American analysis of Iranian armed forces

66
Anti-ship missiles

American analysis of Iranian armed forces


Most effective weapons Iran in the region are its anti-ship missiles, which allow you to remotely hit surface targets, while remaining low-vulnerable from enemy fire. The following paragraph gives an overview of them from the smallest to the largest.

C-701 and their derivatives



These are small air-to-surface missiles designed in China to attack small vessels with a displacement of less than 200 tons. The rockets are subsonic and have a short range of flight - no more than 20 kilometers, but their low altitude, less than 20 meters, and the constantly developing guidance system, guarantee high accuracy of hit - over 95 percent. Apparently, China produces a special version with an improved guidance system for the foreign market, which is called the C-703. Iran independently produces another version developed for launching from a land carrier (and possibly from sea-going vessels) under the name Kowsar. With further improvement of the guidance system, Iranian officials say that this version of the missiles will be able to withstand electronic interference. Because of its short range, this family of missiles outside the borders of Iran should be placed either on aircraft or launched from a seagoing vessel. All this requires a certain degree of air superiority to ensure their sustainable use during a military conflict.

Kowsar was most likely the weapon used to defeat INS Hanit in 10 nautical miles from Beirut in 2006. The Israeli corvette (more than 1000 tons tonnage) was seriously damaged, but remained afloat. The controversial aspect of this event was that the automatic missile defense systems on board the corvette were turned off, so it remains unknown how successful Kowsar can overcome this kind of protection.

C-704 and Nasr-1



This is the older brother of the C-701, with similar speed, cruising altitude and accuracy. The main difference is its size, which makes it possible to deliver a kilogram weighing 130, which is 4 times as large as C-701, and thus may be a threat to ships with a displacement of up to 4 thousand tons. Another difference is the range, which is over 30 kilometers. The main feature of the rocket may be its low cost compared to other weapons that can attack vessels of the same displacement. The number of units acquired by Iran from China remains unknown.

In 2008, Iran successfully launched a self-built Nasr-1 rocket, which seems to be a modified version of the C-704, with a more powerful warhead (150 kilogram) and a slightly longer range. Iranian newspapers, quoting official sources, argued that Iran is currently producing them in droves; how many missiles were produced is still an open question.

The relevance of this class of short-range missiles gives their number. Although it is difficult to find exact figures, some reports indicate the presence of more than 300 units at the beginning of the 21 century, even before Nasr-1 and Kowsar entered production.

C-601 and other silkworm class missiles



This is a class of very large rockets developed in China based on the original Soviet design. During the Iran-Iraq war, the Chinese sold them to both sides. Typically, these missiles carry a half-ton warhead and have a range of over 150 kilometers. Early versions of the missiles did not differ in accuracy (the probability of hitting about 70 percent) and today have little chance against modern defense systems. China continues to supply an improved version of these missiles (C-201) to the Middle East; in 1998, the sale of these weapons to Iran officially ceased, but today Iran has the ability to produce them independently.

C-802 and Noor



C-802 rockets are high-precision long-range missiles developed in China. This 2-speed rocket with a cruising speed just below the 1 Mach (speed of sound), in addition, the autopilot can reduce the altitude below 10 meters with a calm sea. The rocket is very resistant to electronic interference and has a low radar visibility; missile accuracy is in excess of 98 percent. It carries a 165-kilogram warhead capable of hitting shipboard armor. Having a range of 200 kilometers, the C-802 is a dangerous weapon, providing its owner with serious military prospects.

In 1991, Iran ordered 150 C-802 from China. Shipments in the 1996 year, after the 60 missiles had already been delivered, stopped under US pressure, indicating the importance of these weapons.

Despite the suspension of shipments from China, Iran managed to develop its own version of this rocket, called Noor, in which improvements may have been made. Their number is unknown, but it is known that this weapon was produced for several years. This is one of the tactical issues of the Strait of Hormuz: how many Iran’s Noor missiles are and how accurate they are.

SS-N-22 Mosquito



This is the most important naval weapon available to Iran. Originally called the Mosquito, these missiles were developed by the USSR during the end of the Cold War, created specifically to overcome NATO missile defenses. First, the rocket is very fast, accelerates to 3 Mach at high altitude and to 2.2 Mach at the surface; at maximum speed, it can cross the Strait of Hormuz in less than a minute. Secondly, it can change the course according to a random law as it approaches the target, thereby making it very difficult for the automatic defense to calculate its trajectory. This is a large rocket that weighs 4,5 tons, capable of delivering a 320 kilogram warhead; its distance in different sources is indicated differently, but modern versions can reach a distance of 100 kilometers. This technology was inherited by Russia, which continues to improve it, producing more and more sophisticated versions. This family of missiles is usually called the most deadly existing naval weapon with a probability of hitting more than 99 percent.

Visiting Moscow in 2001, the Iranian defense minister was quite impressed with the demonstration of these missiles in order to order for their army a non-disclosed number. Iran, of course, has this weapon, but in what quantity and which versions it remains unknown. Was the order in 2001 alone? Or was Iran continuing to buy them?

In the early years of the last decade, when it became known that Russia was selling these missiles to China, India and Iran, there were suggestions that NATO did not have effective protection from them. By this time, they have been known for more than two decades, and of course NATO had the time to study them and come up with ways to protect against such weapons.

However, NATO forces in combat never confronted such weapons, and given the short distances in the bay, and the possibility that Iran uses several of them in a simultaneous attack, it would be very reasonable to assume that such missiles could cause serious damage.

Khalij Fars ballistic missile



About a year ago, the Khalij Fars ballistic missile was officially presented to the press. It is capable of carrying an 650-kilogram warhead, has a maximum speed of more than 3 Mach, and a maximum launch range of 300 kilometers.

In addition to air missiles, Iran also has torpedoes, which are worth mentioning.

Torpedo hoot



This is another weapon that demonstrates Iran’s ability to produce weapons. Hoot is a supercavitational torpedo, which means that it goes its way under the water in a gas bubble, which significantly reduces friction. It is much faster than any torpedo used by NATO, and can reach speeds up to 200 nodes (370 km / h; note mixednews), which complicates the task of protecting against it. It is very reminiscent of the Squall, a defensive torpedo developed in the Soviet Union, which is still being produced in today's Russia; but in this case there are no reports that Iran has ever acquired the original. Claiming that he developed his own design completely independently, Iran successfully tested these independently built rockets. Despite its impressive speed, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of these torpedoes. Its range should be relatively small, and it should be noisy enough to detect it already at launch. As with all weapons manufactured by Iran, the number of such torpedoes in service may be the main threat.

