is missile armor a thing? how the fuck does this happen?

>>63877612 (OP)
Oh no, you're retarded.

>>63877625
as a matter of fact, i am
now explain what the fuck is this

>>63877629
A missile interception.

>>63877629
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum
Read up.

>>63877634
>>63877635
Nigger i'm asking how the fuck can the missile succesfully intercept and NOT fucking blow up the target.

He's retarded.

>>63877640
Other than nuclear tipped ABMs there isn't a single interceptor that's designed to vaporize it's target.

>>63877644
you can just admit you don't know either y'know

>>63877648
Yes well but something exploding in your face causes shrapnel that will either ignite your remaining fuel all at once, penetrate the explosive material and cause it to splodo or destroy your mechanism for detonation, possibly causing it to splodo.

How on earth can shrapnel fail to penetrate?

>>63877658
There's zero evidence of shrapnel failing to penetrate.

>>63877658
Those missiles are at the very edge of their range. They might not even have full warheads for extra range.

>>63877664
And not igniting or exploding?

You can literally see the missile lose speed and slight change angle from the explosion's momentum. If it didn't go boom despite the clearly still working fuel reserve it's because it failed to penetrate, otherwise I can't fucking fathom how a completely pierced, fuel loaded missile still goes on as if nothing happened.

>>63877674
>fuel loaded missile
It's not a fuel loaded missile, it's a reentry vehicle that probably has no fuel onboard.

>>63877650

I think they're trying to tell you that you can intercept a missile and destroy/disable it, but the remains of the object will continue to travel through the air if it isn't completely destroyed.

Which makes sense intuitively because it's probably easier to design an object to intercept missiles if it's smaller/lower yield. And you probably don't need to completely destroy/vaporize a missile in order to disable most of it's destructive ability.

>>63877674
>terminal descent at max range
>fuel loaded

>>63877680
>>63877693
>it's a reentry vehicle that probably has no fuel onboard.
And somehow it has a tail of ejecta that shows all the typical signs of liquid fuel propulsion

>Fattah does not fall under the general classification of hypersonic weapons, but is rather a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) that has a “second stage [that] incorporates the warhead, aerodynamic controls and a small solid-propellant motor with a moveable nozzle for thrust vector control (TVC)

Are we still gonna play retarded or you are gonna help figure out what happened in the webm?

>>63877684
I agree, problem is, these are systems meant for urban protection - Failure to destroy on intercept means *something* gets damaged.

Up till I saw this I was convinced a successful interception guarantees explosion - only way I can imagine it is that either the missile somehow resisted penetration or the hot metal cuts through the explosive material and somehow doesn't start a reaction

Bot cases seem improbable to me. But the vid is. There's something I'm clearly missing.

>>63877702
>And somehow it has a tail of ejecta that shows all the typical signs of liquid fuel propulsion
No it doesn't.

>solid-propellant motor
So is it characteristically liquid-fueled or not?

>>63877728
So you acknowledge it had fuel then, can you begin discussing how it survived a FUCKING BOMB TO THE FACE

>>63877738
>So you acknowledge it had fuel then
No, I didn't you fucking retard. I'm calling (you) retarded because you lack even basic reading comprehension and vision (tail of ejecta? fucking where, dipshit?).

>>63877750
>(tail of ejecta? fucking where, dipshit?).
You gonna go full schizo and pretend the burning propellant's is actually friction burns?
No like you haven't already said completely retarded shit like calling it a reentry vehicle.

Thanks for the bumps I guess, someone who actually knows their shit will help me figure it out eventually.

>>63877738
1) it has no fuel, what you call "tail of ejecta" is actually superheated air covering the missile because it's traveling so fast

2)explosions don't dissolve things out of existance, they blow them apart. Because these missiles are being intercepted while going very fast on a descending trajectory so close to their target, there isn't enough time for the fragments to disperse and lose their momentum; at best, intercepting the missile means that the warhead was disabled and that the missiles trajectory was changed slightly, but the pieces are still gonna hit the ground hard.

>>63877702
>missile slams into interceptor on terminal
>impact damages missile, preventing it from making minute course corrections
>missile misses target
Congrats you just learned about air defense on /k/

>>63877783
>what you call "tail of ejecta" is actually superheated air covering the missile because
it's traveling so fast
>and pretend the burning propellant's is actually friction burns?
fucking called it lmao

that shit doesn't happen at match 5. Unless iran has another class of hypersonic i'm not aware off, that's a fattah and it has fuel.

>intercepting the missile means that the warhead was disabled and that the missiles trajectory was changed slightly, but the pieces are still gonna hit the ground hard.
That implies the warhead can be disabled causing without detonation. At which point i'd ask myself "why do we need such mechanism on this kind of launch"

And if it doesn't and it's just primed to explode on contact, it brings back the question of "why did it not".

