Private *
Registration Date: 10-05-2018
Date of Birth: Not Specified
Local Time: 01-17-2020 at 03:22 PM
Status: Offline

PeeD's Forum Info
Yesterday, 09:53 AM
13 (0.03 posts per day | 0.44 percent of total posts)
(Find All Posts)
0 (0 threads per day | 0 percent of total threads)
(Find All Threads)
2 Days, 8 Hours, 43 Minutes
2 [Details]
PeeD's Contact Details
PeeD's Most Thanked Post
Post Subject Numbers of Thanks
RE: Bavar-373 LR SAM System 5
Thread Subject Forum Name
Bavar-373 LR SAM System Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defense Force
Post Message
No test against Shahab-3 and in total not much new after the leaked footage two days ago.

So lets compare it to the S-400:

Pro S-400: Very large and very powerful PESA array in it's Gravestone engagement radar. Allows engagement of 12 instead of 6 simultaneous targets.
Con: Lack of waveform agility, easier to detect and locate.

Pro Bavar-373: Dual-band at battery level. Gives a benefit of ~20dB for detection and tracking of stealth targets and much more robust ECCM.
Con: None except cost, theoretically S-400 can do this too but a battalion level only (Big Bird).

Pro S-400: 380km range ARH SAM component.
Con: Easier to jam, significantly more expensive. Bavar-373 lacks such a long range component against high-value targets.

Pro Bavar-373: All off-road capability, including CP, S-400 only in special sub-variant without CP.

Con Bavar-373: Unknown how/if the X-band engagement radar achieves range and illumination performance in the class of the S-300/-400. An AESA needs to be very large or very expensive (GaN) to achieve that. It's possible that Iran has found a innovative and economical solution to this in connection with higher gain. A backfeed PESA would be still possible and much more cot effective, but powerlevels would be too low to make sense compared to the spacefeed high power S-300/-400 system.
In worst case a blind illumination by a backfeed PESA is done, with the task to just put enough RF energy on the target for the Sayyad-4 seeker to pick it up in the last seconds of the terminal phase.

Pro S-400: Small minimum range to fight against CM class targets. Thats due to the TVC system. Bavar-373 potentially lacks this as it's not designed to be spent on CM class targets.

Pro S-400: Cold launch makes sure the system can operate in forrest areas and minimized potential damage to the TEL.
Con: More expensive and not fail-proof.

Pro Bavar-373: 10x10 TEL offers growth potential for heavier/larger missiles.
Con: More expensive, larger footprint.

Pro S-400: May have the benefit of increased maneuverability if used in ABM role as TVC system might still be active in shorter range engagements. Still possible that the Sayyad-4 has TVC too.
Con: Higher cost per round, only operational in the short boost phase.

Pro S-400: SAGG guidance system for better ECCM and counter-beaming/notching capability and lower SAM cost. Bavar-373 may or may not have an equivalent.

Conclusion is: For the Bavar-373 radars to achieve similar range and illumination performance as the S-400 or even S-300, some groundbreaking innovations or high cost systems are required. A open question for now.