Navy



Part of Iran’s anti-ship weapons requires placement on warships, so the Iranian Navy is another piece of the puzzle.

Submarines



Iran’s main submarine fleet consists of ultra-small submarines. This class of ships was originally thought to be used for penetration operations, but they found a different role in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. Their small size allows them to maneuver in the shallow waters of the northern shore of the bay, and also complicates their detection by sonars. In recent years, Iran has built Xhumir 17 class submarines that can carry Hoot torpedoes. Add to this the old submarines of the Yugo class, built by North Korea according to Yugoslav drawings. In shallow Iranian waters, these small vessels will be difficult to detect, and they are able to deploy minefields and launch torpedoes without being instantly detected.

At the beginning of the 1990s, Iran acquired the Kilo-class submarines from Russia, the 3. They are about twice the size of Ghadir submarines, and are designed specifically for anti-ship operations in shallow water. They are built using special tiles that distort and absorb sound, making it difficult to detect them with sonar at large distances.

Rocket ships



These are small and fast offensive ships conceived for coastal operations. Iran has 10 type ships Houdong, built in China, and capable of being equipped with large-sized 8 rockets. At the end of 1970, Iran ordered Kaman-class 12 gunboats, of which ten are still in service. In recent years, Iran has been able to build copies called Sina type boats. These 14 small ships carry 4 launchers of mid-size anti-ship missiles each.

Speedboats



These are very small ships with two torpedo tubes. To become effective, they need to come relatively close to their goal, rather than seriously substitute themselves under the fire of the enemy. In terms of efficiency (both when approaching for an attack and for a waste maneuver) they rely on speed. Iran has over 70 boats of type Peykaap, some of which are self-produced boats and 10 Tir units. Both of these models are reported to have a maximum speed of over 50 nodes (over 90 km / h). A newer version, Peykaap-II, is equipped with two rocket launchers.

In 2012, Iran launched 12 combat boats, inspired by high-speed sports vessels that can reach speeds of up to 70 nodes (around 130 km / h). Named Zolfaqhar, besides torpedoes, they can carry two small rocket launchers for Kowsar missiles. The Iranian authorities told the press that the mass production of such high-speed boats began in 2011; the exact number of boats of the Iranian Navy remains unknown.

Other ships



Iran has several large ships that can also use anti-ship missiles. They themselves are fairly easy targets, so their role in armed conflict is uncertain. In recent years, Iran has built three frigates based on the construction of three frigates purchased by Britain before the revolution; To this can be added three corvettes, acquired in 1960's. Iran also has 6 patrol boats, 2 minelayers, 14 hovercraft, and over 20 landing craft. He also has more 80 coastal patrol ships of various sizes, some of which are built by Iran itself.

Air force



Anti-ship missiles can also be placed on aircraft, and Iran has a fairly long list of aircraft that are suitable for this. In addition, the Air Force can also play a critical role in protecting the Iranian Navy and its shores from NATO air forces. The following is a very concise listing by category:

* Air superiority - 60 or more fighter jets, including 25 recently updated MiG-29, -25 or more F-14 Tomcat and 10 Mirage F1.

* Multipurpose tactical fighters - more than 150 jet fighters, of which 140 are F-4 and F-5 1960-s fighters, plus an unknown number of Saeqeh aircraft (a copy of F-5).

* Air Defense Fighters - Chengdu J-20 Fighter 7.

* Air support - Su-13 jet assault attack aircraft 25.

* Assault aviation - 32 Su-24s plus an unknown number of Azarakhsh (the first attempt by Iran to copy the F-5; in development since 1997).

* Helicopters - more than 50 vehicles of various designs and purposes, mainly built in the United States before the revolution.

Along with this, there are some remarkable models:



* Chengdu J-10 is a modern multipurpose fighter produced in recent years in China. With a maximum speed of more than 2 Mach, range of about 2500 km and being very maneuverable, this fighter is quite able to withstand such NATO combat aircraft as F-18 fighters. In the field of aircraft without stealth technology, this is one of the best options in terms of technology for the money that exists on the market at the moment. Iran acquired two squadrons (24 units), which were delivered between the 2008 and 2010 years.

* Chengdu / PAC JF-17 Thunder is a multipurpose fighter developed in China in accordance with the specific requirements of the Pakistani Air Force. With an operational range in 1300 km, and a top speed in Mach 1.6, this aircraft is not as powerful as the J-10, but it is much cheaper. Iran ordered an unidentified number of these fighters from China in 2003. Due to customer requirements, China has renamed this version of jet fighters to FC-1. Their production began in the 2006 year, and since then little has been known about them.



* Su-30 - appeared as a Soviet response to the American F-15E Strike Eagle; developed at the end of the Cold War, it was conceived primarily for missions to obstruct the actions of the enemy. With a range of about 3 thousands of kilometers and a maximum speed in Mach 2, this fighter is capable of hitting any other modern military aircraft. A few years ago in the Israeli media appeared news that Iran ordered the 250 of these fighters from Russia; this order has never been confirmed by other sources, and such volumes should have caused more attention. In 2008, Israeli journalists again claimed that Su-30 squadrons were watching during Iran’s military exercises, and again these statements were not confirmed by anyone. Although it seems unlikely that Iran has hundreds of such aircraft, it seems possible that military vehicles could be among all military equipment. If Iran has at least some significant number of them, say, at least two squadrons, the military operation in the region will be completely different. This is one of the main mysteries on the Strait of Hormuz chess board.

Defense



Completes the list of Iran's significant weapons air defense. It can be used to determine how well Iran can defend its military forces on the coast of the Persian and Oman gulfs.

Mersad, Shahin and Shalamche



In 2010, the Iranian authorities, with the occasion of their solemn demonstration, announced the start of mass production of Mersad defense systems. This is a fully digital radar and monitoring system associated with the Shahin launch site. This rocket is also produced by Iran, which has updated the American Hawk rocket, increasing the range and increasing the maximum height that the rocket can reach with a maximum speed in Mach 2.6. The development of this system was continuous during the 2011 year, after which the new version of the rocket was successfully tested. Named Shalamche, the rocket has a maximum speed of Mach 3 and a launch range of 40 kilometers; it is capable of hitting a target located in 30 kilometers in less than 30 seconds.

