Author Topic: Qiam-1 is now being deliverd to IRGC. (Read 9160 times)

Aspahbod · « **on:** May 22, 2011, 07:32:36 AM »

http://www.iribnews.ir/Default.aspx?Page=MainContent&news_num=285509

[farsi]آغاز تحویل انبوه موشک قیام 1 به نیروی هوافضای سپاه[/farsi]

[farsi]در آستانة یوم‌الله سوم خرداد، سالروز فتح خرمشهر با حضور سردار سرتیپ پاسدار احمد وحیدی وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح و سردار حاجی زاده فرماندة نیروی هوافضای سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی تحویل انبوه موشک قیام یک ازجانب سازمان هوافضای وزارت دفاع به نیروی هوافضای سپاه پاسداران آغاز شد.

به گزارش واحد مرکزی خبر ، سردار وحیدی در مراسم تحویل‌دهی موشک قیام1 گفت: تولید انبوه موشک قیام، نخستین موشک بدون بالک کشور نشان از خودکفایی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در تولید انواع موشک و رسواگر مدعیان دروغگویی است که اخیراً موضوع همکاری در این زمینه را با برخی کشورها مطرح کردند.

وزیر دفاع تصریح کرد: همانگونه که قبلاً نیز اعلام کردیم، وزارت دفاع با توکل بر خدا، و تکیه بر خودباوری ، خلاقیت و خردمندی نیروی مومن و متخصص خود مرزهای خوداتکایی و خودکفایی را درنوردید و استقلال توأم با عزت و سربلندی را برای جمهوری اسلامی ایران به ارمغان آورده است.

وزیر دفاع در تشریح ویژگیهای این موشک گفت: موشک قیام 1 بشکلی طراحی شده که امکان شناسایی ازجانب سامانه های ضد موشکی دشمن را کاهش می دهد و حذف بالکها در این موشک موجب شده است با دستیابی به سرعت بیشتر در عملیات، زمان آماده‌سازی موشک برای شلیک کاهش چشمگیر و مکان شلیک را متنوع کند.

سردار وحیدی افزود: این موشک قادر است اهداف مورد نظر را با دقت بسیار بالا مورد اصابت قرار دهد.

وزیر دفاع با تشکر و قدردانی از تلاش مدیران، دانشمندان و متخصصان صنایع هوافضای وزارت دفاع در افزایش قدرت بازدارندگی جمهوری اسلامی ایران، این دستاوردهای بزرگ را حاصل مقاومت، پایداری و جانفشانی رزمندگان و ایثارگران سلحشوری دانست که حماسه‌های بزرگی همچون فتح خرمشهر را خلق و دست متجاوزان را از حریم مقدس میهن اسلامی کوتاه کردند.
[/farsi]

It says Qiam-1 is now being delivered to IRGC Air Force.

M-ATF · « **Reply #1 on:** May 22, 2011, 09:12:57 AM »

images:

http://www.farsnews.com/imgrep.php?nn=9003015098

YMJ · « **Reply #2 on:** May 22, 2011, 09:27:04 AM »

Can Qiam-1 maneuver?

Pasdar · « **Reply #3 on:** May 22, 2011, 09:28:16 AM »

Obviously, the very latest version in the shahab-3 production line. I think they've already gotten the most out of this this frame, it is time they start a new line after this. Then again, continued development of liquid fueled missiles, very much helps our space program too.

Mr-Babak-S · « **Reply #4 on:** May 22, 2011, 04:12:20 PM »

New ballistic missile delivered to IRGC
Sun May 22, 2011 12:19PM

Iran test fired Qiam ballistic missile on August 20, 2010.
An Iranian commander announces the mass delivery of the Qiam (uprising) ballistic missile system to the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC).

"The mass production of the Qiam missile, the country's first missile sans stabilizer fins, shows the Islamic Republic of Iran's self-sufficiency in producing various types of missiles," IRNA quoted Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi as saying on Sunday.

He added that Qiam's design reduces the possibility of being detected by enemy anti-missile systems and the omission of its fins has increased the missile's speed.

"The missile is able to hit its targets with high precision," he said.

Iran successfully test fired the Qiam surface-to-surface missile on August 20.

Qiam is part of a new generation of domestically-manufactured surface-to-surface missiles with liquid fuel.

In recent years, Iran has made great achievements in its defense sector and achieved self-sufficiency in producing essential military equipment and systems.

In January, Iran successfully test-fired mid-range, surface-to-air Hawk missile and the Iranian Defense Ministry delivered new cruise missile systems to the Navy.

