Iran

[MechEngr]

Originally Posted by tdracer

Along that same line, when Patriot was first used in anger against Iraq, it didn't work very well against ballistic SCUD missiles (in spite of impressive looking TV footage).
We learned from that, and the current version of Patriot is far improved.

AFAIK Patriot was bad against the Scuds because of two problems - the first was that different modules used different time-bases that differed in the number of bits assigned to their clocks. The second was that the Patriots were kept running far longer without a reboot than ever before. This meant that the two modules had increasingly different notions of time. One module did the calculation of when to shoot and passed that time to the other, the other looked at a different clock as the basis for when to initiate the launch. Had the Patriots been rebooted several times a day they would likely have hit the incoming scuds. As it was they were firing way off schedule, where "way off" was some seconds or fractions of seconds. I think they were running continuously for days.

See also the Ariane flight V88 had a similar design problem that led to the loss of the launch vehicle and several satellites. " The active module presented a diagnostic bit pattern to the On-Board Computer which was interpreted as flight data"

Edit to add why they were on line so long. In the anti-aircraft use, there would be long distance radar that would provide sufficient time to wake up the system and get it ready, but with missiles that time was reduced below what the system start took. I would be surprised if a reset would take as long as a startup, but they didn't know the source of the problem and thought it was because the missiles were too fast.

[NutLoose]

Thanks for that MechEngr, a fascinating insight.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

But that doesn't actually mean that Iranian hostilities towards Israel will end,

Completely agree.
They have been using the Axis of Resistance strat versus Israel since shortly after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. That low level harassment with the occasional outburst (From Hezbollah or someone else) is a simple fact of life. What I am sure Mr Biden would prefer is that things between Israel and Iran return to that state of play, rather than ratcheting up a notch or two.

Originally Posted by MechEngr

{Clock differentials in spoiler}

Spoiler

 

 

AFAIK Patriot was bad against the Scuds because of two problems - the first was that different modules used different time-bases that differed in the number of bits assigned to their clocks. The second was that the Patriots were kept running far longer without a reboot than ever before. This meant that the two modules had increasingly different notions of time. One module did the calculation of when to shoot and passed that time to the other, the other looked at a different clock as the basis for when to initiate the launch. Had the Patriots been rebooted several times a day they would likely have hit the incoming scuds. As it was they were firing way off schedule, where "way off" was some seconds or fractions of seconds. I think they were running continuously for days.

See also the Ariane flight V88 had a similar design problem that led to the loss of the launch vehicle and several satellites. " The active module presented a diagnostic bit pattern to the On-Board Computer which was interpreted as flight data"

Edit to add why they were on line so long. In the anti-aircraft use, there would be long distance radar that would provide sufficient time to wake up the system and get it ready, but with missiles that time was reduced below what the system start took. I would be surprised if a reset would take as long as a startup, but they didn't know the source of the problem and thought it was because the missiles were too fast.

That sounds similar to what I recall from a debrief some ages ago; there were some other bits involved as well.
On the bright side, the less than awesome performance led to PAC Three development and other efforts at improvement.
I'll double check with an old Hawk and Patriot Battery commander I worked with years ago ... if he's still alive. Been years since I talked to him.

for albatross and Ralph: wrong thread guys. Let's not put Mod attractant up if we can help it, OK?

[albatross]

Sorry about that.
Which thread do you suggest I move it to?
In the meantime I shall delete my post here.
I don’t want to activate the “Mod Squad” they have a difficult task already.
Cheers
Albatross

Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50

Completely agree.
They have been using the Axis of Resistance strat versus Israel since shortly after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. That low level harassment with the occasional outburst (From Hezbollah or someone else) is a simple fact of life. What I am sure Mr Biden would prefer is that things between Israel and Iran return to that state of play, rather than ratcheting up a notch or two.

That sounds similar to what I recall from a debrief some ages ago; there were some other bits involved as well.
On the bright side, the less than awesome performance led to PAC Three development and other efforts at improvement.
I'll double check with an old Hawk and Patriot Battery commander I worked with years ago ... if he's still alive. Been years since I talked to him.

for albatross and Ralph: wrong thread guys. Let's not put Mod attractant up if we can help it, OK?

[T28B]

Albatross:
We have a bit of a scrum about Israel and Palestine here.

[admikar]

Originally Posted by RetiredBA/BY

I dont think you quite understand that Ukraine ‘s resistance to illegal aggression by Russia, clearly an enemy of the west, is doing us. a great service. That in my view, makes Ukraine a great ally of the west.
​​​​​​…. and judging by their incredible fighting competence and spirit agains a numerically superior enemy, I believe they would be a great asset to NATO.