C-300 and Bavar-323



The C-300 is an up-to-date air defense system originally developed by the USSR in the 1970s. The system was inherited by Russia, which continues to further develop and improve it, and sells it to many customers around the world. In essence, the system is a semi-trailer transport truck with a radar, a fire control subsystem and a set of ground-to-air missiles. Modern versions of the system can track up to 100 targets, be it airplanes or cruise missiles, and attack simultaneously 12 targets within a radius of 150 kilometers. After a lot of assumptions about a possible deal between Iran and Russia, both sides in 2009 confirmed the imminent start of deliveries. A year later, Russia froze all arms sales to Iran within the framework of a UN resolution, and supplies were not completed. How many systems were delivered, and whether they were delivered at all, was not disclosed, but we can say for sure that the possible supplied number is not sufficient, since Iran immediately began developing its own version. Iran later claimed that it had acquired several additional units from Belarus and from another unidentified seller. There are rumors about the acquisition of such systems from Libya.

Following the fiasco with the original deal, Iran began to develop its own version of the air defense system. Focusing on his experience in the construction of short-range and medium-range systems, Iran was able to complete the first Bavar-323 prototype last year. Up to this point, the serial release of the system has not been announced.

S-200 and Fajr-8



Another ancient system, developed in the USSR and sold to Iran, is now produced by itself. Russia is constantly developing a system that consists of a radar, a control system, and a launching missile system. Modern versions of the systems can shoot 7-tonnage missiles at a distance of up to 300 kilometers, at an altitude of up to 40 kilometers, and can fly 7 times faster than the speed of sound. Iran has for years produced its own version called Fajr-8, about which almost nothing is known, except that this is an improved version of C-200. With a possible military scenario in the Strait of Hormuz, these missiles may not play an important role, but they can provide Iran with the opportunity to protect itself from an air attack at high altitude.

In addition, Iran also has a multitude of ground-to-air missiles, partly acquired from Russia and China, partly in-house. They range from small hand-held anti-helicopter anti-aircraft missiles to air defense systems with large missiles designed to hit targets at long ranges. The number of most of them remains unknown.

Summary

Most of Iran’s military equipment is outdated, and many obsolete pre-revolutionary systems are in operation. Iran has been studying how these technologies can be redesigned and replicated for years, and now has a significant number of such systems in service. These home-grown technologies are often publicly demonstrated at military exercises and praised by Iranian politicians and the military. Some of these weapons are quite dangerous, in particular, ultra-small submarines capable of operating in shallow water. Others, like high-speed boats with rocket armament, largely remain a “dark horse.” These simple technologies are a serious danger if they are presented in large numbers. And maybe Iran will allow for some time to withstand the military onslaught in the strait.

And there are still many modern systems acquired in recent years from Russia and China. As for them, open information about this remains scarce, and sometimes even contradictory, since many transactions are conducted in secrecy. The number and characteristics of these technologies in most cases remain unknown, which hinders a clear understanding of the true military power of Iran. Is this uncertainty just a part of Iran’s attempt to create an image of greater military power that it actually possesses? Or is it part of a strategy to protect arms purchases from the West? In any case, the few types of weapons available to Iran, like Mosquito missiles, C-300 air defense systems, or J-10 fighter jets, are enough to discredit any idea of ​​the immediate superiority of NATO forces over Iran.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +20
    11 March 2012 12: 57
    Absolutely nothing new .. Everything that has been written has been known for a long time from open sources and is not a secret for anyone ... Iran is clearly prepared for the war precisely in the conditions that are now being created ... In the bay, small vessels are more effective than large ones .. Yes and rockets, too ... Right, the Americans collapsed ...
    1. +7
      11 March 2012 13: 15
      I hoot greatly surprised. I did not know that they have an analogue of a barrage. This is a very serious torpedo.
      By the way, the question has been revolving in my head for a long time, if torpedoes can significantly increase speed due to cavitation, is this technology applicable for submarines? Is this possible? what
      1. +9
        11 March 2012 13: 38
        This is a barrage, I'm afraid the crew will not survive this, and finding such a submarine is not a problem. Since its maneuverability is minimal, and the track from it is clearly visible from the air.
      2. Neighbor
        +10
        11 March 2012 13: 38
        In any case, the American suckers will grab a good lule. Such - which since Vietnam have never dreamed of. This is not to fight the savages, who have nothing but a machine gun. It would be just great - if Iran really had 250 Su-30s. And other modern weapons - except for the S-300.
        It is disturbing that recently some sort of Americanosos spoke out - maybe McCain - says like we do not exclude the possibility of delivering nuclear attacks on Iran. Now it will be complete ....... c. They are thugs - the matter will not be for them.
        1. +5
          11 March 2012 14: 11
          As for the "blows", he turned it down, election chatter ...
        2. slas
          +5
          11 March 2012 14: 41
          Quote: Neighbor
          In any case, the American suckers will grab some good ones. Such - which since Vietnam have never dreamed of.

          the same thing was said about the Iraqi army and where it is now with Saddam recourse But about the Amer brain floating in the brake fluid wassat a powerful and vigorous bomb to be thrown here yes I agree with you
          1. +5
            11 March 2012 15: 07
            Quote: slas
            the same thing was said about the Iraqi army and where it is now with Saddam But about the Amer’s brain floating in a powerful brake fluid and throw a vigorous bomb here yes I agree with you








            No, dear! Plunge into the Internet and "ask around". The overwhelming majority agreed that Iraq, suffocated by years of economic sanctions, with the only outlet - "Oil for Bread", was not capable of withstanding NATO's colossus. And Saddam understood this, but he had nowhere to retreat - "there was a fence behind his back"! But pride and desire to support the created image of a strong dictator (otherwise the whole of Iraq would have crawled, like Libya today), did not allow me to bow my head! The man walked - vabank! And - lost. With Iran, the situation is different - they, if possible, played at loyal neutrals, and when they got strong, they began to make their own policy. They still have a couple of years and yusy, instead of streamlined phrases - "Iran has a rather weak defense", they would say - "Fuck we need to get involved! Brothers Israelis, solve this problem yourself!" Yes, and "fixed assets" (weapons) are worn out today. And the economic situation in the camp of NATO member countries and among the Yusi themselves is not rosy ...
            1. slas
              +1
              11 March 2012 16: 05
              Quote: esaul
              The overwhelming majority agreed that Iraq, suffocated by years of economic sanctions, with the only outlet - "Oil for Bread", was not capable of withstanding NATO's colossus.