The systems, designed and manufactured by Iranian experts, are capable of spotting and destroying different targets at sea.

The Navy has successfully test-fired a range of powerful missiles mounted with laser technology, which display high precision and have a range of 45 kilometers (28 miles) to 300 kilometers (186 miles).

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/181167.html

Mr-Babak-S · « **Reply #5 on:** May 22, 2011, 08:27:01 PM »

I imagine it can maneuver somehow to hit its target with better accuracy.
Maybe it has small exhaust ports that it uses to correct direction.

Catsoo · « **Reply #6 on:** May 23, 2011, 01:19:00 AM »

With the mixed of new technologies introduced in different missiles the logical that soon will introduce a Ghadr missile
with better accuracy and no fins and perhaps even lighter.

Catsoo

sarmad17 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 23, 2011, 01:42:46 AM »

Wheres Eagle to shed some more light on this?

wisdom · « **Reply #8 on:** May 23, 2011, 02:15:31 AM »

IT HAS VECTOR CONTROL AT THE NOZZLE EXIT AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE WHITE THINGS AT THE EXIT NOZZLE. THIS TECHNOLOGY CAN BE USED IN MISSILES THAT GO BEYOND ATMOSPHERE AND GIVES THE MISSILE PRECISE DIRECTIONAL CONTROL. NORMALLY NOT USED IN AIR TO AIR MISSILE (BUT YOU COULD I GUESS) SINCE THEY USE AIR FLOW AND LIFT FOR DIRECTIONAL CHANGE. IT IS A TECHNOLOGY THAT FEW COUNTRIES POSSESS DUE TO DIFFICULTY IN CREATING MATERIALS THAT DO NOT ABLATE OR MELT AT HIGH TEMPERATURES. SINCE ABLATION OR STRUCTURAL MELT DOWN WILL DESTROY THE MISSILES ABILITY TO VECTOR THRUST. aLSO IT IS MORE PRECISE WITH ITS COMPUTER CONTROL. THESE MISSILES ARE USUALLY LONG RANGE AND HENCE CANNOT BENEFIT FROM ROTATIONAL (SPIN STABALIZATION ) ALONE.
THE MASS PRODUCTION IS OF GREAT NOTICE SINCE THIS IS IN LINE WITH RUSSIA, USA AND FRANCE AND MORE THAN INDIA CAN DO SINCE IT ASSEMBLES MOST MISSILES ONE AT A TIME. CHINA IS USUALLY NOT ACCOUNTED FOR SINCE ITS MISSILE DOCTRINE IS VERY DIFFERENT AND DOES NOT CARE FOR MASS PRODUCTION CAPABILITY OF LONG RANGE MISSILES.
HOPE THIS HAS HELPED
VERY IMPRESSIVE

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 23, 2011, 03:37:19 AM »

Sorry guys, I've been off most of the day

Wisdom,

Those "white things" are just Jet Vanes. They are the same steering systme used by the original R-17 Scud so that's nothing new.

Technically, Jet Vanes are a form of Thrust vectoring but a very old and rather obsolete kind (used since the V-2).

From the images I have seen so far of the Qiam-1, there is no evidence of a Terminal Phase guidance system. From the information I have read from "experts" on such things, it is certain the Qiam-1 have a very modern Boost Phase guidance system. This is evidenced by the lack of stabilizing fins. Without the stabilizing fins used on the original R-17 Scud, there has to be some system in place to compensate. Add that to the likelihood of the Qiam-1 having a greater range then previous Scud variants means its certain some sophisticated guidance system is in place (my guess is a Laser Ring Gyro but that's pure speculation).

However the first images of the Qiam-1 from last year make it fairly clear there aren't any manuevering fins or thrusters on the warhead section which makes it highly unlikely to have a terminal guidance system.

Still, the Qiam-1 is arguably the most advanced and likely most accurate Scud variant known. Only the Soviet Scud-VTO could be considered more accurate since it had a Terminal guidance system (Electro-Optic seeker with small manuevering fins).

Sadly, I don't see anything new in this pictures since we already have images of the engine section from last year. Still it definitely shows they are being assembled on a fair rate.

And to me that is very telling and suggests the missile is still close enough to the Scud that minimal testing is needed since it likely shares the same missile body (not including the Warhead section obviously) and the same engine (possibly improved thats just a guess) and since Iran has the ability to build ALOT of Scuds there is no reason to assume this missile won't be built in massive numbers. Also it's likely this missile will find its way to Syria would needs a modernization of their Scud fleet.

