Comprehensive coverage

Iran conducted a test of missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometers powered by solid fuel

The use of solid fuel can increase the accuracy of the hit * The missiles can hit Israel, American bases in the Middle East and Europe

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia University, September 2007. From Wikipedia
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia University, September 2007. From Wikipedia

When elite technology meets a terrorist state it is not used for good purposes. These things, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the UN Assembly last Thursday, are demonstrated this morning by Iran.

The Iranians say that they have successfully attempted to launch long-range Sajil 2 missiles, capable of carrying warheads and hitting Israel, American bases in the Middle East and parts of Europe.

According to the reports of the British SKY network, the Revolutionary Guards, responsible for the Iranian missile program (and not its regular army), announced that they had successfully attempted to launch missiles with a medium range of two thousand kilometers. It was the third round of missile tests in two days of an exercise carried out by the guards. Yesterday they tested the Fateh-110 missiles, short-range surface-to-surface missiles, and the Tunder 69, a short-range sea-based missile.

The missiles - which were called Sajil 2 - are two-stage surface-to-surface missiles powered by solid fuel (like the boosters of the space shuttles that are designed to give it the initial momentum - AB), in contrast to the older missiles of the Shihab 3 model that are powered by a combination of solid fuel and liquid fuel . It is estimated that the use of solid fuel may increase the accuracy of the missile hitting the target.

CNN adds that if this is true, the new missiles put Moscow, Athens and southern Italy within striking range from Iran. The experiment is being carried out a few days after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad admitted that Iran had built a second uranium enrichment plant in the city of Qom.

16 תגובות

  1. If the Sajil 2 is really for a range of only 2,000KM, Moscow is not in range because it is 2,700KM from the north of Iran.

    If the Iranians wanted to hit us with missiles, wouldn't it be enough that they would fire from Iraq, only about 500 km?
    Of course, before the USA entered... but even so you can smuggle a missile...

  2. My friend, as much as war is a painful thing, I assure you that even a Shihab missile that crushed a block of buildings in Tel Aviv is better than a nuclear mushroom.
    There is nothing at all to compare the damage of a conventional bomb (however powerful and destructive it may be), to the destructive power of an atomic bomb, for all the radiation hazards it sows. Radiation, to remind you, means irreversible damage to the bombed area - for generations. A block of buildings can still be rebuilt.
    No matter how much the current conflict with Iran escalates, everything is better than a nuclear attack on the Gush Dan (despite my great distaste for the Dizengoff Republic...), and on my side there will be a shower of rockets from Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Hamastan.

  3. Good Morning,
    1. Mirum Golan's linguistic creation, "Nazi Islam" strikes a good chord, especially when you know that Iran is
    The source of the work "The Aryan Race".
    2. Mirom Golan - It is true that what does not go with force goes with more force, but the question is how much it costs and to whom
    It hurts - look at all the wars in distant regions, to which the USA has sent its sons, not to mention
    On the distorted results obtained:
    In Iraq, for example, the Shiites got stronger, Syria steals terrorists and dissidents, the Iraqi people who were hurt before
    Even more hurt, and one of the most terrible things: the battle shock reactions of the soldiers returning home.
    3. Vapors - even with a cocked gun there is a "stop", and this is what Israel is working on, as I read some time ago in "Sheva"
    4. To Yehuda - a guess
    Divination shows that the little Nazi will be forced out of power.
    Peace be upon Israel

  4. The Iranians invite it, really demand it... and despite the conciliatory intentions, it doesn't seem like the deal will end well.
    I wish we were fooled, but a gun fired in the first act calls for a bundle in the last act. Any other 'signature' would be really bad, unfortunately.

    So have a good signature.

  5. The attempts of the Iranians to produce more and more long-range missiles show that they want to threaten not only Israel but also Europe, Russia and even the rest of the world.
    The world understands that it has a problem. The question is whether he will do something about it or let this little Hitler grow.
    Good signature
    Yehuda Sabdarmish

  6. If I may respond to the one above, I hope you are not an Iranian plant as your style of speaking indicates-
    One of the three conditions of the State of Israel, for the use of nuclear weapons on its part is.. you guessed it correctly - the use of non-conventional weapons on the State of Israel. I'm certainly not jealous of a country that will throw a chemical missile in the direction of Israel... I really am not. And a nuclear Israeli response, in this case, would also be acceptable in the eyes of the whole world - despite his extroverted "enlightenment" towards Nazi Islam.
    And there is a simple solution to the problem you mentioned - to land a strong and successful blow on the Iranians, before they have time to land one on us.

  7. Leave Atom! What about chemical and biological…

    After all, it is clear that they have such a weapon, and if they are attacked by someone, we will receive it first.

  8. Another theoretical advantage to solid fuel is a significant shortening of the take-off time (boost phase) which makes it difficult to intercept the missile at this stage of its flight, since it leaves less time for the intercepting missile to reach it (this is a time window of only a few tens of seconds). In addition, a missile with solid fuel propulsion is also less sensitive to physical damage to it or its vicinity, and is also more resistant to interception by a laser beam. Not operational yet.

  9. Noam is right. The big advantage (and only envy) of the fuel
    The solid is the ability to prepare the missile for launch
    At a relatively high speed - hence high survivability
    of the missile and its launchers.

  10. The advantage of solid fuel is in the ability to launch quickly. Liquid fuel must be filled shortly before launch, which exposes the missile to a preliminary impact.
    Solid propellant rockets are storable ready for delivery.

  11. How does solid fuel increase accuracy? After all, this is only the launch phase and not the phase when the missile's head falls on the target.

  12. A question for my father and the other respondents

    Will the science site continue to exist even if unconventional Iranian missiles fly in the area?
    It bothers me a lot during the lockdown this Yom Kippur.

    Hoping for an optimistic answer
    Easy fasting and good signing
    Sabdarmish Yehuda

  13. There is no Shihab 3 powered by solid fuel.

    There is a missile called Segil, two stages as you know, and it is powered by solid fuel.

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.

Skip to content