Iran Military Forum







Pages: [1]

Author Topic: HAWK [Shahin] SAM  (Read 5767 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Ayyash

  • سرگرد
  • *
  • Posts: 3073
  • us
  • Respect: +481
HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« on: October 23, 2009, 05:47:22 PM »
0
Various events
Logged
The Arkenstone - Zulfiqar Dimensions Redux (May 10, 2013)

Online Ayyash

  • سرگرد
  • *
  • Posts: 3073
  • us
  • Respect: +481
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #1 on: October 23, 2009, 05:49:17 PM »
0
1-3 = misc
6-10 = Shahin
Logged

Offline Shirazi

  • سرهنگ دوم
  • *
  • Posts: 5798
  • ir
  • ما تا آخر ایستاده ایم
  • Respect: +115
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2010, 02:08:40 AM »
0
Can the delta wings be replaced by Jet vanes? That's one way they could increase its range as it would create much less drag. With the jet vanes they could also put them in canisters and make them mobile.

Another way to increase the range would be to use the rocket motors used on the pheonix missiles (which has a range of 180km and is only slightly lighter than the hawk).
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 03:27:30 AM by Shirazi »
Logged

Online Eagle2009

  • سرهنگ دوم
  • *
  • Posts: 3539
  • Respect: +458
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2010, 05:11:20 AM »
0
Jet Vanes are possible of course since they are present in the various missiles used by the S-300 SAM system. However they use both jet vanes and traditional fins because neither is adequete in properly controlling such a missile so you can not delete the fins entirely. The decrease in drag would somewhat increase range but I doubt by very much.

When it comes to using a Phoniex missile rocket motor (Rocketdyne Mk 47) for a possible SAM motor..It is of course possible but such a missile will have not have the same range as the Phoniex simply because the amount of lift and thrust required to achieve the wanted speed when launched from the ground is much greater than when launched from the air on a F-14. Simple physics dictate this but there is another complication as well when talking specifically about the Phoniex.

The secret to the Phoniex missiles great range actually lies with its trajectory when launched from the air. It does not relay on its motor to achieve its great range, the phoniex missile is designed to climb quickly to roughly 80,000 feet and than dives towards the target using the extra kinetic energy from the dive to hit targets well beyond 100km. Such a trajectory is obviously not nearly as useful for a SAM since it would require much more fuel to achieve the same feat fired from the ground.

So, a SAM using the Phoniex missile's motor would likely not have nearly as great a range as the Phoniex itself. How great a range such a SAM could have is quite difficult to speculate because of the many factors involved. I am not saying that the Phoniex's motor would be a bad choice, simply dont expect that kind of range from a SAM using the same motor.
Logged
"I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell."
- Harry Truman

Online Ayyash

  • سرگرد
  • *
  • Posts: 3073
  • us
  • Respect: +481
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2011, 05:32:49 PM »
0
I was checking out the latest issue of the Military's "Saff" magazine and it had a feature on Iranian missiles, and within it was a section about the Shahin.

It mentioned two different variants, the Shahin-1, and the Shahin-2, it even included specifications on the two.

Shahin-1:
Weight: 384 kg
Max. Range: 13 km
Warhead: 190 kg, HE
Max. Velocity: 450 m/s

Shahin-2:
Weight: 530 kg
Max. Range: 20 km
Warhead: 180 kg, HE-FRAG (not sure on the FRAG part, maybe it's a continuous-rod warhead?)
Max. Velocity: 660 m/s

HAWK: (Wikipedia)
Weight: 590 kg
Max. Range: 24 kg
Warhead: 54 kg HE-FRAG
Max. Velocity: 816 m/s

I'm more baffled at these numbers then the caps on the new Noor missile canisters. These numbers reflect such a steep departure from the HAWK missile when it comes to physical size that they can't possibly be right.

Here is the magazine with the section on the Shahin which can be found on P.17
http://aja.ir/portal/Home/ShowPage.aspx?Object=News&CategoryID=6b87bf91-59f2-4e18-8ff5-a829069a4482&WebPartID=c1d4b049-fa6d-4674-96e7-428abfed0167&ID=65e35b9e-6a3f-4917-8d58-b8c23be8e449
Logged

Online Eagle2009

  • سرهنگ دوم
  • *
  • Posts: 3539
  • Respect: +458
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2011, 10:13:37 PM »
0
Ayyash,

Those Range figures seem a bit off..

The Basic HAWK (MIM-23A) had a range of 25km while the I-HAWK missile (MIM-23B) has a range of 40km. By the time of the revolution as far as I know all HAWK systems were upgraded to the I-Hawk standard including the missiles so its a bit puzzling Iran's Shahin-1/2 are so far off compared to the HAWK models Iran has in inventory.

EDIT- Just thought of something, What if these figures belong the Shahin-1/2 artillery rockets?
Logged

Online Ayyash

  • سرگرد
  • *
  • Posts: 3073
  • us
  • Respect: +481
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2011, 01:06:56 AM »
0
The specifications are definitly closer to the Shahin rocket then the Shahin SAM despite it being posted in conjunction with a picture of the SAM.

The thing is that it doesn't match the specifications for either variant of the Shahin rocket though either.

It's part of a whole article on BMs that includes what looks to be valuable information on the the Nazeat, Zelzal, and Shahab series, i'm pretty sure it even mentions the Fateh-110 having an imaging infrared seeker.
Logged

Online Eagle2009

  • سرهنگ دوم
  • *
  • Posts: 3539
  • Respect: +458
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2011, 01:22:41 AM »
0
Ayyash,

Which makes me wonder the credibility of the source since we have plenty of images of the Fateh-110's nose section and there is no way it uses an IR seeker since it would need a smooth glossy cover just as a EO seeker would require.
Logged

Online Ayyash

  • سرگرد
  • *
  • Posts: 3073
  • us
  • Respect: +481
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2011, 02:08:54 AM »
0
I haven't read through to see what it actually says, i just saw "IIR" under the entry. So i'll reserve judgment until i am able to.

But you do bring up a good point that i've actually been considering as i've read this magazine. The point is, how much weight do we actually give government/military sources? I've always given them the benefit of the doubt because, they're official sources so one presumes them to be correct, but that might not be the guess. At any rate though, it's better then Global Security's numbers.
Logged

Offline Aspahbod

  • سرجوخه
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • ir
  • Respect: +224
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2011, 11:43:07 AM »
0
A question, what are the radars used in mersad system? Are they the same as MIM-23 HAWK's radars?
Logged

Offline omedAFG

  • سرباز دوم
  • *
  • Posts: 403
  • au
  • Respect: +178
Re: HAWK [Shahin] SAM
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2011, 12:24:32 PM »
0
how many shahin sytems (3 missles) are operational
Logged
Afghanistan- where empires go to die. -Mike Malloy
Pages: [1]
 

SMF 2.0.4 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.171 seconds with 26 queries.