M-ATF · « **Reply #10 on:** May 23, 2011, 04:41:54 AM »

Eagle
in these pictures it is obvious that unlike scuds (except Scud-VTO) , Qiam-1 uses a sparable warhead.

uper section of qiam-1 that shows it uses separable warhead:

there are some excrescences on the warhead of qiam that task of them is unknown.

and we havent seen rear view of warhead yet.

and it seems Qiam-1 is a little smaller than scuds, specially from last year images (in comparison by mans near the missile it seems length of qiam-1 is less than 10 m).

(im not sure about this one) see this image:

unfortunately its not possible to calculate effect of prespective but on this image it seems diameter of qiam is a little smaller that 88 cm of scud

M-ATF · « **Reply #11 on:** May 23, 2011, 04:49:08 AM »

i havent seen video of launch of scud or shahab-1 and shahab-2 , but rising speed of Qiam is more than rising speed of qadr-1 and shahab-3.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 23, 2011, 04:56:49 AM »

M-ATF,

I know the Qiam-1 has a separating warhead and I never said it didn't. I said it's unlikely it has a terminal guidance system. They two things are not the same nor do they have to be related. For example from the many close up images of the Shahab-3 there are these days it's quite clear it too has no terminal guidance system since there is no visible method of steering the warhead after separate (no thrusters or fins contrary to early reports with fuzzy images).

However these images don't actually prove that so much since all Scuds have warhead sections that normally separated while in storage and are only attached when they are being prepared for the field. However only variant of the Scud has a separating warhead in flight until the Qiam-1 came along which was the Scud-VTO.

We have actually discussed the likely dimensions of the Qiam-1 back when it first appeared last year. From those who know the Scuds better than I, they made it very clear they were absolutely certain it has the same diameter as the Scud family. The length is the only question, with most agreeing is not too different in length.

These images may give you the illusion they are smaller because of the lack of fins.

Also there is no direct evidence the Qiam-1 is faster than the Shahab-3 and I find it unlikely it is. The Shahab-3's much greater thrust and heavier warhead would suggest a much faster terminal speed (thanks to greater kinetic energy). The boost speed (the time it takes to reach space) could be higher because of the lack of fins but I don't know whether it makes a huge difference or not. Removing the fins will decrease drag but I am not certain how much it does this by.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 23, 2011, 04:59:48 AM »

Those "things" on the warhead are actually a mystery to me. Most knowledgable observers said they were either sensor or antennas of some kind since they don't see oriented properly to be thrusters but I honestly don't know. One would think if they were meant to spin the warhead to keep it stabilized in the terminal phase they would be slanted to an angle but again I am just guessing there.

wisdom · « **Reply #14 on:** May 23, 2011, 06:42:57 AM »

@ eagle

Jet vanes were used in v-2 scuds and most russia ICBM techs...the concept is old but so is liquid rocket technology.
The jet vanes on qiam are controlled by actuators in a much different manner than scud or shahab hence the omission of the fins. Otherwise if they were the same they could not get rid of the aerodynamic fins. To have the high angles required for trajectory change the vanes the material have to be very different. Hence my statement that few countries can make these ablative materials today. The graphite scud vanes would burn up..so .the vanes are an advancement for Iranian aerospace or any country. I hope you agree that these cannot be the same material or angle of attack in front of the thrust flow as a scud that you stated. I agree with you that no one in their right mind throws away a proven technology and creates from scratch so most Iranian IRBM and future space launch vehicles will use upgraded scud engines of some sort.. Your statements about ballistic trajectory of the warhead can only be true if you happen to have pictures of their rear...so please share the pics. If you already have then please repost since I missed them.

wisdom · « **Reply #15 on:** May 23, 2011, 06:55:59 AM »

@ m-aft

Miniaturization of the warhead by Iran and hence decreasing the allowable destructive power of the TNT that it can carry can only mean to me it is of non-conventional type. Hence it is unlikely to spend so much expense to down size create the delivery vehicle and deliver a specific warhead without guidance. Now if they had not made the warhead smaller and separable then I would agree it is more likely to be unguided missile like a scud.

shahab · « **Reply #16 on:** May 23, 2011, 09:04:10 AM »

Quote from: wisdom on May 23, 2011, 06:55:59 AM

@ m-aft

. Now if they had not made the warhead smaller and separable then I would agree it is more likely to be unguided missile like a scud.

Scud, Qiam, Shahab 3 etc. are guided missiles. Don't confuse between the guidance of a missile (INS for example) with terminal guidance.