              Are you talking about the time after the first war of the 91st? And I say what they talked about and argued (and how) until the 91st
          2. Goga
            +3
            11 March 2012 15: 17
            By the end of World War II, YUS did not have much need to bludgeon the Japanese with nuclear weapons, but they bombed them. That their morale has improved since then? Definitely not.
            Iran is not Iraq and the Persians are not Arabs, but the purchase of a part of the top from the YUS has been worked out (how many "personnel" from Gaddafi have gone over?) "circulation" or not.
            1. +3
              11 March 2012 15: 47
              Goga A nuclear strike on Japan was delivered not so much for the surrender of Japan, but in order to scare Stalin with new weapons, which we did not have at that time, and to prevent the occupation of the Japanese islands by Soviet troops, which at that time had already smashed the Japanese Quan . In this case, the priorities are somewhat different.
              1. -2
                12 March 2012 00: 52
                Quote: Victor
                A nuclear strike on Japan was dealt not so much for the surrender of Japan, but in order to scare Stalin with new weapons, which we did not have at that time

                In 1944, Stalin signed the Bretto Woods Agreement, but after the victory refused to ratify it (which was a perfectly correct decision). Here in 1945 our Western allies hinted to him.
            2. Atlon
              +5
              11 March 2012 15: 50
              The Japanese were bombed not for the Japanese, but for us. This was shown to Stalin: "This is how we can!" However, ours quickly completed their bomb, so the amers were blown away at that stage. And in general, EVERYTHING that ever and anywhere did and will do "naglo-Saxons" EVERYTHING is directed against us. Anyway.
      3. +9
        11 March 2012 17: 17
        Quote: Internet fighter
        By the way, the question has been revolving in my head for a long time, if torpedoes can significantly increase speed due to cavitation, is this technology applicable for submarines? Is this possible?

        The highlight of the Flurry is the effect of supercavitation. In fact, the Flurry is more like a rocket than a torpedo (sometimes it is called a torpedo rocket), and it does not float, but flies in a gas bubble (cavity), which it itself creates.
        In the bow of the Shkval torpedo there is a special part - the cavitator. This is an elliptical flat thick plate with sharpened edges. The cavitator is slightly inclined to the axis of the torpedo (in the frontal section it is round) to create lift on the bow (at the stern, the lift is created by the rudders). When reaching a certain speed (about 80 m / s) with rocket boosters near the edge of the plate, cavitation reaches such an intensity that a gigantic “bubble” is formed, enveloping the torpedo. In this case, the hydrodynamic resistance to movement is significantly reduced.
        In fact, a cavitator alone is not enough to get a cavity of the right size. Therefore, in “Shkval” an additional “boost” is used: immediately after the cavitator in the bow there are holes - nozzles, through which the cavity is “blown up” from a separate gas generator. This allows you to increase the cavity and cover the entire body of the rocket-torpedo - from bow to stern.
        It is impossible to mask the launch of the Flurry: the torpedo makes a loud noise, and gas bubbles float to the surface, forming a perfectly visible trail. One of the developers, who was present during the tests on Issyk-Kul Lake, told us: “What does the launch of the Flurry look like? Imagine that the god of the seas Poseidon picked up a whip: a whistle and a roar, and then very quickly running into the distance, straight as an arrow, a trace of a whip in the water. ”

        For this reason and also because of the impossibility of maneuvering and the use of sonar in a cavitation bag make this technology unacceptable for submarines. Do not forget also about the rocket boosters, which must first accelerate the submarine for the required speed of the cavitation effect. At the very least, it is necessary to revive the project 661 "Anchar", called at one time the "goldfish" because of the expensive titanium case and a powerful power plant.
        1. 0
          12 March 2012 00: 37
          Ascetic
          Thank you for the detailed explanation. I did not know that rocket boosters were needed.
          For this reason, and also because of the impossibility of maneuvering and the use of sonar in a cavitation bag, this technology is unacceptable for submarines.

          It’s the coordinates that are put into the torpedo in advance, since the sonar bubble does not break through for remote control. But on the submarine, maneuvers are controlled from within.
          The Flurry effect on a submarine could be compared with nitrous oxide on a racing car and, for example, used in case of avoiding a torpedo or other attack. And yet, I think here the geometry of the submarine is the main stumbling block, and not even the strength of the hull, since the loads should not increase, but decrease.
          "Flurry" is not able to turn. The torpedo moves strictly in a straight line to a pre-calculated meeting point with a target. The stabilization system constantly monitors the position of the torpedo and its course and makes adjustments with the help of retractable rudders, barely touching the walls of the "bubble", as well as due to the inclination of the cavitator - the slightest deviation threatens not only loss of course, but also destruction of the cavity.
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +10
      11 March 2012 21: 08
      Quote: domokl
      Absolutely nothing new .. Everything that has been written has long been known from open sources and is not a secret for anyone.


      I agree, but for some reason (but why, it is perfectly understandable!), The author "modestly" is silent about ground-to-ground missile weapons?
      Whereas :
      In the event of the outbreak of war, Iran could strike at Israel’s territory with the Shekhab-3 ballistic missile with a range of 1300 to 1930 km, according to various sources. Iran has 12 launchers of these missiles. The circular probabilistic deviation (CVO) of the Shehab-3 missiles is about 2,5 km. For conventional (non-nuclear) weapons, this is extremely low accuracy, however, it is somewhat offset by the presence of a multiple warhead consisting of 5 warheads of 280 kg each, with individual aiming at the target. This weapon is effective against large, poorly protected targets, such as large cities. Attacks on cities will be directed primarily against civilians, and they can be considered solely as an act of revenge. Iranian missiles will not be able to seriously damage Israeli military infrastructure.

