5 ms·

As far as full military, sure. But their rudimentary guided srbm's are not the best by any measure. Their best still use infrared or standard gps for guidance.

As far as full military, sure. But their rudimentary guided srbm's are not the best by any measure. Their best still use infrared or standard gps for guidance. That is early 90s tech by american standards. Edit: wiki shows even lower tech ballistic style electromechanical guidance on their page. Thats 1960s tech. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fateh-313 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fateh-313

pjc50 7y ago
... assuming that the publicly available information on Wikipedia is accurate? https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/todays-missile-threat/iran/fateh-313/ https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-prolif... claims "GPS/unknown" https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-ballistic-missile-inventory/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-ball... "improved the precision of the Fateh-110 guidance system, which uses both INS and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) with a projected CEP of 250 m."
option_greek 7y ago
Since its a surface to surface missile, does it really matter ? :)
jackpirate 7y ago
Who cares what decade the tech is from? Those missiles landed dead-center on buildings. (Seriously, look at the images!) This demonstrates an impressive operational capability to select which targets to destroy.
coldcode 7y ago
The retired general who was Central Command leader at one point said their missile tech has become highly improved in the past few years. Here they missed on purpose.
sswaner 7y ago
I could not see any impact/blast marks in empty areas. If they missed, they missed wide of this photo. Every blast mark looked like it hit something. Especially the one that hit a hanger looks like it destroyed an airplane, probably a C-130?
Seenso 7y ago
> As far as full military, sure. But their rudimentary guided srbm's are not the best by any measure. Their best still use infrared or standard gps for guidance. That is early 90s tech by american standards. > Edit: wiki shows even lower tech ballistic style electromechanical guidance on their page. Thats 1960s tech. The US still fields missiles with "1960s tech": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III_(LGM-30G) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III... I'm not so quick to dismiss these Iranian missiles. They seem to be accurate and able to effectively perform the job they were meant to do. It's a mistake to classify military technology as lower=worse/higher=better like it's a tech tree from a videogame. Inertial navigation systems like these missiles seem to have are actually superior to GPS in many circumstances that are relevant here. Yes, they drift, but that's not a huge issue over a short flight time. More importantly, they're self-contained, jam-proof, and don't rely on a service provided by an adversary.
- mywittyname 7y ago
  By the 1960s, contemporary military capabilities were such that wiping out all of humanity was possible. It's absolutely unwise to dismiss old military tech.

pjc50 7y ago

... assuming that the publicly available information on Wikipedia is accurate? https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/todays-missile-threat/iran/fateh-313/ https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-prolif... claims "GPS/unknown" https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-ballistic-missile-inventory/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-s-ball... "improved the precision of the Fateh-110 guidance system, which uses both INS and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) with a projected CEP of 250 m."

option_greek 7y ago

Since its a surface to surface missile, does it really matter ? :)

jackpirate 7y ago

Who cares what decade the tech is from? Those missiles landed dead-center on buildings. (Seriously, look at the images!) This demonstrates an impressive operational capability to select which targets to destroy.

coldcode 7y ago

The retired general who was Central Command leader at one point said their missile tech has become highly improved in the past few years. Here they missed on purpose.

sswaner 7y ago

I could not see any impact/blast marks in empty areas. If they missed, they missed wide of this photo. Every blast mark looked like it hit something. Especially the one that hit a hanger looks like it destroyed an airplane, probably a C-130?

Seenso 7y ago

> As far as full military, sure. But their rudimentary guided srbm's are not the best by any measure. Their best still use infrared or standard gps for guidance. That is early 90s tech by american standards. > Edit: wiki shows even lower tech ballistic style electromechanical guidance on their page. Thats 1960s tech. The US still fields missiles with "1960s tech": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III_(LGM-30G) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III... I'm not so quick to dismiss these Iranian missiles. They seem to be accurate and able to effectively perform the job they were meant to do. It's a mistake to classify military technology as lower=worse/higher=better like it's a tech tree from a videogame. Inertial navigation systems like these missiles seem to have are actually superior to GPS in many circumstances that are relevant here. Yes, they drift, but that's not a huge issue over a short flight time. More importantly, they're self-contained, jam-proof, and don't rely on a service provided by an adversary.

mywittyname 7y ago
By the 1960s, contemporary military capabilities were such that wiping out all of humanity was possible. It's absolutely unwise to dismiss old military tech.