I wonder what constitutes legal aggression?

Originally Posted by Economics101

Don't you realise that defeat for Ukraine puts NATO allies like Poland and the Baltics next on Putin's list? So its not just to save Ukraine that Nato members should give all the aid they can: it's also to save themselves from a likely and more deadly situation.
Also I think we should be slow to criticise Ukrains about mobilisation: they have suffered enormous casualties, so easy to sit on the sidelines and yell.

Their mobilisation woes are quite a lot of their own doing. I can see a lot of military aged males driving expensive cars around the Adriatic. No wonder those with no expensive cars decline to play along.

Originally Posted by DogTailRed2

This war (and the war in Ukraine) is coming to a head and people need to be careful which side they pick.
Do you ally yourself with Democracy or Dictatorship?
Choose wisely.

Idea that democracy is always good and that dictatorship is always wrong is naive at best. If you need an example, take a look at Iraq and consequences change of system brought.

[beardy]

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

One of the great leaders who stood up to a fascist dictator - Churchill
​​​​​​​

[T28B]

Since the topic here is Iran, may we return to that please?
beardy, that's a well worn quote, but if you apply it to Iran's form of government how does it play out?
They are not a fascist dictatorship, but rather something else.

[beardy]

Originally Posted by T28B

Since the topic here is Iran, may we return to that please?
beardy, that's a well worn quote, but if you apply it to Iran's form of government how does it play out?
They are not a fascist dictatorship, but rather something else.

It may be a well worn quote but it is worth repeating.
Iran is a theocracy, other states have tried the theocratic route and have failed (apart from maybe the Vatican City). The point about standing up to a dictator is there to bring credibility to the speaker in his defence of democracy, not to compare to the powers of head of the Iranian state who speaks not for himself, but for his deity.

[admikar]

It seems neither side will back down. Israel said they will retaliate, Iran said they will re-retaliate, only this time it will be a lot faster response.
If it was not for Ukraine, I would vote for world's collective beat down of both sides.

[Lonewolf_50]

I wonder if said deity is occasionally quoted out of context. Happens a lot in the information age.

Back to Iran:
Not a good story that hit my feed today:

On Monday, Israel's military chief Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi said the recent Iranian drone attacks "will be met with a response," the Associated Press reported. Halevi did not provide any further details on a possible response but noted that Israel is still considering a number of different plans.

This would be a great time for my country's President to tell Bibi:
"If you do this, you are on your own."
Since Iran has been very public about "OK, we made our point, as far as we are concerned this operation is over" a "response to their response" will be easily spun as escalation.
On the other hand, the technical curiosity I have about the following Aviation scenario does intrigue me:

Can Israel manage to slip a few F-35's across the Iranian border, blow up something in Iran (a missile site perhaps) and then slip home unnoticed?
This is a bit harder than the stunt they pulled 40+ years ago on the nuclear reactor site in Iraq.
Both Jordan and Iraq, or for sure Syria, have to be overlown for a lot of miles to mange such a "get in get out" raid.
May be too hard.
Also, it risks Iranian air defense scoring a kill if the IAF don't get it right.

Personally, I hope they don't do that, too many things can go wrong...but they do have previous form.
And I suspect that Iran is trying to prepare for such an attempt.
how stealthy is stealth?

[admikar]

How strong is Zionist lobby in US?
Besides, Israel already showed they don't listen to anyone else and defending Israel during first strike makes it all the harder to justify turn around.

[SASless]

Turning the other cheek is not a plan that works when the other side insists upon repeatedly slapping you in the your chops.

They stop when they get their hind end properly kicked and realize there is a bitter cost to such misconduct.

The Iranians kicked over their can of hi-tech Whoop Ass and it is fitting some of it gets splashed on them.

Let's see the IDF show its stuff and play Whack-A-Mole with Quds leadership and their Hezbollah pals.

Every time one of the top tier leadership can be found, fixed, and removed.....all the better.

No big massive retaliation effort that leads to losses....play it smart and safe and explain in basic terms the risks the Iranian leadership assumes when it leaves Iran.

At the same time....demonstate to Hezbollah and sundry associated groups associating with Iranians is very bad Karma.

If it is the leadership whose heads are for the chop....rather than the rank-and-file.....that ups the ante and forces Iran and Hezbollah to retihink their strategy.

No good playing nice with those that have no intention of playing nice.