M-ATF · « **Reply #17 on:** May 23, 2011, 09:51:20 AM »

Quote

From those who know the Scuds better than I, they made it very clear they were absolutely certain it has the same diameter as the Scud family. The length is the only question, with most agreeing is not too different in length.

i have seen such assessment ( specially on armscontrolwonk) , maybe you believe them but i dont believe their assessment on this subject. to me it is around 2 meter shorter than scud.

see this image.d1 is around 90 pixel, and d2 is around 450 pixel, if you consider height of man (d1) 1.8 meter ( most of iranians are shorter than 1.8 meter and are between 1.7 to 1.75) length of missile is aorund 9 meter and diameter of it is around 70 cm.

parthenon · « **Reply #18 on:** May 23, 2011, 11:34:53 AM »

I'm surprised the Qiam went into production, thought it was a "proof of concept" model to experiment (hence liquid-fuel) with vane-less BM's.

So why no vanes?
1) (from the press release) "...easier to fuel"... Why?
2) "...greater speed"... obvious!
3) storage in containers or silo's?
4) less reflective surfaces (radar; "laser weapons", see the OTHER Qiam THREAD)
5a) speculation1: quasi-ballistic trajectory with manoeuvrability in atmospheric(?) coasting phase but especially in max.speed terminal phase. Vanes would probably break off when trying to STEER against atmospheric pressure.
5b) speculation2: will the "triconic" ("outer") nosecone with warhead1 SEPARATE and continue unpowered on the original course, while the missile itself is STEERED to a second target with on top another, "inner" nosecone (and warhead 2)?... a kind of simplified MIRV (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) if you will.

BTW, the standard graphite vanes have no problem with LIQUID fuel (Qiam) only with SOLID fuel.

parthenon · « **Reply #19 on:** May 23, 2011, 12:54:48 PM »

With "vanes" I mean fins ("air vanes") except for the last line where it should read "graphite" jet (=TVC) "vanes". Sorry about that.

A two-target "MIRV" (primary triconic warhead and secondary "tandem" missile warhead) would also confuse ABM defenses to some degree.

M-ATF · « **Reply #20 on:** May 23, 2011, 03:25:38 PM »

i compared an iranian shahab-2 with qiam-1. seems both have the same dimensions, but my estimation for both is 9 meter length, it seems I was wrong, or perhaps shahab-2 is really shorter than scud

Ayyash · « **Reply #21 on:** May 23, 2011, 04:40:58 PM »

I remember the calculations on the size of the Qiam were messy and very hotly contested when it was first shown.

My own calculations produced much the same results as you M-ATF. Using the average height (1.7 m) and using a couple different people standing next to the Qiam for reference I found that the average height was 8.5 m+ and diameter was .7 m (which is close enough to the SCUD diameter that they're probably the same). The diameter should be the most reliable since it's not subject to the vertical distortion of looking up.

I have to confess though, I just don't know whether or not the Qiam is shorter then the SCUD. On one hand the numbers do seem to indicate it, but on the other my calculations are far from 100% accurate just because of the uncertainties. Heck, the entire IRGC could be staffed by abnormally short people! It also doesn't make a lot of sense why they would only make 10-20% smaller. It would make sense if it was a tech demonstrator or a prototype testing the effects of scaling down a SCUD system (as opposed to scaling up on the Shahab-3). In other words, there's no observable benefits to a slightly smaller missile while at the same time requiring new production and tooling equipment which would play a large role in the overall cost and time-until-fielding of the missile. Unless of course aerodynamically the removing of the stabilizing fins couldn't be done on a larger system, but I see no reason why that would be the case.

That's interesting that you measured the Shahab-2 to be the same length. Perhaps this is proof that 2.25 m are really lost in the distortion of looking up or comparing a human height to overall height.

rouz · « **Reply #22 on:** May 23, 2011, 05:34:19 PM »

Wouldn't the dimensions of the tire be better for measuring purposes? I'm guessing that the tires, unlike the crew, only come in one size for that particular type of truck.

Ayyash · « **Reply #23 on:** May 23, 2011, 05:36:29 PM »

Quote from: Barberry on May 23, 2011, 05:34:19 PM

Wouldn't the dimensions of the tire be better for measuring purposes? I'm guessing that the tires, unlike the crew, only come in one size for that particular type of truck.

If memory serves me right, we tried to but we weren't able to find the make of the trailer or wheel that I know. I also tried to compare the size of the ladder rungs because those should be the same as on a MAZ-type TEL, but it gave me a height of something like 15 m so I didn't think it was too reliable.

RAY-ATK · « **Reply #24 on:** May 23, 2011, 05:55:13 PM »

Any guess about its range and weight ?

Author Topic: Qiam-1 is now being deliverd to IRGC. (Read 9160 times)

rouz