[rxsid]

"Iranian and some western reporting agencies are repeating the story that the missiles used by iran were “highly” accurate. That is a bogus statement. The Qaim is a liquid fueled derivative of the good old scud. In the Soviet era, the scud was to carry nuclear rounds to pinpoint accuracy was not necessary. The Zolfaghar (aka Fateh-110) is a smaller solid fueled missile originally based on an unguided artillery rocket ( Zelzal-2 ) to which they added a guidance package. Historical performance - the recent attack had at the start a 25% missile failure rate. Looking at the pattern of the missiles strikes it is obvious the bases were the target but that the missiles were not accurate enough to hit much"

FYI - "Highly accurate" is of course subjective, however, the Fateh-110 has an alleged accuracy of 100 to 250 meters.

A satellite image (above) of the Ain Al Assad Airbase after Iran's missile attack showing the damage caused to the site after Iran launched ballistic missiles. [1]

[Godzilla]

the “national interest” article further points out the inaccuracy of the missiles. The one “hit” by comparison meets the ‘luck’ standard.

In 2020 a 100 to 250 Meter accuracy is not accurate. Neither is a 75% operational rate. They are a propaganda weapon that depends on luck more than accurate targeting. Because they are solid fuel and truck mounted, they can shoot and scoot, being hard to destroy.