over its nuclear deal, a path that seems uncertain today.
 
The S300PMU2 is not an outdated system. It is also a weapon developed by Russia after the Cold War.
If iranian want to defend against ballistic missiles, can purchase the S300V4 from Russia.
This war gives me the impression not that Iran's air defense weapons are outdated, but that Iran's leadership is collapsing. Just like the NATO air strikes on Kosovo, there are spies and agents everywhere - from the top leadership of Iran to ordinary citizens, everyone hopes that Iran fails.
randomradio said:
Nothing on hand at the moment. Jane's reported it was located in Iran, so the source is reputable.

S-300PMU2 is very old, not sufficient against 4.5th and 5th gen capabilities, especially if there's no air support available. Anyway, I was referring to shorter range systems that can defeat PGMs and tactical BMs.

Yes, India is very confident. Our weapons were more successful than anticipated. You haven't noticed but except for Rafale, all our jets are old, ordered 30-45 years ago. Those old jets worked phenomenally well against some of China's (and Sweden's) most advanced capabilities. And we are in the process of getting new jets that are significantly more capable than the old jets.
Click to expand...
 
randomradio said:
Yes, India is very confident. Our weapons were more successful than anticipated. You haven't noticed but except for Rafale, all our jets are old, ordered 30-45 years ago. Those old jets worked phenomenally well against some of China's (and Sweden's) most advanced capabilities. And we are in the process of getting new jets that are significantly more capable than the old jets
Click to expand...
The Indian equipment is not outdated. The Su-30 is significantly superior to the JF17block1/2 and F16AB, su30 orders began in 2005, and the oldest ones are no more than 20 years old.
It can be said that Indian fighter jets have a significant advantage over Pakistani ones.
lcafanboy said:
All results of cousin marriages. Absolutely no difference between a paxtanis, Iranian, Arabian, they're all retarded products of cousin marriage....😂🤣
Click to expand...
In fact, Iranians and Indians are more like cousins, both being descendants of the Aryans.
 
South block said:
This Indian missile MARV using four deployable wing panels for end-phase gliding is not necessarily a weakness...... While it's true this increases supersonic shockwave drag and may reduce terminal speed.....the tradeoff allows for greater lift, extended cross-range, and better maneuverability to evade missile defenses......It's a deliberate design choice that prioritizes survivability and precision over raw velocity in the final phase.
Click to expand...
Objectively speaking, the Indians did find the best option within their technical capabilities
Although this type of weapon does not conform to the design standards of the mainstream high-speed hypersonic missiles in the international community.
But it still poses a challenge to end-game anti-missile systems like HQ9B/PAC3 MSE.
 
LX1111 said:
View attachment 44400View attachment 44396
Is this thing an HGV?
Isn't this just adding four lift-enhancing wings to the traditional missile?
View attachment 44397

View attachment 44399

This is what is called an HGV.
Click to expand...

HGVs come in different designs.

1.jpg

Conical is the simplest and designed for stable flight and mass production. The benefit of conical designs is they can reduce friction heat by rolling and can still provide some maneuverability at hypersonic speeds.

Given BM-04 is a short range system, those are important criterias. But BM-04 comes with extra lifting surfaces, so it can maneuver more than a standard conical design; 10-30 deg vs 5-10 deg. DF-ZF is a blended wing-delta wing hybrid. It's meant to come as close to a MaRV as possible (20-40 deg vs 40 deg).

But both designs are capable of maneuvers without losing speed while MaRV loses speed as it maneuvers.

Space Shuttle uses a delta winged body, 20-40 deg.

Only winged and blended wing bodies provide the highest maneuverability exceeding MaRVs without losing speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CATS @hunter, FenicromovCW and redpanda
LX1111 said:
The S300PMU2 is not an outdated system. It is also a weapon developed by Russia after the Cold War.
If iranian want to defend against ballistic missiles, can purchase the S300V4 from Russia.
This war gives me the impression not that Iran's air defense weapons are outdated, but that Iran's leadership is collapsing. Just like the NATO air strikes on Kosovo, there are spies and agents everywhere - from the top leadership of Iran to ordinary citizens, everyone hopes that Iran fails.
Click to expand...

Relative to the adversary's capabilities, it is outdated. For example, the F-15C is very good, but outdated or even obsolete compared to the F-22.

Yes, the S-300V4 would be a much better option, as is the S-400. Individually, the S-300PMU-2's radars and missiles are good, but it lacks the S-400's C2 system. The C2 is necessary to keep up with adversary capabilities.

Russia's S-300PM-2 have been upgraded as of 2022. The Iranians do not have this upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redpanda
randomradio said:
HGVs come in different designs.

View attachment 44401

Conical is the simplest and designed for stable flight and mass production. The benefit of conical designs is they can reduce friction heat by rolling and can still provide some maneuverability at hypersonic speeds.

Given BM-04 is a short range system, those are important criterias. But BM-04 comes with extra lifting surfaces, so it can maneuver more than a standard conical design; 10-30 deg vs 5-10 deg. DF-ZF is a blended wing-delta wing hybrid. It's meant to come as close to a MaRV as possible (20-40 deg vs 40 deg).