      According to the United States, Iran also has about 100 Scud mobile launchers and 400 Shehab-2 missiles (advanced Scud) with a flight range of up to 750 km and a missile defense of only 50 m and 200 Shehab-1 missiles (advanced "Skad-B") with a flight range of up to 500 km. These missiles are not able to reach Israel, but can cause considerable damage to US military bases, which are in their reach.
      Iran, from the first hours of the war, can start shelling American air bases with Shehab-1 and Shehab-2 missiles, and this can cost the Americans a lot. One accidental hit of the Iraqi Scud (these missiles were extremely low accuracy) in the barracks of reservists in Dharan caused the largest simultaneous loss of US forces for the entire operation "Desert Storm".
      Shehabs can make Americans suffer such losses every day.
      Moreover, Iran can deliver a preemptive strike at a time when American planes are only preparing for hostilities, and then in Hollywood you can safely shoot the movie "Pearl Harbor-2."
      And one more nuance: as practice has shown, the fight against mobile launchers in the desert is a very difficult task, their complete extermination can take months.

      Next:
      1. Complete silence about the Tor-M1 air defense system: (29 units and 800 missiles for them), capable of solving the tasks of air defense of the divisional level and covering individual objects.
      2. Not a qualitative analysis of the Iranian Navy.
      3. The number of fighters for "gaining air supremacy", etc. has been underestimated.
      В
      Conclusion: the article has a "propaganda flavor of amerovskoy poshiba" - like, well, not really that and very much and is designed for the amerovskoy public no more!
      So despite the serious "problems in quantitative and qualitative criteria" in assessing the state of the Iranian Armed Forces, the Persian Gulf will inevitably become a death trap for American ships that ventured into it.
      The Pentagon’s Millenium Challenge 2002 military exercises showed that the US Fifth Fleet, if it started a war with Iran in the Persian Gulf, would be completely defeated within a day by a massive launch of anti-ship missiles from the coast, and then it was finished off by a “mosquito fleet” - missile boats, possessing great impact power with small sizes.
      The results of the exercises were taken into account by the Americans. In December 2011, the John Stennis AUG left the Persian Gulf for the Arabian Sea.
      So we conclude that at the moment, neither the Israeli Air Force, nor the US Navy AUG will be able to conduct a full-fledged air war with Iran due to being too far from a potential theater of war and without deploying a powerful group of American tactical aircraft in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait is not enough.
  2. +15
    11 March 2012 13: 04
    Interestingly, most of the information on the quantity and quality of weapons available to Iran is not known to the general public. Indirectly, this suggests that there are no corrupt generals in Iran (or very few), and counterintelligence probably works well.
    1. +2
      11 March 2012 14: 38
      If you mean TTX, then you are right .. Such information is being tried not to be published .. The rest is gleaned from official statements of the Iranian government .. But the TTX is not needed by specialists ... It’s just what Iran has imported or created on the basis of. So it’s not worth a lot to compare with an analogue ... You forget that this is not a leading country in the field of creating and developing new types of weapons ...
  3. Knowing
    +6
    11 March 2012 13: 04
    most interesting article in the last month
    1. +3
      11 March 2012 13: 12
      Far from the most interesting, but more or less informative, yes.
    2. +2
      11 March 2012 14: 40
      laughing You can read such articles here once a week ... In particular, this is a reprint of a two-week-old article with minor corrections ...
  4. KAV
    KAV
    +4
    11 March 2012 13: 08
    A lot will depend on people. If there is professionalism, self-sacrifice, hatred of the enemy in the ranks of the Iranian army, etc. then nato will have to tight. Even old weapons can cause serious damage. They shot down a superplane in Yugoslavia with our old air defenses.
    1. KA
      KA
      +3
      12 March 2012 00: 25
      I would like to add, not so much from the professionalism of people as from venality! As experience shows, the United States does not get involved in a battle without creating a fifth column, but now the doctrine of "war by someone else's hands" has been proclaimed, so Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, possibly even Georgia and Azerbaijan, not to mention about NATO allies.
      1. 0
        12 March 2012 00: 30
        Quote: KA
        not to mention NATO allies

        I agree that we saw in Libya. From the gentleman’s shoulder, we gave the stagnant Europeans a sweetheart by nature to burn.
  5. Cripple cross
    +1
    11 March 2012 13: 13
    I think time will tell. It is unlikely that war can already be avoided. The longer the amers and Israel drag out, the more they are punched laughing
    1. -1
      11 March 2012 23: 40
      They will not start and will try to get out of this almost stalemate situation, after the failed intimidation of the obstinate. This will mean the end of Western hegemony, because on the horizon looms to "get in the face", and this is tantamount to a loss, that is, loss of faith in the steadfastness of NATO's military power for satellites and those who look into the mouth of the West. You can defeat the enemy and lose to smithereens. Now everything looks more like a chess game in which the "multi-move" will win and the one with the stronger analytical center will win. And an information war can play a cruel joke on the West, and it will most likely also become a hostage to its initiative in information technology. The information bastion is an ordinary house of cards. How beautifully already forgotten Doronin said about this recently: - "fourteen-year-old Nastya from Chelyabinsk, who introduced herself on the Internet as Nadezhda Vasilyevna from Khabarovsk, can destroy in an instant what billions have been spent on". So the information war is the same puffed elephant as the puffed dollar.
  6. Chel333
    -4
    11 March 2012 13: 18
    Watch out !!! laughing
  7. +6
    11 March 2012 13: 22
    The article only confirms the fact that Iran is a dark horse. It seems to be, but it seems not. And how much? Yes, how much is needed. so much and there is still so much sex. Let usa scratch turnips.
  8. +3
    11 March 2012 13: 25
    That's what, the Yankees have always been able to count ... That's why they have itchy head inside ... Now, of course, they are a little afraid (army), they love a little (dollar) .... And if the Iranians ditch the aircraft carrier ... Then, with a cry, the naked king will tear them to pieces ...
  9. Region65
    +2
    11 March 2012 13: 31
    Hello everyone .. I don't know how about American missile weapons (they practically do not have them, since the flight path of a tin can (some old decommissioned rocket) is known to PROSNIK for a day and sometimes for two, so it's a big mind no ... but today all day I have been watching the flights of the Qatari "Civil" aviation along the borders of Syria ... and even today Qatari planes flew a lot to Jojia ...
    1. +3
      11 March 2012 14: 13
      This is where you watched?
      1. Region65
        +1
        12 March 2012 08: 56
        http://www.flightradar24.com/
        all that flies in real time :)))
        1. +1
          12 March 2012 15: 27
          Thank you very much
    2. 0
      11 March 2012 15: 19
      How many rockets do you need that Qatar wouldn’t torment?
      1. +2
        11 March 2012 15: 31
        One, then he will already be tormented by himself.
      2. Region65
        +1
        12 March 2012 08: 55
        one ... maybe even half ... thrown on the border of Qatar and Saudi Arabia or the AOE and then the "friends of Syria" friends from one missile would be two less
        :)
  10. +1
    11 March 2012 13: 33
    In general, it is clear that Iran's armament leaves more questions than answers. How outdated systems will show themselves in cases of a possible conflict (we remember how in Yugoslavia the ultra-modern and "absolutely invisible" F-117 was shot down by the Soviet-made C-125 anti-aircraft complex, which was put into service already in 1961. How successful or unsuccessful can be tactics of using midget submarines and small attack torpedo boats against an aircraft carrier warrant. And of course the question is whether or not Iran has nuclear weapons. Official sources confidently say no. And unofficial ones, less confidently say, "maybe."

    That's why the States are so slowly, literally step by step, moving towards their goal of neutralizing as a state of Iran. But in any case - it is clear even to the uninitiated that until the situation around Syria is cleared up, Iran may feel relatively safe.
    1. -6
      11 March 2012 18: 09
      in Yugoslavia, the ultra-modern and "absolutely invisible" F-117 was shot down by the Soviet-made C-125 anti-aircraft complex, which was put into service already in 1961

      Please specify how many such aircraft were shot down there? And did it really help Yugoslavia?
      1. hellbringer
        +4
        11 March 2012 22: 50
        1 was shot down as described above. Knocked down if not mistaken calculation under the command of Colonel Zoltan. Well, it is clear that there was interaction with ground informants. For which he was immediately hid in the Amerov prison, his further fate is unknown to me.
      2. Insurgent
        0
        13 March 2012 00: 06
        The image of America suffered as much as it was drunk and fell, say in Bosnia, the wreckage was removed from the media so that the professor didn’t lose his reputation where the sc-f-117 dusty
  11. +7
    11 March 2012 13: 38
    if the Iranians fight like the Iraqis, then they will be a complete dime! correctly said, we must fight and not be afraid! Hope for Allah, but don’t be fooled!
    1. lars
      +8
      11 March 2012 15: 18
      Iraqi soldiers and commanders fought very well! There are many cases (unfortunately isolated) when Iraqi pilots and especially tankers demonstrated a high class and battered amers in full. Betrayal of the overbought top of the army is a problem am
    2. Region65
      +1
      12 March 2012 11: 30
      Americans have long recognized that about five (!!!)% of the Iraqi army resisted this Iraqi company, the rest was bought and that’s all :) in Iran, such a trick will not work, the whole army will slaughter overseas pigs there.
  12. Vanek
    0
    11 March 2012 13: 46
    Chel333,

    Was this a FAQ? A man (or ........) runs into rudeness? angry
    What kind of shame is this? Remove immediately.
  13. kPoJluK2008
    +1
    11 March 2012 13: 50
    I found a lot of stupid copyright errors .. For example, the Su-25 is a ground attack aircraft, not a fighter, and the Su-30 was created as a counterweight to the F-15E, although the Su-30 is a control machine, and the F-15E is a strike aircraft. It was already in the late 90s that India wanted a multi-purpose machine, and there was added the ability to work on the ground, only it was already the Su-30MKI.
  14. signalman
    +2
    11 March 2012 13: 50
    Perhaps the Yusovites are worried about information about the presence of an Iranian automated passive electronic reconnaissance station of the Kolchuga type, which cannot be detected, but which is capable of determining with high accuracy the coordinates of ground and surface targets, their routes of movement at a distance of up to 600 km in depth of the territory km along the front, and for air targets flying at an altitude of 150 km - up to 10 km Plus the Iranians, with the help of the Chinese, changed the control cables to fiber optic (taking into account the experience of Iraq), so opening the control system is also a problem.
    1. +4
      11 March 2012 14: 19
      It is also unforgettable that Russia modernized two radars in Syria and Lebanon. Now all the targets are visible when lifting them from the airfields of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey long before approaching the borders of Iran.
      Previously, the radar only covered northern Israel and part of the Mediterranean Sea.
  15. Vanek
    -2
    11 March 2012 14: 02
    If this is because of me, THANKS.
    1. -3
      11 March 2012 14: 04
      Thank you!
  16. 0
    11 March 2012 14: 07
    so look not cheap americans will cost an attack on Iran
  17. Anatoly
    0
    11 March 2012 14: 09
    In general, there is something to answer. It’s not for them to drive the Bedouins in Afghanistan.
    1. lars
      +2
      11 March 2012 16: 20
      Who chases whom - another question recourse
  18. Railways
    +2
    11 March 2012 14: 12
    Strange, it is written that the missile of the S-200 complex (or whatever the Iranian modification is called there) is 300 km long and 7 times faster than the speed of sound (!!!!) - it is said that it will not play a special role, with such data !!!
  19. +2
    11 March 2012 14: 52
    The goal should justify the means. In other words, an American analysis of the state of Iran’s armed forces shows that losses in operations against Iran can be unacceptably high, even if only reliable information is taken into account. Of course, the task of defeating Iran, if any, is feasible, but if the existing group of forces of the United States and its allies is fraught with large losses that the United States can not afford now, the loss of even one aircraft carrier immediately devalues ​​the result, and there are still a bunch of unknown factors, so that Iran can sleep peacefully (at least six months).
    1. Insurgent
      -1
      13 March 2012 00: 03
      Firstly, it’s not enough to bomb, it’s time to occupy Iran, and secondly, Iran is also in trouble, and thirdly, how many selected cutthroats from the sea nursery need at least half a million
  20. +5
    11 March 2012 14: 59
    An interesting selection of information. Given some data on Soviet (Russian) counterparts, I had an understanding of why the amers are not really eager for an open clash with the Iranians. I suppose that the attack will be only when the amers have their own agents of influence in Iran. Bribery of the generals and political elite is more useful than a military operation.
    1. Goga
      +3
      11 March 2012 15: 23
      AK-74-1 - "Bribery of the generals and the political elite brings more benefits than a military operation", absolutely true (+)
  21. suharev-52
    +8
    11 March 2012 15: 13
    I can’t understand why someone didn’t like the article. The author of the forces of opportunity tried to analyze the possibilities of Iran. Honor and praise be for him. It is very difficult to analyze a country like Iran, due to its secrecy and lack of open sources. So dear, do not roll the barrel on the author. He did everything he could. The article is good. It proves that, even with a minus of the unknown, the war against Iran will not be an easy walk. Thanks to the author for the review. We look forward to further developments. Sincerely.
    1. +2
      11 March 2012 16: 14
      suharev - 52,
      Trolls walk around the site. Whoever pays for it, also minuses such materials.
      Personally, my opinion. The article is wonderful. The review is as detailed as possible. There is more such information on the site! Thanks to the author for the work done! Plus!
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +1
      11 March 2012 21: 14
      Quote: suharev - 52
      The author of the forces of opportunity tried to analyze the possibilities of Iran. Honor and praise be for him.


