Allegedly the building it struck next to:
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
93 points (100.0% liked)
World News
36619 readers
484 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It looks like the missile was intercepted, but the debris still caused significant damage. It fell straight down.
That definitely didn't look like it was intercepted or just debris.
I believe he is correct. You see one puff of an interceptor missing to the right, but look back up the trail of the one that hit, there is another puff on it sooner.
It also does not look like a detonation to me. More like what happens when a 500kg chunk hits the ground at Mach 2ish.
I think someone can calculate the speed of it.
Use multiple building height next to it and calculate the covered distance using the camera frames.
You can literally see the explosion in the sky, and then the thing falling straight down.
I think it looks more like the ignition of a 2nd stage motor, since it picks up speed, but I'm no rocket surgeon.
I thought so too, but I think the acceleration is an optical illusion due to the warhead coming in slightly towards the camera. I also don't recall any ballistic missiles carrying a terminal motor that kicks in that late.
That's usually only for cruise missiles. Gravity does a good enough job of giving the warhead speed.
It could certainly be an optical illusion.
It could be a tactic to confuse anti missile batteries, by firing half a second after apogee. Gravity is fixed/known, but a secondary booster could be fired at different accelerations. Also it would leave less time to intercept
Not sure Iranian missiles are that advanced. Even the Soviet missiles designed to take out supercarriers only had the most basic terminal maneuverability. And those were done by fins. Even the US has only recently caught up with that level of ballistic missile tech by the mid 2000s
It is 2025. Soviet missiles are no longer the most advanced technology and it's not impossible to imagine that Iran has developed technology better than that of a country that hasn't existed for 25 years.
There is much evidence supporting Iran as having missiles capable of maneuvering post launch.
it appears multiple missiles were there and disrupted, one got through.