But both designs are capable of maneuvers without losing speed while MaRV loses speed as it maneuvers.

Space Shuttle uses a delta winged body, 20-40 deg.

Only winged and blended wing bodies provide the highest maneuverability exceeding MaRVs without losing speed.
Click to expand...
I'm curious what is the design of Dhvani? It looks like a mix of blended body and winged body from the photos I have seen from aero-india.
 
LX1111 said:
The Indian equipment is not outdated. The Su-30 is significantly superior to the JF17block1/2 and F16AB, su30 orders began in 2005, and the oldest ones are no more than 20 years old.
It can be said that Indian fighter jets have a significant advantage over Pakistani ones.
Click to expand...

Most of the MKI's current configuration was decided in 1996, like the Bars radar. Whereas PAF's JF-17 B3 and J-10C's configurations are just a decade old.

LX1111 said:
In fact, Iranians and Indians are more like cousins, both being descendants of the Aryans.
Click to expand...

Ever since genetic testing was invented, it was found that the Aryan race does not exist. It only existed in the minds of the Nazis. But yes, Iranians and Indians are closely related.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Immortal and redpanda
randomradio said:
HGVs come in different designs.

View attachment 44401

Conical is the simplest and designed for stable flight and mass production. The benefit of conical designs is they can reduce friction heat by rolling and can still provide some maneuverability at hypersonic speeds.

Given BM-04 is a short range system, those are important criterias. But BM-04 comes with extra lifting surfaces, so it can maneuver more than a standard conical design; 10-30 deg vs 5-10 deg. DF-ZF is a blended wing-delta wing hybrid. It's meant to come as close to a MaRV as possible (20-40 deg vs 40 deg).

But both designs are capable of maneuvers without losing speed while MaRV loses speed as it maneuvers.

Space Shuttle uses a delta winged body, 20-40 deg.

Only winged and blended wing bodies provide the highest maneuverability exceeding MaRVs without losing speed.
Click to expand...
If what you mean is that this missile from India is similar to the C-HGB used in the US's LRHW
AUSA-LRHW_02.jpg
I believe that C-HGB is a bipyramid structure variant of MaRV.
It is no different from China's DF26 missiles.
message-editor_1584721364321-c-hgb.jpg2024102805023146328.jpg
However, this missile from India clearly lacks the bipyramid design. Instead, it mainly relies on four wing panels to provide lift.
 
LX1111 said:
Objectively speaking, the Indians did find the best option within their technical capabilities
Although this type of weapon does not conform to the design standards of the mainstream high-speed hypersonic missiles in the international community.
But it still poses a challenge to end-game anti-missile systems like HQ9B/PAC3 MSE.
Click to expand...
Let’s be technically precise here...... The assumption that the Indian design is somehow inferior or “non-mainstream” simply because it employs deployable aerodynamic surfaces reveals yours superficial grasp of hypersonic terminal vehicle dynamics...... What you're calling a limitation is in fact a deliberate aerodynamic decoupling strategy , leveraging increased lift via high aspect-ratio control surfaces to enable significant off-axis cross-range maneuver, a well-established principle in HGV kinematics......... Yes, there's a drag penalty due to increased wave drag post-deployment, particularly across Mach 3–5 regimes... ... But this is a managed trade-space......the deceleration profile is factored into the guidance law and trajectory shaping algorithms to exploit altitude for control authority while remaining within thermal and structural margins.......increase in lift-to-drag ratio (L/D) during this phase directly enhances the ability to defeat predictive intercept paths of systems like the PAC-3 MSE and your mighty HQ-9B , HQ 19 etc... which rely heavily on extrapolated kinematics and fixed engagement cones...........So no sweety......this isn’t about "doing the best with limited tech"........ It’s about leveraging known atmospheric reentry mechanics & guidance constraints on interceptor systems....... If anything, it shows an understanding of how to exploit the weaknesses in endo-atmospheric interception windows........Calling this non-standard just because it doesn't mimic a boost-glide wedge body is reductive and technically inaccurate regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Asterion Moloc, redpanda and _Anonymous_
Iran launched a ballistic missile attack on Israel, primarily on Tel Aviv. According to Iran, the operation was called "True Promise 3". There were 3 waves of missile strikes, which actually overloaded the Israeli air defense system. Daytime footage, this is the fourth wave of missile attacks. To repel the attack, Israel used the Iron Dome air defense system, which is not designed to intercept ballistic missiles, but was able to intercept some of the missiles. Iran used between 100 and 300 missiles, the type of missiles is still unknown. According to Israeli media, which was confirmed by American media, the missile strike hit the Israel Defense Forces command post in Tel Aviv, the Defense Ministry building, and the government complex in Kirya, where the IDF's secure command center is located. One missile hit the Tel Aviv nuclear research center. Other sites in Israel were also attacked. Following the Iranian attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appealed to Iranians, calling on them to rise up against the Iranian government.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom