Author Topic: Iran inaugurated production line of "Dehlavieh" anti armor weapon (Read 22053 times)

the8march · « **Reply #150 on:** July 09, 2012, 07:52:01 AM »

I really dont want to derail this thread to discuss Merkavas. But who is expecting Israel to tell him that Hezbollah has destroyed 50 Merkavas? All the published pictures of destroyed Merkavas were not taken from the main battle where Merkavas were destroyed. Images from this battle are still not published. Hezbollah says that they reveal secret information about firing positions and tactics. However here are some pictures available on youtube from others attacks... count the penetrations..


Merkava	Small \| Large


AT-4 Fagot, AT-14 Kornet vs Merkava in Lebanon.wmv	Small \| Large

Numbers · « **Reply #151 on:** July 09, 2012, 08:26:18 AM »

Quote from: the8march on July 09, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

I really dont want to derail this thread to discuss Merkavas. But who is expecting Israel to tell him that Hezbollah has destroyed 50 Merkavas? All the published pictures of destroyed Merkavas were not taken from the main battle where Merkavas were destroyed. Images from this battle are still not published. Hezbollah says that they reveal secret information about firing positions and tactics. However here are some pictures available on youtube from others attacks... count the penetrations..

So how many Merkava Tanks were disabled and destroyed due to ATGM fire? Since I have heard different figures from different sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
"According to Merkava tank program administration, 52 Merkava main battle tanks were damaged (45 of them by different kinds of ATGM), missiles penetrated 22 tanks, but only 5 tanks were destroyed, one of them by an improvised explosive device (IED)."

22 penetrations of Merkava by ATGMs is not bad.

In the next conflict Israel will be using Active Defence System on Merkava Tanks.

Numbers · « **Reply #152 on:** July 09, 2012, 08:58:02 AM »

Quote from: RG on July 08, 2012, 07:54:17 PM

That's right, one shot one kill. Kornet can kill a modern MBT but a Precursor Missile can't, so I rather to sacrifice a small missile to open the way for the ATGM.

As you said it's easier and cheaper to carry a lighter smaller (around 4-5kg) Precursor Missile to defeat the Active Protection for the Kornet than depleting your ammo by using a Kornet to make way for another Kornet.

I completely agree with you. Precursor Missile is a must have technology for long range ATGM like Kornet.

comandantecarlos · « **Reply #153 on:** July 09, 2012, 09:45:36 AM »

One must not forget that the range is quite large. It's an interesting tactical situation. The tanks may be separated from infantry units.

mustavaris · « **Reply #154 on:** July 09, 2012, 09:47:48 AM »

When you see a video where a tank is hit by a missile/rocket you really cannot know what happened.. Those videos also have a training accident and pictures from various conflicts. The smoke does not tell much alone either. When the tank is destroyed, it is destroyed (not repaired, crew killed/wounded). Putting them out of action is much easier. That is what you guys seem to miss: in the field it does not really matter whether it is out of use "for now" or destroyed but claiming that a tank that is later repaired and most of the crew returns to service were destroyed, is nonsense.

mustavaris · « **Reply #155 on:** July 09, 2012, 09:50:43 AM »

What´s the use of precursor missile when in long range they won´t work (like in case of RPGs they might)... it´s simply better to employ two (or more) lethal missiles.

Quote from: Numbers on July 09, 2012, 08:58:02 AM

I completely agree with you. Precursor Missile is a must have technology for long range ATGM like Kornet.

mustavaris · « **Reply #156 on:** July 09, 2012, 09:53:12 AM »

Yes... not bad at all. But it seems that for some people only "destroying" means that the mission was accomplished. The fact being that killing and destroying... are overrated. And despite of what I say, I am not saying that Hezbollah did not prevail marvelously.

Quote from: Numbers on July 09, 2012, 08:26:18 AM

So how many Merkava Tanks were disabled and destroyed due to ATGM fire? Since I have heard different figures from different sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
"According to Merkava tank program administration, 52 Merkava main battle tanks were damaged (45 of them by different kinds of ATGM), missiles penetrated 22 tanks, but only 5 tanks were destroyed, one of them by an improvised explosive device (IED)."

22 penetrations of Merkava by ATGMs is not bad.

In the next conflict Israel will be using Active Defence System on Merkava Tanks.

IronHorse110 · « **Reply #157 on:** July 09, 2012, 10:00:41 AM »

Quote from: mustavaris on July 09, 2012, 04:13:24 AM

Nope. Around that figure was hit and put out of action through the conflict (40 - 70 depending on the sources). They never lost dozens of Merkavas, dozens were put out of action for some time.. and that means anything between few hours of field work to factory overhaul before the tank was again ready for service. But of course you are free to count those as "lost"... whatever suits you:) This is also the general agreement among defence professionals and their journals.

But if buying into Hezbollah propaganda makes you feel better, go for it. It is only you to whom such might have negative consequences.

During live fire they will send their crew men to fix a tank? Please, then those crew men are perfect for target practice.

The second the tank is immobilized, it becomes more of a liability then anything useful. So when you hit a tank and it can't move, it doesn't matter anymore because its just sitting there and you can just continuously hit it until the soldiers inside panic or die.

So when they say 53 Markevas were lost, it means they were not longer of any use. To say they are sent back to the factory to be fixed is a joke, your going to tow it away and risk getting artillery shells pounding your position?

I don't get what you try to prove by saying they were fixed later, what matters is that on the field they were neutralized.

Its like saying the plane was not lost, it got shot down and the engine was sent back to the factory and used again. Please!

The whole point of using a ATGM is to neutralize the approaching tank. If 53 tanks were neutralized, it makes no difference if they were turned into vapor or you shot exactly where the fuse box is (figure of speach) and it no longer functions, but its in perfect condition. What matters is that they no longer could perform their mission.

Numbers · « **Reply #158 on:** July 09, 2012, 10:02:35 AM »

Quote from: mustavaris on July 09, 2012, 09:50:43 AM

What´s the use of precursor missile when in long range they won´t work (like in case of RPGs they might)... it´s simply better to employ two (or more) lethal missiles.

Well, Precursor Missile can be a long range Missile. It is very light, guided and deployed on Launcher Tripod with main ATGM Missile. It triggers Active Defence System. After that main ATGM Missile hits enemy Tank.

the8march · « **Reply #159 on:** July 09, 2012, 10:38:50 AM »

Is there any mention of the range of this missile?

Were there any pictures showing the back of the missile? Would be very interesting to see the optics placed there.

Harry_Thomason · « **Reply #160 on:** July 09, 2012, 12:46:09 PM »

Quote from: the8march on July 09, 2012, 10:38:50 AM

Is there any mention of the range of this missile?

If it has Kornet-e specs, its 5500 m. at day, and 3500 m. at night.

I'm also very curious about Dehlavieh vs APS like Trophy and Quick kill (is the latter deployed yet?). Even if they would be successful against a single missile, as any anti-missile system it can be saturated by multiple missiles.

khayyam · « **Reply #161 on:** July 09, 2012, 05:21:19 PM »

Since this matter was brought up, and since this is not an American forum, perhaps it is worth it to respond to something that member "mustavaris" brought up>
In late 2006, the Israeli Army released "figures" of Merkava losses, and I am assuming that Mustavaris (and every amateur/professional I see online) have been relying on these figures (x tanks hit, y tanks penetrated, z tanks destroyed). Please, ignore all that: the only source we have on this matter is the Israeli Army, and if you choose to believe these figures, then you have zero critical faculty: A- Armies lie about these matters ALL THE TIME during ongoing conflicts, the reasons are too obvious to state, B- Israel in specific has historically and consistently lied about casualties and especially equipment losses (since the early days of the conflict in the late 1940s).

Regarding "Hezbollah propaganda": I have personally read every statement that was issued officially by the party, throughout the conflict and afterward, and their reports have always been very level-headed and modest, even during the heat of the conflict. They almost never reported on events that never took place, and their casualty figures were always closest to truth. It was Israel that reported on hundreds of Iranians fighting in south lebanon and thousands of captured lebanese fighters and a similar story almost every day of the 2006 war.

Lastly, the IDF gave naive westerners the impression that every tank destroyed in Lebanon was hit by a Kornet: if Mustavaris knew the amount of Kornet launchers available in South Lebanon on July 12,2006, he would not be making the assumptions that he made above.

wisdom · « **Reply #162 on:** July 09, 2012, 06:15:15 PM »

Quote from: mustavaris on July 09, 2012, 04:13:24 AM

Nope. Around that figure was hit and put out of action through the conflict (40 - 70 depending on the sources). They never lost dozens of Merkavas, dozens were put out of action for some time.. and that means anything between few hours of field work to factory overhaul before the tank was again ready for service. But of course you are free to count those as "lost"... whatever suits you:) This is also the general agreement among defence professionals and their journals.

But if buying into Hezbollah propaganda makes you feel better, go for it. It is only you to whom such might have negative consequences.

So Israel lost a few tanks and a few guys but was unable to penetrate more than 1.8 miles into Lebanon with 10's of 1000's of soldiers and was defeated...but did not really loose any armor or men they just decided to give up since they are nice people
If buying into western propaganda makes you happy so be it

hossein9876 · « **Reply #163 on:** July 09, 2012, 09:02:24 PM »

The company which manufactures the Kornet claims they haven't licensed Iran the technology to produce the Kornet:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-09/iran-producing-missiles-based-on-russia-s-kornet-analysts-say

Iran Producing Missiles Based on Russia’s Kornet, Analysts Say
Iran is producing new laser-guided anti-tank missiles modeled on Russia’s Kornet, the rocket used by Hezbollah in the 2006 war with Israel, according to defense analysts in London and Moscow.

The Iranians may have copied the design after obtaining it from non-state sources such as Hezbollah, said Igor Korotchenko, director of the Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade in Moscow, who’s also the head of an advisory council for the Russian Defense Ministry. Syria and the Hamas Islamic movement are also among possible sources for providing the technology, according to Neil Gibson, a defense analyst from IHS Jane’s.

Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi on July 7 inaugurated production of the Dehlaviyeh anti-armor missile system designed to hit mobile and ground targets, the state-run Fars news agency reported. The Kornet has a range of as far as 5.5 kilometers (3.3 miles), according to its manufacturer, the KBP Instrument Design Bureau.

Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim militant organization in Lebanon backed by Syria and Iran, in 2006 claimed to have destroyed two advanced Merkava-4 Israeli tanks with the Russian-made Kornet, which Israeli officials said was supplied by Syria. Russia hasn’t licensed Iran the technology to produce the Kornet, Korotchenko said.

Vyacheslav Davidenko, spokesman for state arms exporter Rosoboronexport, and Andrei Morozov, a senior manager in charge of media relations at KBP, couldn’t be reached for comment.
Syria, Hamas

“It’s most likely that a country in the area, previously supplied the Kornet by Russia, has supplied the missile to Iran,” IHS Jane’s Gibson said by e-mail. “This is most likely Syria, Hamas or Hezbollah, the latter supposedly supplied the Kornet by Syria.”

Syria had to commit not to re-export Kornet missiles at the time its purchases were made, according to Korotchenko. Iran could receive some technology and missiles through third parties such as Hezbollah as the Kornet was exported to dozens of countries, he said.

The Russian missile was also sold to Algeria, Greece, India, Jordan, Morocco and Turkey as well as reportedly to Azerbaijan, Libya, Peru and Uganda, Gibson said.

Once the missile had been supplied, Iranian engineers and scientists would have had to reverse-engineer all the missile systems, according to the IHS Jane’s analyst.

RG · « **Reply #164 on:** July 09, 2012, 10:25:44 PM »

I hope this would be DIO's next coming project!

GRAN the 120mm guided mortar.


The GRAN Guided Weapon System for 120mm Mortars (English language)	Small \| Large

Cheers.

Username · « **Reply #165 on:** July 10, 2012, 01:57:08 AM »

This is a very significant development for the Iranian Armed forces. I have been searching to see if there has been any report of Helicopter launched Kornet missile.

With flexibility to target both armored ground targets and other helicopters and a range of over 5k, it would be a nice alternative to TOW missiles.

Immortal · « **Reply #166 on:** July 10, 2012, 02:42:53 AM »

Iran Producing Missiles Based on Russia’s Kornet, Analysts Say
By Henry Meyer on July 09, 2012

Iran is producing new laser-guided anti-tank missiles modeled on Russia’s Kornet, the rocket used by Hezbollah in the 2006 war with Israel, according to defense analysts in London and Moscow.

The Iranians may have copied the design after obtaining it from non-state sources such as Hezbollah, said Igor Korotchenko, director of the Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade in Moscow, who’s also the head of an advisory council for the Russian Defense Ministry. Syria and the Hamas Islamic movement are also among possible sources for providing the technology, according to Neil Gibson, a defense analyst from IHS Jane’s.

Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi on July 7 inaugurated production of the Dehlaviyeh anti-armor missile system designed to hit mobile and ground targets, the state-run Fars news agency reported. The Kornet has a range of as far as 5.5 kilometers (3.3 miles), according to its manufacturer, the KBP Instrument Design Bureau.

Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim militant organization in Lebanon backed by Syria and Iran, in 2006 claimed to have destroyed two advanced Merkava-4 Israeli tanks with the Russian-made Kornet, which Israeli officials said was supplied by Syria. Russia hasn’t licensed Iran the technology to produce the Kornet, Korotchenko said.

Vyacheslav Davidenko, spokesman for state arms exporter Rosoboronexport, and Andrei Morozov, a senior manager in charge of media relations at KBP, couldn’t be reached for comment.

Syria, Hamas
“It’s most likely that a country in the area, previously supplied the Kornet by Russia, has supplied the missile to Iran,” IHS Jane’s Gibson said by e-mail. “This is most likely Syria, Hamas or Hezbollah, the latter supposedly supplied the Kornet by Syria.”

Syria had to commit not to re-export Kornet missiles at the time its purchases were made, according to Korotchenko. Iran could receive some technology and missiles through third parties such as Hezbollah as the Kornet was exported to dozens of countries, he said.

The Russian missile was also sold to Algeria, Greece, India, Jordan, Morocco and Turkey as well as reportedly to Azerbaijan, Libya, Peru and Uganda, Gibson said.

Once the missile had been supplied, Iranian engineers and scientists would have had to reverse-engineer all the missile systems, according to the IHS Jane’s analyst

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-09/iran-producing-missiles-based-on-russia-s-kornet-analysts-say

reza18 · « **Reply #167 on:** July 10, 2012, 05:46:30 AM »

A tank is not like a bicycle where it can be taken off the field for repairs and back on the field again for action..Whoever believes that crap needs examination.

Fact is, the Israeli occupation/oppression forces(IOF) got their ass kicked..Several of their tanks where either destroyed or decommissioned. The reason they couldn't advance any further was because of that. Their tanks were stopped in their tracks so they had to rely on heavy air-bombardment and artillery pounding..Even that didn't stop Hezbollah from firing close to hundred rockets a day.

A tank doesn't need to be totally destroyed to be ineffective..Just the decommissioning the damn thing makes it close to useless..And then one has to take into account the logistical nightmare of rescuing the tank from the war-zone by engineers..They effectively become sitting ducks for snipers...

Numbers · « **Reply #168 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:01:32 AM »

Quote from: reza18 on July 10, 2012, 05:46:30 AM

Fact is, the Israeli occupation/oppression forces(IOF) got their ass kicked..Several of their tanks where either destroyed or decommissioned. The reason they couldn't advance any further was because of that. Their tanks were stopped in their tracks so they had to rely on heavy air-bombardment and artillery pounding..Even that didn't stop Hezbollah from firing close to hundred rockets a day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
"According to Merkava tank program administration, 52 Merkava main battle tanks were damaged (45 of them by different kinds of ATGM), missiles penetrated 22 tanks, but only 5 tanks were destroyed, one of them by an improvised explosive device (IED)."

22 penetrations of Merkava by ATGMs, that is the overall score in 2006 Lebanon War (could be down played by Israel army).

mustavaris · « **Reply #169 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:41:06 AM »

I guess that you know no tankers nor folks from the support units:) A lot of things are done at the field.. Tracks are changed by the crew in short time, with regular support units you can change engine, gun barrel, gearbox, wheels, parts of armour, optics, much of the electronics..

What comes to later part, that is exactly what I wrote. "Destroying" and "killing" are overrated and when defending against heavy armour (or aerial threat) it is more often than not, about denying from the enemy their best options.

And what did I wrote about Hezbollah?

Quote from: reza18 on July 10, 2012, 05:46:30 AM

A tank is not like a bicycle where it can be taken off the field for repairs and back on the field again for action..Whoever believes that crap needs examination..........A tank doesn't need to be totally destroyed to be ineffective..Just the decommissioning the damn thing makes it close to useless..And then one has to take into account the logistical nightmare of rescuing the tank from the war-zone by engineers..They effectively become sitting ducks for snipers...

mustavaris · « **Reply #170 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:42:43 AM »

Could you actually read what I wrote. Please.

Quote from: wisdom on July 09, 2012, 06:15:15 PM

So Israel lost a few tanks and a few guys but was unable to penetrate more than 1.8 miles into Lebanon with 10's of 1000's of soldiers and was defeated...but did not really loose any armor or men they just decided to give up since they are nice people
If buying into western propaganda makes you happy so be it

mustavaris · « **Reply #171 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:45:12 AM »

As there are people to whom certain things have to be underlined, let me re-iterate something.

Quote from: mustavaris on July 09, 2012, 09:53:12 AM

Yes... not bad at all. But it seems that for some people only "destroying" means that the mission was accomplished. The fact being that killing and destroying... are overrated. And despite of what I say, I am not saying that Hezbollah did not prevail marvelously.

mustavaris · « **Reply #172 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:45:51 AM »

Concentrate guys, it is not that hard;)

mustavaris · « **Reply #173 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:48:59 AM »

And for some people who wonder,the keyword is armoured recovery vehicle:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_recovery_vehicle

mustavaris · « **Reply #174 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:52:34 AM »

These are extremely lethal weapons if they are just accurate enough. Either active seeker or laser guidance (and FOs).. Most of the MBTs have rather modest armour against top attacks and if you have these, every infantry group with FOs and mortar support will become extremely dangerous.

Quote from: RG on July 09, 2012, 10:25:44 PM

I hope this would be DIO's next coming project!

GRAN the 120mm guided mortar.

The GRAN Guided Weapon System for 120mm Mortars (English language)

Cheers.