Iran has deployed missle capable of reaching Isreal, Russia

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-07-31 03:50am

Ripped from Freeperville

U.S. officials have confirmed claims by Iran that its military has deployed the new Shihab-3 long-range missile with the Islamic shock troops for the first time.

Iran's official Voice of the Islamic Republic Radio reported July 20 that the missiles were turned over to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Also supplied were Su-25 jet fighters and transport and attack helicopters.

The deployment represents a major advance in Iran's power projection since the country previously had only short-range missiles similar to 180-mile Scuds.

The Shihab-3 ballistic missile (Shihab in Farsi means meteor shooting star) is a road mobile medium-range missile with a range of up to 930 miles. It is believed capable of carrying a 2,200-pound warhead. The missile is based on the design of the North Korean Nodong missile.

Some weird-ass site

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-31 03:55am

Not part of the regular Iranian army? Interesting.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-07-31 05:43am

North Korea I should have expected it! My those Axis of Evil guys are tricky arent they. Well I gues sits time to pack up our Iraqi forces, head across the border and try and get Bush's popularity up a bit.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-07-31 05:56am

This doesn't make sense:

Also supplied were Su-25 jet fighters and transport and attack helicopters.

Supplied from where, to where?

Nitpick: the Su-25 is not a 'jet fighter', it's a mud mover

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-07-31 10:44am

Vympel wrote: Nitpick: the Su-25 is not a 'jet fighter', it's a mud mover

A Su-25 is neither - it's more akin to a Russian equivalent of a A-10.

Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-07-31 10:47am

Please tell me the government isn't planning to invade Iran next...

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-07-31 10:50am

Maybe you will get drafted....

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-07-31 10:54am

Simon H.Johansen wrote:
A Su-25 is neither - it's more akin to a Russian equivalent of a A-10.

Which is a mud mover, numbnuts

Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

The day Iran can afford FLANKERs is the day I eat my hat.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-07-31 11:02am

theski wrote:Maybe you will get drafted....

Nope, can't. My 26th birthday is this year, I'm exempt - overage.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-07-31 11:22am

Iceberg wrote:Please tell me the government isn't planning to invade Iran next...

It isn't necessary, so of course not. Funding the student groups, on the other hand (if they want it, obviously)....

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-07-31 11:30am

Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

Hardly, it's just the Media being stupid. The British deployed "Battleship-Cruisers" at one point.

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2003-07-31 11:41am

Vympel wrote:The day Iran can afford FLANKERs is the day I eat my hat.

The Ayatollah tried to buy Fulcrums from Moldova at one point.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-07-31 11:57am

Bob McDob wrote:
The Ayatollah tried to buy Fulcrums from Moldova at one point.

The US bought them instead, as I recall. Probably to prevent them from going to Iran, if what you're saying is correct.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-07-31 12:31pm

Vympel wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??
The day Iran can afford FLANKERs is the day I eat my hat.

I doubt you'll have to worry about that for many years to come.

Still, Iran did have F-14s in the 1970s when the aircraft was still relatively new, and painted them ugly desert camo colors.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-07-31 12:33pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

Hardly, it's just the Media being stupid. The British deployed "Battleship-Cruisers" at one point.

Hey, don't knock our Battleship-Cruisers!

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-07-31 01:27pm

Tsyroc wrote:
Vympel wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??
The day Iran can afford FLANKERs is the day I eat my hat.
I doubt you'll have to worry about that for many years to come.

Still, Iran did have F-14s in the 1970s when the aircraft was still relatively new, and painted them ugly desert camo colors.

However, the Iranians scrapped them since they found out that they couldn't get spare parts

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2003-07-31 02:02pm

3rd Impact wrote:
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

Hardly, it's just the Media being stupid. The British deployed "Battleship-Cruisers" at one point.
Hey, don't knock our Battleship-Cruisers!

Next thing you know they'll have "Carrier-Destroyers".

otter · Post by **otter** » 2003-07-31 04:08pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Tsyroc wrote:
Vympel wrote: The day Iran can afford FLANKERs is the day I eat my hat.
I doubt you'll have to worry about that for many years to come.

Still, Iran did have F-14s in the 1970s when the aircraft was still relatively new, and painted them ugly desert camo colors.
However, the Iranians scrapped them since they found out that they couldn't get spare parts

That, and I believe the technicians set to train them sabotaged the planes before the left the country.

They had a special on the History channel last week on the F-14s history and development and a brief stroy on what the techs did to the 14s to make them non-operable

anyone else see it?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-31 04:38pm

Vympel wrote:
Simon H.Johansen wrote:
A Su-25 is neither - it's more akin to a Russian equivalent of a A-10.
Which is a mud mover, numbnuts

Actually by USAF standards it and the A-10 are a fighter. While the A-10 is designation as an attack bird, its deployed in fighter squadrons and the pilots go through fighter pilot training.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-31 04:43pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:
However, the Iranians scrapped them since they found out that they couldn't get spare parts

Actually some Iranian Tomcats are still flying.

Posbi · Post by **Posbi** » 2003-07-31 04:47pm

Didn't they create an own spare parts industry?

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-07-31 05:12pm

the iranians last time i checked were also in the late developement stages for an F-16 equivalent fighter/attack aircraft combination, similar in intended role to the chinese J-10.

The iranians should be able to afford Mig 29s and Su27s, i mean they have huge oil profits.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-31 05:45pm

Posbi wrote:Didn't they create an own spare parts industry?

Yes, they have developed a considerable capability to manufacture parts. Its unlikely they can build entirely new radars or engines but basically everything else should be within their capability.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-31 05:49pm

NapoleonGH wrote:the iranians last time i checked were also in the late developement stages for an F-16 equivalent fighter/attack aircraft combination, similar in intended role to the chinese J-10.

The iranians should be able to afford Mig 29s and Su27s, i mean they have huge oil profits.

They do have early model MiG-29's, but the Su-27 is a huge leap up in capability and cost.

Iran is a big nation with a very young population, which soaks up most of there money. Places like the UAE and Saudi Arabia are so rich because they so few people, in reality they don't have all that much money compared to western economy's. Iran's yearly defence budget is only about 7 billion.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-07-31 06:55pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Perhaps it's a typo and they meant Su-27??

Hardly, it's just the Media being stupid. The British deployed "Battleship-Cruisers" at one point.

?Typical..you would have thought that after Jutland that they would have seen the folly of the Battlecruiser type