>>63877791
Fair, but when you are trying to dab on urban settlements, you need.

What I'm getting here is that the closer to literal artillery my rocket designs are, the harder they are to stop.

>>63877823
>anon discovers hypersonic is a thirdie meme
It's a ballistic missile, retard. It's probably somewhere in the vicinity of Mach 10-15. Look how fucking how slow the interceptor appears, nearly stationary. Yet it is probably going Mach 3+.

Not a fan of Iran but I feel its healthy for Israel to get and not just give.
Just like Russians need some buildings going pop now and then.

>>63877833
Iran has made an absolutely pathetic showing though.

>>63877835
Is there any country on earth producing enough missiles to sustain 3 digits every week?

>>63877836
No, which is why missile spam is a retarded meme picking up the slack from Douhet's idiocy.

v limited knowledge of what to expect, but there are plenty of videos of other iron dome interceptions where the interceptor and the target both seem to explode. but maybe depends on whether its davids sling as the interceptor or what the intercepted target it. tried to attach example but am retarded zoomer and cannot un-audio a webm
im very curious to see the next two seconds of the clip which likely show whether it impacts with a genuine detonation, it must be somewhere online

>>63877861
There's a big difference between a 10kg Hezboah hobby rocket and a 4,000 kg missile screeching to earth at Mach 15.

>>63877836

We mostly see missile spam from countries that are too unsophisticated to have functioning military or diplomacy. They can just buy wal mart surplus weapons from a real country with real scientists and industry, fire it at the tel aviv taco bell parking lot, and declare victory.

Real countries moved away from launching lots of dumb ordinance at strategically irrelevant targets because after doing it for decades, they realized it wasn't very effective at achieving anything. This is why modern militaries are obsessed with precision now. That stuff is more expensive, and there hasn't been a demand in real countries for large volumes of that ordinance, so there's no economy of scale to produce it. And thirdies probably couldn't afford it even if there was.

>>63877640
>Nigger i'm asking how the fuck can the missile succesfully intercept and NOT fucking blow up the target.
It could be a dud, or maybe the interceptor had been disabled somehow? From what I'm hearing, only 20% of the IDF missiles are actually intercepting the Iranians bombardment. And that was a rosy estimate. The iron dome was apparently greatly over exaggerated.

>>63877876
true, although there's no way the missile in that video is hypersonic, perhaps mass alone is carrying it thoughbeit

>>63877612 (OP)
same reason why even if an aircraft is hit by a missle it might not explode, if the sharpnel doesent hit anything that explodes but just the inhert control surfaces it will just damage the target

>>63877910
Iron Dome is for intercepting hamas's bottlerockets, not fucking MRBM's the size of a bus

>Rocket armor, mass of a schoolbus, Persian blood magicks.

How about the actual answer: it didn't intercept. It looks like it did from that angle, but what that video is showing is that the detonation happened a split second late. The shrapnel cloud went behind it, and the off trajectory was just due to the explosive force being close enough.

>>63877783
we saw the same thing in kiev back then when they intercepted the kinshals. the interceptions happened so late, that the kinshals still struck near their intended targets and with a lot of force left.

>>63878513
the flash happened right at the merge

>>63877634
>>63877635
No proximity explosion? Or does this specific missile rely on a direct hit on the IRBM?

>>63877880
With the number of important civilian buildings hit, I can't say iran doesn't have access to precision.

But still, it really seems no country can sustain large missile production these days.

>>63877910
No the dome's function. These are specific AA batteries, and iran is trying to target them and mostly failing when it's not simply blowing up specific civilian targets. That's another topic entirely, it's pretty weird but the same missile type here is being both grossly accurate and grossly inaccurate.

>>63878233
Does angle of penetration matter? Did Iranis accidentally discover some aerodynamics trick?
Hell, could missiles that large have actually meaningful penetration depth requirements?

>>63878513
Strongly doubt air pressure alone can both redirect and slow down a falling missile.

>>63877674
Why would a missile that's about to hit its target still have substantial fuel left?

>>63877836
No because if you need to produce 3 digits of missiles a week and still not seeing any sort of strategic result, you're clearly wasting your time.

>>63877910
>From what I'm hearing, only 20% of the IDF missiles are actually intercepting the Iranians bombardment. And that was a rosy estimate
that means your information diet entirely consisted of retarded brown propagandists, Iran has fired >1000 missiles, if the interception rate was 20% there'd be >800 hits, and we've seen maybe 20

>>63879521
Hitting factories and other high value economic buildings from a distance (very limited in number) is a strategic advantage.

>>63879526
some military targets were hit and there's an info black out on them. there's been videos with like a dozen explosions on the same spot

>>63879577
yup, brown pretending to be a noootral third party

>>63879627
thanks for the bump schizo