The Iranians screwed the Pooch.....and now they are sweating bullets worrying about what is coming in return......that is a very good thing.

[Lonewolf_50]

China has Iran's back.

(Bloomberg) -- China’s top diplomat told Iran that the nations can work together across a range of areas in the future, signaling their ties remain solid following Tehran’s unprecedented attack on Israel.

“China is ready to steadily advance practical cooperation in various fields with Iran and promote greater development of China-Iran relations,” Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Iranian counterpart Hossein Amirabdollahian in a phone call on Monday.

Wang also said China noted Iran’s position that its military action was “limited” and the country was “exercising its right of self-defense,” according to a statement from the Foreign Ministry in Beijing. China also believed Iran could handle the situation to “avoid further turbulence,” he said.

Wang’s comments offer Iran a measure of diplomatic support after its missile and drone attack on Israel sparked worries of a broader conflict. Tehran said the move was retaliation for an attack on its embassy compound in Syria that killed top Iranian military officers. This was the first time Iran has struck Israel from its soil.

Wasn't Wang Rodney Dangerfield's playing partner in Caddyshack?

Originally Posted by SASless

If it is the leadership whose heads are for the chop....rather than the rank-and-file.....that ups the ante and forces Iran and Hezbollah to retihink their strategy.

No good playing nice with those that have no intention of playing nice.

Seems a viable strategy.

[albatross]

Originally Posted by T28B

Albatross:
We have a bit of a scrum about Israel and Palestine here.

Thanks, posted my rant there.
Cheers

[DogTailRed2]

Iran will eventually get nuclear weapons changing the dynamic some what. So do we attack them now removing that possibility or kick the can down the road until it happens and then worry about it then?
Religious extremism want's the West annihilated. Just a matter of time. Lets hope atheism, common sense and democracy prevail. Nah. me neither.....

[Lonewolf_50]

Kicking the can down the road is a very common political choice.
Expect that.

[MechEngr]

Religious extremism wants control of their followers and they cannot keep that control without an external threat. Usually it is just some vague reference to unbelievers or some unsubstantiated evil, but that won't support a military budget.

Iran's leadership depends on the existence of the West to provide the visible danger they claim to shield their followers from. As can be seen from the situation, they are also playing the Sunni Muslims vs the Shia Muslims. They just need something to rage against.

[Raph737]

Talking about some military aspects since it’s the military forum. Thinking about a few articles I read that debunked this idea that it was a great victory for israel and the west, with the notion that this was about a message to the neighbours and international community but most importantly, to domestic audiences. The aspect I’d like some views is that, Israel needed five countries to neutralise a large number of these devices, it couldn’t have possibly done on their own, to me is like going to the pub, punching a random only because five or your MMA trained mates are behind you and jump into your defence. The drones they used have a market value of $20K USD per pop, whilst one air-to-air AIM 120 for example, costs $1.37million per head. Then there’s the $200k iron dome missiles and any other expensive machinery used to deter the attack, fuel costs etc. They did it, but it cost them, and us, a fortune. For the Iranians it was cheap and the message was delivered.
I don’t know about you but I don't sing victory and play the big man when I needed a coalition to defend myself from a mess I started it.

Military victory? Well, if you look at the fact that the attack was deterred then yes. But Iran just needed one to hit the target…and it did, hence it was designed to spread the defence open with large numbers from different directions. Also, their propaganda is going overdrive saying that the Israelis were so weak that Uncle Sam, Brits and french had to save them…not a lie is it now?
As far as propaganda, they won. I can refer you to a good article on this, I have doubts about what the media is trying to convince us about right now.

[T28B]

Originally Posted by MechEngr

Religious extremism wants control of their followers and they cannot keep that control without an external threat.

Indeed. The proclamation of the United States as The Great Satan was part of the message sent during the Islamic Revolution. In broader terms, however, it isn't just religious extremists who use that.

A number of posters on this sub-forum participated in the 1982 Falklands War. A contributing factor to that war even coming to pass was the perceived need by the regime in Buenos Aires to focus discontent on some external threat or source of frustration.

Returning to the topic of this thread and your observation:

Not long after Iranian state TV informed the nation that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had launched hundreds of drones and missiles, people poured into the streets in Tehran and other cities to show their support for Iran's first-ever direct military action against Israel. Iran had vowed to retaliate for the killing of seven IRGC officers about two weeks earlier, in an airstrike that hit an Iranian consulate in Syria's capital.

One might argue that the leadership in Tehran had a core audience for the missile and drone launches: the home audience.