      I didn’t like it! Why, look at the tape at the very beginning, where I answered DOMOKLO on this topic more or less, so I won’t repeat it. am

      And with all due respect to you, the article is a translation, especially Amerovsky (it plays only on one side, to exalt oneself, to belittle the opponent!)
      So why and to whom are the compliments?
      Well, maybe a translator, so it's his job!
      Made as it should be for a professional translator, but no more ...! wassat
  22. lars
    +1
    11 March 2012 15: 28
    By the way, nothing is said about the receiver (artillery) air defense. Vainly underestimated !!!
    up to 10 divisions of just this

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/121868.html
    1. 0
      12 March 2012 09: 12
      True, the number of divisions is not known, but the installation is not bad.
      http://www.iran-resist.org/IMG/jpg/116_J0_Mesbah_3.jpg
  23. sazhka0
    +1
    11 March 2012 15: 34
    Any "reasonable" state will change its weapons .. It cannot be otherwise. Technologists work in any country .. Today with you, tomorrow with us .. This is normal .. You just have to bear in mind. And it's not stupid to live in yesterday .. But what will it lead to ?? . There would have been an "idea" and there will always be an antidote. Now you remember the grandparents who said "if only there was no war" .. This is not cowardice .. This is EXPERIENCE ... THE CONSEQUENCES ARE NOT Predictable ..
  24. +10
    11 March 2012 16: 08
    Here, many commentators will recall Iraq. Provided that the generals were bought, not one Iraqi aircraft, according to official data, did not take off, and the tanks began to attack American convoys only on the way to Baghdad. Now look at the statistics.

    Losses of the international coalition in manpower
    As of February 6, 2012, the loss of US troops in the Iraq war was estimated as follows. [7]
    dead - 4 (66 of them died after the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom)
    wounded (only combat wounds) - 32 (301 of them were injured after the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom)

    The above losses do not include employees of foreign private military and security companies operating in Iraq with permission and in the interests of coalition countries. Meanwhile, from 2003 to 2010, up to 200 thousand employees of 400 private security and military companies operated in Iraq.

    Losses of the international coalition in aviation
    As of March 10, 2012, the list contains the following losses:

    Helicopters
    OH-58 20
    AH-64
    UH-60 14
    CH-47
    CH-53/MH-53 7
    AH-1
    CH-46
    UH-1 3
    Cougar 2
    Sea King 2
    AB-412
    AH-6
    W-3WA 1
    Links 1
    Total: 87 helicopters

    Aircraft
    F-16 5
    F / A-18 5
    C-130/MC-130 4
    A-10 1
    AV-8B1
    F-14 1
    F-15E 1
    S-3 1
    Tornado 1
    Total: 20 aircraft

    Losses of the international coalition in tanks
    According to information provided by Major General T. Tucker, as of February 2005, injuries of various degrees of severity were 70% of the tank fleet of 1135 Abramsdeployed in Iraq; of them 80 machines were not subject to recovery by the forces of repair and restoration units deployed in the theater; in turn, 17 of them were rated as irreparable. In this way, irretrievable losses amounted to only 5% of the total number of damaged tanks.

    According to some reports, a year later, in February 2006, the number of M1 destroyed in Iraq of all modifications increased to 20.

    Notice the wars as such were not, they quickly reached Baghdad.
    1. Kievan
      +1
      11 March 2012 17: 33
      Drop the link, please.
      1. +1
        11 March 2012 18: 36
        I took from open sources, there are quite a lot of them. In google, type my loss points and you will get a lot of links.
    2. 0
      11 March 2012 18: 14
      And given that the Americans considered repair
      then they will consider this subject to be restored
  25. sazhka0
    +4
    11 March 2012 16: 28
    The "theme" is shown .. And then such "patriotism" begins .. Put (them) this or that .. Yes, we are "them" and so and so .. Wars are ALWAYS .. Choose what you like. Go and fight for "just cause". And then as children .. WAR IS NOT TOYS .. When the intestines lie "on" the stomach and you can’t put them back .. Here is WAR.
  26. Kievan
    +3
    11 March 2012 17: 19
    If the Americans succeed in destroying / violating the control system of the Iranian armed forces in the first strike, then individual fragments of the air defense, air force, and navy will not pose a serious danger. There may be isolated cases of heroism multiplied by luck, but no more. Persia had once turned out to be an ear on clay feet. What is the average Persian commander who lost contact with the headquarters and receives information about what is happening on the issues in Al-Jazeera, only experience will show.
    In general, Americans can play the same game with Iran as they did with the USSR and there will be no war. Now they are forced to throw a ton of money on defense, imposed sanctions, and then oil prices will fall for a year ...
  27. +1
    11 March 2012 17: 32
    From December 2005 to January 2007, Russia supplied Iran with 29 Tor-M1 anti-aircraft missile systems.
  28. -4
    11 March 2012 18: 05
    Since when has Chengdu J-10 been in service with Iran? wassat
    1. Insurgent
      0
      13 March 2012 00: 01
      I realized what this airplane hinted at is its prototype Israeli lavi
  29. +4
    11 March 2012 18: 29
    I really want Iran to poke on the ass of the United States to Israel and their mongrels in the form of a democratic, philanthropic Europe. But if you really look at the world, GATHER with aviation and cruise missiles a couple of days before the level of the Middle Ages and there will be another god forgotten backward (still some backward) mine country.
    1. +2
      11 March 2012 18: 34
      I bet Libya ironed how many months by aircraft and tomahawks? And it did not work Libyan air defense. Yes, with the support of mercenaries on earth.
      There are no rebellious cities and mercenaries in Iran, and air defense will also work in a better air defense class.
      1. -4
        11 March 2012 18: 49
        There are no rebellious cities and mercenaries in Iran, and air defense will also work in a better air defense class.

