Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IgbJS3XPbQ



Not exactly Russian related, but Iran start with production of their own Kornet-E ATGMs. I wonder if they bought them with blueprints from Russia or they just reverse engineered Kornet from Syria or Hesbolah.

medo wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IgbJS3XPbQ



Not exactly Russian related, but Iran start with production of their own Kornet-E ATGMs. I wonder if they bought them with blueprints from Russia or they just reverse engineered Kornet from Syria or Hesbolah.

Are we sure those are even Kornets, not a crappy local knock off?

Not the most exciting video Medo...

Certainly a laser beam riding missile is not the most complex technology to copy, and for the users it has a range of advantages including no wires to snag or break so it can be fired from moving platforms like vehicles and helos and UAVs, plus to jam the signal the enemy would need to put the jammer between the missile and the launcher... which is pretty tricky.
The main advantage is missile speed, which can be much faster than with a wire dragger, which seriously cuts down engagement times...

BTW according to Wiki the Russians sold 80 missiles to Eritria for $170,000, which works out at just over 2 thousand dollars a missile... compared with Javelin that is incredibly cheap... actually compared with an RPG rocket that is very cheap... the bigger rockets are about $750 each and don't have a range of 5.5km.

Don't know what the new missiles cost, but I think most of the improvements are in the guidance system so the missiles wont be that much more expensive.

TR1 wrote:Are we sure those are even Kornets, not a crappy local knock off?

They sure look like it



They're "crappy" based on what?

Based on Iran's defense industry as a whole.

THey are not known for top of the line stuff in any field.

TR1 wrote:Based on Iran's defense industry as a whole.

THey are not known for top of the line stuff in any field.

Considering Iranian made C-802 hit Israeli corvette near Lebanon, they are not that bad either. Iranian industry is new and is developed with difficulties because of sanctions, but they still were able to launch satellites into orbit. With modern machinery and good technical skills, they could be still inside quality norms.

Kornets are among the most sophisticated AT missiles in the world. I think even with blueprints and an official license the Iranians would have problems manufacturing all the components and to the required detail. Even China, when it copies Russian tech, ends up with lower-grade versions (although this is partly intentional as they prefer cheaper hardware). What chances does Iran have?

Yeah exactly, I don't doubt Iran can make decent, even good weaponry, but I just have not seen really top of the line stuff from them in any field.

Kornet is among the most penetrating of ATGMs, have the Iranians been able to replicate its performance? How about reliability, guidence and actual field functionality?

Well how about the fact that they already produce TOW, Konkurs and Metis clones, which BTW have been used in combat successfully (Lebanon). This is probably a clone of the baseline version of the Kornet which I think is within their industry's capability since they must have samples to work with.

I am pretty sure they don't licence produce TOW now, but Iran does licence produce a range of weapons systems including ATGMs.

I rather suspect this is an example of a licence produced missile.

Does anyone speak Persian and is able to translate the video for us?

When the Shah was in power in the 1970s and Iran was the best thing since sliced bread, it was Iranian money that bought a surprising number of western defence products.

In fact what we know now as the Challenger series of tanks, which are world class vehicles, was basically paid for by Iran... imagine if they waited for them to be delivered before the overthrow of the CIA puppet?

I haven't checked but I would suspect the first TOW production plants in Iran was US built and paid for by Iranian oil.

They like to have their own military industries and they often base their products on foreign systems... twin tailed F-5s spring to mind, but I have quite a high regard for Iranian engineers... of course not being an engineer myself I also have a high regard for Chinese engineers too... even just copying is not easy and they often do more than just copy anyway.

A good example is my Type 56S rifle. Externally it is just an AKM copy, but they rebuilt the rear of the bolt carrier so that the hammer cannot hit the firing pin in the bolt till the bolt carrier is in the forward and locked position... it is a safety thing that prevents the hammer hitting the firing pin while the bolt is not in its forward locked position. In the Soviet AKM there are a few extra components that prevent the hammer being released till the bolt is closed and is referred to in the west as a rate of fire reducer... it is really just a hammer delay.

The Chinese solution reduces the number of parts they need to make, though it makes the bolt carrier slightly longer and heavier overall it is a design improvement.

GarryB wrote:I am pretty sure they don't licence produce TOW now, but Iran does licence produce a range of weapons systems including ATGMs.

I rather suspect this is an example of a licence produced missile.

Does anyone speak Persian and is able to translate the video for us?

When the Shah was in power in the 1970s and Iran was the best thing since sliced bread, it was Iranian money that bought a surprising number of western defence products.

In fact what we know now as the Challenger series of tanks, which are world class vehicles, was basically paid for by Iran... imagine if they waited for them to be delivered before the overthrow of the CIA puppet?

I haven't checked but I would suspect the first TOW production plants in Iran was US built and paid for by Iranian oil.

They like to have their own military industries and they often base their products on foreign systems... twin tailed F-5s spring to mind, but I have quite a high regard for Iranian engineers... of course not being an engineer myself I also have a high regard for Chinese engineers too... even just copying is not easy and they often do more than just copy anyway.

A good example is my Type 56S rifle. Externally it is just an AKM copy, but they rebuilt the rear of the bolt carrier so that the hammer cannot hit the firing pin in the bolt till the bolt carrier is in the forward and locked position... it is a safety thing that prevents the hammer hitting the firing pin while the bolt is not in its forward locked position. In the Soviet AKM there are a few extra components that prevent the hammer being released till the bolt is closed and is referred to in the west as a rate of fire reducer... it is really just a hammer delay.

The Chinese solution reduces the number of parts they need to make, though it makes the bolt carrier slightly longer and heavier overall it is a design improvement.

The Chinese I believe have plenty of innovations of their own. It's just that their effort is mostly focused on reducing cost and manufacturing complexity, more than anything else. There is absolutely no reason to re-invent the wheel for them, or to stay ahead of the curve. For most hardware - they just wait until the US and Russia come up with something new, and then copy it and make a version in order to suit their own requirements. They save time and money. I mean why waste these resources for something they don't really urgently need; like the latest tanks, AT missiles, APCs, infantry kits, guided bombs, etc... The same goes for their nuclear force too; it's enough to ensure their security, and they see no neccessity in plunging vast sums in order to achieve even partial parity with the US and Russia in nuclear ballistic missile subs or strategic aviation.

They are slowly moving up to a more qualitative force; but basically where the quality is really needed (long range artillery, missile destroyers, fighters, etc...); they already have it in any case; either via purchases from Russia, or their own high-cost designs. Those sensitive technologies that they asked for Russia, but which were not sold to them, or which are priorities for them (anti-ship missiles, etc...); they are making quick advances in.

We agree...

Remember they have an enormous population and a large armed force to equip... decent reliable stuff that works is often much better than the flashy high tech western stuff that works on paper... some USStrong fanbois will talk about how an F-16 can carry an 8 ton weapon payload and that Chinese and Russian aircraft are inferior because their light fighters can't, but you and I know better than that. War is not a computer game where on every mission each aircraft expends enormous amounts of weapons against wave after wave of enemy aircraft...

Here's an Iranian TV report (in English)

They never actually say they designed it, they only state they now manufacture it.

This is clearly a licence produced Kornet-E model missile, which is a very potent weapon and a very capable system.

Interesting they mention its capability against naval targets... the obvious issue there is the 5km range would mean you would need to get quite close to a ship to hit it and the relatively small warhead would not do serious damage to anything over 500 tons. A missile into the main deck of a small boat could be very effective, or aiming at external armament like anti ship missiles in exposed launchers could be very effective, but against a larger vessel it would be a pin prick.

If you were going to build a UCAV however this missile would be an ideal system because there are no trailing wires and its high flight speed would get it to targets fairly quickly and against small point targets it would be very useful. In addition, its 5.5km range offers fairly good reach for a small unmanned aircraft... at 3,000m up a small UCAV would be difficult to see or hear from 5km range. With the guidance system in a belly mounted ball turret with unlimited 360 degree rotation it could fly in a small circle 500m across at 5km distant with the ball turret constantly traversing to keep the target in view and every time the aircraft comes around it can launch a new missile if necessary.

I doubt Iranians think to use Kornet ATGMs against ships, when they talk about targets on water, but that they are very useful to destroy enemy swimming vehicles as AMTRAKs and other boats carrying naval infantry to attack your coast. Hitting AMTRAK 5 km away means surviving marines have a long way to swim back to the ship or a long way to swim to the coast.

Iran bought METIS ATGM licence and I dont see why not Kornet also. I doubt this is a ripoff.

I doubt Iranians think to use Kornet ATGMs against ships, when they talk about targets on water, but that they are very useful to destroy enemy swimming vehicles as AMTRAKs and other boats carrying naval infantry to attack your coast. Hitting AMTRAK 5 km away means surviving marines have a long way to swim back to the ship or a long way to swim to the coast.

This is true, if they are planning a landing force... which would likely be Irans greatest fear, a shore based ATGM that can hit targets in the water would be very valuable for stopping an invasion force... a landing ship beaches and opens its landing doors and the first vehicle starts to drive out and is hit by a Kornet... how do you shift 30 tons of steel (Bradley) or 40-50 tons (LTTTTTTTVP whatever) or 70 tons of dead weight (Abrams) while under fire?

Equally its accuracy against point targets with a HE charge would also be useful to engage SEAL teams mapping out the beaches etc.

I also agree with Viktor... I suspect this is just evidence that Iran is now licence producing Kornet-E missiles.

I suspect in a few years time they will want to upgrade to Kornet EMs, which will extend their capabilities even further.

This is supposed to be Irans 1st very modern MBT, but there is only 1 bad picture of it creating serious doubt it exists? Can its existence be confirmed? Also what is the current state of the iranian armored fleet? Could it effectovely compete with israeli and US armor?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:This is supposed to be Irans 1st very modern MBT, but there is only 1 bad picture of it creating serious doubt it exists? Can its existence be confirmed? Also what is the current state of the iranian armored fleet? Could it effectovely compete with israeli and US armor?

I think it is still in the concept/prototype phase, hence the one crappy picture.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:
This is supposed to be Irans 1st very modern MBT, but there is only 1 bad picture of it creating serious doubt it exists?


Can its existence be confirmed?

Also what is the current state of the iranian armored fleet?


Could it effectovely compete with israeli and US armor?

to be honest , i must say that z3 and t72-s  have similar capabilities
to this day, total  number of five   Z3 MBT  has been produced
and Z3 is not modern MBT

back bone of iran armored flett is t72-s  and chieftain
army bought  large number of t72-s in past
and then IRGC start the production of T72 in  2005  

NO ... Iran's armory can't compete with USA and Israel

Iran's MOD passed a very very tight budget for   R&D  about Z3 .
they simply not see ground fleet as priority in  their  deference doctrine

Z3:

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:
This is supposed to be Irans 1st very modern MBT, but there is only 1 bad picture of it creating serious doubt it exists?


Can its existence be confirmed?

Also what is the current state of the iranian armored fleet?


Could it effectovely compete with israeli and US armor?

to be honest , i must say that z3 and t72-s  have similar capabilities
to this day, total  number of five   Z3 MBT  has been produced
and Z3 is not modern MBT

back bone of iran armored flett is t72-s  and chieftain
army bought  large number of t72-s in past
and then IRGC start the production of T72 in  2005  

NO ... Iran's armory can't compete with USA and Israel

Iran's MOD passed a very very tight budget for   R&D  about Z3 .
they simply not see ground fleet as priority in  their  deference doctrine

Z3:

A little correction

So far we have only seen four Z-3 prototype and Zulfiqar is designed by Army self sufficiency organization, although according to Army officials it will be mass produced by both Army and MOD.

Z-3 will be somewhat better than T-72S, it has a better fire control system and optics also it is better armored and heavier than T-72S.

Z-3 is still in development, I am sure that if it enters mass production it will be equipped with passive defense systems(which we have already seen built an installed on T-72S) and ERA.

Can it fire svir, refleks gun launched ATGMs? If no I don't see why iran can't make a deal with russia to buy some older Refleks versions and further develop them.
BTW does the zulfiqar 3 have an autoloader.
Lack of modern ground forces can be a big weakness since iran has plenty of places from where US and Saudi Arabia can stage full scale invasions and marine landings.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Can it fire svir, refleks gun launched ATGMs? If no I don't see why iran can't make a deal with russia to buy some older Refleks versions and further develop them.
BTW does the zulfiqar 3 have an autoloader.
Lack of modern ground forces can be a big weakness since iran has plenty of places from where US and Saudi Arabia can stage full scale invasions and marine landings.

Zulfiqar-3 is equipped with auto-loader, there has been no official statement regarding the usage of ATGM by Zulfiqar tank but Iran is producing an Iranian version of Svir called Tondar.

Zulfigar 3 would be leaps and bounds better than T-72S if it has modern composite material (I trust Irans metalurgy) and I believe it does have a thermal imager, making it far more capable.

Would love to see it in numbers.

This tank has entered massive production?