        Have you forgotten how the opposition in Iran was suppressed? Are South Azerbaijan and Kurds happy with ayatuls?
        1. Insurgent
          0
          12 March 2012 23: 59
          and Turks who kill less Kurds by the way Kurds belong to the Persian ethnic group, however, like the Tajiks
      2. sazhka0
        +2
        11 March 2012 21: 45
        The Iranians have a reason .. They are fighting for their homeland ..
  30. Stasi.
    +1
    11 March 2012 18: 36
    Before attacking Iran, the Americans need to disable Syria, which is an outpost of Iran. And with Syria, too, a lot of obscurity. In principle, the Yankees can defeat Syria, but then Iran, which is its ally, will immediately enter the matter. Reliably only one easy walk like in Yugoslavia will not work now, even in Syria, not to mention Iran.
    1. Insurgent
      0
      13 March 2012 00: 00
      Syria has no problems with their problems for Iran
  31. +2
    11 March 2012 19: 39
    You can fight and Tomahawks (hatchet). There would be a will and awareness of further actions.
  32. +1
    11 March 2012 20: 03
    In the review, they forgot to mention the Shafagh-2 strike aircraft.
    http://www.islamnews.ru/uploads/news/2008-08/1741275576/news-EFyBRdjqq3.jpg

    The prototype was created back in 2006, however, nothing is known about the number of aircraft of this type.

    Iran’s Achilles Fifth Air Defense remains limited ability to deal with the Kyrgyz Republic.
    The number of "Thors" is clearly not enough.
    True, attempts are being made to rectify the situation (8-barrel 23 mm memory units, modernization of the Rapira air defense missile system), but this is not enough.
    1. 0
      11 March 2012 20: 28
      Regarding helicopters, the information is not complete.
      There are interesting developments:
      http://crimso.msk.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft31228.htm

      Also, there was information that Iran independently launched the production of "Cobra".
  33. +5
    11 March 2012 20: 31
    For those who are confused in geography:

  34. sazhka0
    +4
    11 March 2012 21: 35
    Well, where are YOU so knowledgeable ?? Who will do what and what? Are you that shtirlitsy ?? Stop bullshitting .. EVERYONE and ALWAYS have a trump card. About which no one will ever speak
  35. other
    -1
    11 March 2012 22: 28
    I think that in big cases this is all window dressing! it's east! just like in Iraq only show off !!

    Why do I have a German flag?
    1. 0
      11 March 2012 22: 33
      Quote: anden
      Why do I have a German flag?

      laughing What kind of car do you have? German? I’m joking, but here they somehow explained. This is not my topic, but I realized that you don’t have one such problem.
    2. +4
      11 March 2012 23: 48
      Quote: anden
      Why do I have a German flag?


      Probably your IP is dynamic
  36. -1
    12 March 2012 12: 31
    But an interesting fact ... some time ago we were discussing the mine war .... But today I found out an interesting fact ... Some people seem to be adopting our ideas ... I apologize for the information clip ... If the guys will succeed ... There will be a BOOL big surprise !!!!
    1. +1
      12 March 2012 15: 30
      Are you talking about sea missiles? laid at 30-100 meter depth. Iran has more than 1200 of them in the Strait, which the Americans recently resented.
      1. -2
        12 March 2012 21: 49
        There is no completely original idea .... When it resolves, I will definitely make it public ... So I always said the best ideas to people who do not understand anything in the subject ...
  37. Insurgent
    +1
    12 March 2012 21: 14
    During the 1991 war, a desert storm in Iraq had a decent amount of mig-29 and su24 in those days, a pretty decent plane, only Iraq couldn’t help lying to Iran, the United States has superiority
    1. +2
      13 March 2012 01: 37
      Do you know that radars in Iraq were French then and at one fine moment they simultaneously stopped working? Aviation and air defense were sticky.

      Information:
      MHC losses

      The data on the losses of the international coalition are scattered. The most complete data exist on US losses. The list below does not include some losses of other MNF member countries incurred before and after the hostilities.
      USA
      Casualties: 298 dead, including 147 combat casualties. The 17st mechanized division suffered the greatest losses (1 people killed); the level of losses from the so-called "friendly fire" was unusually high (23%).
      Losses in equipment: 6 tanks, 1 howitzer, 9 units of other armored vehicles.
      Losses in aviation: 40 aircraft (including 28 from enemy actions), 23 helicopter (including 5 from enemy actions).
      two warships, Princeton and Tripoli, were damaged by mines.
      United Kingdom
      Human casualties: 24 dead, including 11 from the "friendly fire".
      Losses in aviation: 7 aircraft ("Tornado").
      Saudi Arabia: 44 dead.
      Egypt: 14 dead
      France: 2 dead
      Kuwait: lost 1 plane.
      Italy: lost 1 plane.
      the total number of deaths in the coalition forces, in addition to the losses of the American contingent, 88 people.

      Notice that the Americans have 12 planes themselves fell, which I strongly doubt. In general, their statistics of losses are very strange. Crossbows do not turn on, they do not turn on if they hit your tank. Poisoned by drinking some water from the well is also not included in the loss. a tank set on fire with a Molotov cocktail is not included in the loss, only when a tank duel. The Marine fell from the helicopter, also not included in the loss. Etc. Judge for yourself, they prepared for the operation and here "non-combat losses of 12 aircraft"
      1. yorik_gagarin
        0
        15 March 2012 09: 54
        I did not hear about radars ..... where did the source come from?

        I did not hear about radars ..... where did the source come from?

        I did not hear about radars ..... where did the source come from?
  38. yorik_gagarin
    +1
    15 March 2012 11: 29
    The most important thing is that the generals do not sell out ....

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"